Non-QBs projected to go high in the draft that you are not sold on

[HTTRDynasty]

3 minutes ago, Jeezla said:

Do any of you seriously feel like an elite OG would have been the difference between your team winning and not winning the SB this past season?

For most teams, you can legitimately ask this about any position, other than QB.

[DoleINGout]

Derwin james because he is shaky as a free safety in deep zone coverage and isn't a good decision maker as a tackler. As a last line of defense, I think he is average.

[goldfishwars]

5 minutes ago, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

For most teams, you can legitimately ask this about any position, other than QB.

Exactly, acquiring great players at any position simply opens up new options that were previously available to you. The Seahawks might have won with a bad line, but they managed it through it with a generational defense and a magician at escaping pressure at QB – those aren’t options available to most teams.

 

 

[BowlesDawgDX]

21 minutes ago, goldfishwars said:

Exactly, acquiring great players at any position simply opens up new options that were previously available to you. The Seahawks might have won with a bad line, but they managed it through it with a generational defense and a magician at escaping pressure at QB – those aren’t options available to most teams.

 

 

Bingo

[Jeezla]

37 minutes ago, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

For most teams, you can legitimately ask this about any position, other than QB.

sure, but I'm specifically asking if there is a fanbase out there that thinks their team would have won the SB if they could have just had Andrew Norwell or Zach Martin or any other OG for the year. Would upgrading one OG spot have brought the trophy home? The answer is no, unless one of your OG's was playing like Frank Omiyale. Sorry for the memories Bears fans.

[Broncofan]

36 minutes ago, BroncoSojia said:

I need to send this post to every Broncos fan who wants us to draft Nelson at #5.

 

If you do, you should send the other quotes below.  It's a more complete answer (and FWIW, I'm not sold on Nelson at 1.5 if Chubb/Barkley are there, and definitely would pass if Darnold <who won't be there> or Rosen are there).

 

36 minutes ago, Jeezla said:

Do any of you seriously feel like an elite OG would have been the difference between your team winning and not winning the SB this past season?

 

32 minutes ago, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

For most teams, you can legitimately ask this about any position, other than QB.

 

25 minutes ago, goldfishwars said:

Exactly, acquiring great players at any position simply opens up new options that were previously available to you. The Seahawks might have won with a bad line, but they managed it through it with a generational defense and a magician at escaping pressure at QB – those aren’t options available to most teams.

 

 

 

[animaltested]

1 hour ago, Jeezla said:

The Seahawks won a SB with JR Sweezy and James Carpenter at OG. No, elite OG's aren't necessary. If they were, the Browns would have won a game. They have the best OG duo in the NFL with Bitonio and Zeitler, and it got them jack squat. Having elite OG's is about as important as having an elite long snapper. Aka not important at all. They just need to not suck.

Did you see what happened to Seattles run game once those guys left?

And to further enhance this point, did you see what happened to Seattles run game in '06 when they went from Steve Hutchinson to Floyd Womack?

[Jeezla]

8 minutes ago, animaltested said:

Did you see what happened to Seattles run game once those guys left?

And to further enhance this point, did you see what happened to Seattles run game in '06 when they went from Steve Hutchinson to Floyd Womack?

I think what happened in 06 is Shaun Alexander came off a 400+ carry season if you include the playoffs. Same thing happened to DeMarco Murray. You don't run 400 times in the NFL and then come back with fresh legs the next season.

Like I said, terrible OG's are one thing, average OG's are another. Seattle had terrible OGs. In that situation, Nelson would be a noticeable improvement. If Nelson went to the Eagles, it would not be any noticeable improvement, because Wisniewski doesn't suck. He's slightly above average. Going from an average or good OG to an elite OG would be pretty much unnoticeable outside of games where you don't play Fletcher Cox or Aaron Donald, and even those guys are going to get theirs against Zach Martin.

[Forge]

For me, great players are great players. Kickers and punters I'm obviously not entertaining in the first, but everything else to me is in play. I hold a slightly higher value on an interior presence than most given that the 49ers have had to face the likes of Donald, Campbell and the Seahawks front in recent years, but I think it's important. Nelson doesn't scare me in the top 7 or so because I think as a football player, regardless of position, he's top 3 in this draft. Maybe he pans out, maybe he doesn't, but the fact that he's a guard doesn't scare me away. It's not so back on the position value chart (and I probably have it higher than positions others would value more, like wide receiver) that it should be a non-starter (particularly given, though slightly heavy footed, he could probably be a back up right tackle for you as well). 

[Da_Ducktator]

1 hour ago, goldfishwars said:

Exactly, acquiring great players at any position simply opens up new options that were previously available to you. The Seahawks might have won with a bad line, but they managed it through it with a generational defense and a magician at escaping pressure at QB – those aren’t options available to most teams.

Exactly my argument. Zack Martin is an EXCEPTIONAL football player. Larry Allen is one of the greatest offensive lineman literally ever. Notice how the Cowboys won THREE Super Bowls in the 90's. Mark Tuinei was a solid LT, not great. Do the Cowboys win three Super Bowls in the 90's if he is their best offensive lineman? Doubtful. But they had Larry Allen for the last Super Bowl, and had Nate Newton and Erik Williams for all three. Williams was a RT and Newton an OG. Two of the best at those positions in the 90's. The Cowboys won with a Hall of Fame QB, RB, WR, great FB and TE, and All-Pro's at both guard spots, RT, and C. Tuinei, the left tackle, was the weak spot of that offense. Notice how Tuinei took over the left side '86 and the Cowboys didn't have a winning season with him in that position until 1991, when Erik Williams came in. 

You could literally go through any Super Bowl team and say "see, they didn't have great X, therefore you can win without great X." You need great players, PERIOD. Zack Martin is a great player. Larry Allen is one of the greatest of all-time. To say you wouldn't take two of the best to ever player their position because it's at guard is unbelievable blind. Somebody with an opinion like that leads me to strongly believe they've never played, coached, or worked in the game of football. You take great/elite players when you can.

You want to know another reason guard play is important? Bruce Matthews, one of the best offensive lineman of all-time and could have had the same Hall of Fame career if he stayed at tackle, was moved inside and played the majority of his career at G or C. Larry Allen, fyi, was the same way being predominately used as a G in his career though he was exceptional when he played tackle also. 

[animaltested]

16 minutes ago, Jeezla said:

I think what happened in 06 is Shaun Alexander came off a 400+ carry season if you include the playoffs. Same thing happened to DeMarco Murray. You don't run 400 times in the NFL and then come back with fresh legs the next season.

Like I said, terrible OG's are one thing, average OG's are another. Seattle had terrible OGs. In that situation, Nelson would be a noticeable improvement. If Nelson went to the Eagles, it would not be any noticeable improvement, because Wisniewski doesn't suck. He's slightly above average. Going from an average or good OG to an elite OG would be pretty much unnoticeable outside of games where you don't play Fletcher Cox or Aaron Donald, and even those guys are going to get theirs against Zach Martin.

You could make that case for any position outside of Quarterback.

[Jeezla]

26 minutes ago, animaltested said:

You could make that case for any position outside of Quarterback.

not really. You notice the difference between average and elite DB's, pass rushers, RB's, DT's, LB's, OT's, WR's, TE's, and ST players. OG's? Not so much. 

[Da_Ducktator]

17 minutes ago, Jeezla said:

not really. You notice the difference between average and elite DB's, pass rushers, RB's, DT's, LB's, OT's, WR's, TE's, and ST players. OG's? Not so much. 

Yea, I'm sure the Bucs didn't notice any difference when they lost Ali Marpet (who isn't even elite, just good) and DeMar Dotson in week 11.

That 1-4 record and 20 sacks allowed in the final five games after just 20 sacks allowed in the first 11 games certainly could not have any correlation. Almost as if other position outside of LT are important on the offensive line and having great players at those other positions can make a massive impact on the effectiveness of your offense. Almost...

[Jeezla]

Just now, Da_Ducktator said:

Yea, I'm sure the Bucs didn't notice any difference when they lost Ali Marpet (who isn't even elite, just good) and DeMar Dotson in week 11.

That 1-4 record and 20 sacks allowed in the final five games after just 20 sacks allowed in the first 11 games certainly could not have any correlation. Almost as if other position outside of LT are important on the offensive line and having great players at those other positions can make a massive impact on the effectiveness of your offense. Almost...

were those guys replaced with average players or sucky players?

[Da_Ducktator]

1 minute ago, Jeezla said:

were those guys replaced with average players or sucky players?

You literally just said in the previous post you wouldn't notice the difference from going from a very good to elite IOL player to an average one. Less than 30 minutes ago. Are you really going to backtrack now?

I also find it odd how Kirk Cousins had two of his worse games of the year the last two games of the year when he was missing Brandon Scherff. 52.7% after being above 66% the first 14 games with 4 INT's and his only three INT game of the season in week 17 against a Giants team that literally had nothing to play. You don't think it's possible that the absence of an elite offensive guard could have contributed to a crappy game by the quarterback, could you? Blasphemy based on your previous posts..