Concerns about Drafting OL in first | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Concerns about Drafting OL in first

C

caneproud117

Practice Squad
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
444
Reaction score
0
Since no one is responding to a post on 'Just Don't Understand???' I'll start my own thread about the concerns about drafting an OL on need basis. Last year, 4 OL were selected in the first round: George Foster, Jordan Gross, Jeff Faine, and Kwame Harris. Of which, one was the offensive rookie of the year Jordan Gross, two were hurt (Foster and Faine), and one did not contribute much for their team (Harris). Now I'm asking an honest question for all you draft OL folks, history has shown that 1 out of 4 OL can contribute their first year. The argument that OL drafted in the first can come in their "first" year and automatically become contributing factors in the teams success is invalid. On average 1 out of 3.62 lineman drafted in the first make a contributing factor to the teams success their first year, going back to 2001. Usually it is the first guy drafted. Would you draft OL knowing that 1 out of 3.62 OL would not contribute "this" year?
 
Well, I'd like to see the methodology behind the 1 in 3.62 average. For one thing, going back only to 2001 leaves you with a pretty small (and arbitrary, I think) sample size. If you went back over the last 10 or 15 drafts, that would lend more credibility to the number. Beyond that, I'd also like to know how many of those guys were drafted with the idea that they would step in and start, and how many were drafted with the idea of being groomed to replace a veteran.

Anyway, there's a significant amount of risk with ANY first round pick. Some OLs don't pan out. Some DLs don't pan out. Some QBs don't pan out, etc. You have to pick a player that addresses an area of need, and hope for the best. In our case, OL is a significant need, probably the biggest of any position. That's why there's a focus on an OL in round 1.
 
I went and asks fans of their respective teams whether they contributed right away, if they had any bad games, what the learning curve was like, etc... The problem with going back any farther is that people don't remember what they were like their rookie year. I based that number on whether the fans of their respective teams thought they contributed enough their "first" year.
 
I would like to know what the averages are for other positions contributing their first year. Also, not trying to be sarcastic, but we're not scratching a lottery ticket here. There are so many other factors involved when evaluating a player. For example, how many 1st round wide receivers will contribute this year as opposed to last year? Off the top of my head, that kid for the Texans was the only WR who contributed from the first round. (Boldin was 2nd round IIRC). Charles Rodgers got hurt.

I think that if Andrews is there, we'll take him. If he's not, I think we'll still go OL at 20 or whatever we trade down to because this team's glaring weakness is obviously OL. I agree we could use some young blood at DT and MLB, but you've got to fill greatest needs first--if the talent is "graded" to be worth the pick. And I think that Andrews is worth a 20th first rounder.
 
I'm not saying drafting OL for the future isn't a good idea. I think it is, but drafting an area of need and expect that person to start at a high level right away is invalid. That was the point of my argument.
 
Originally posted by caneproud117
I went and asks fans of their respective teams whether they contributed right away, if they had any bad games, what the learning curve was like, etc... The problem with going back any farther is that people don't remember what they were like their rookie year. I based that number on whether the fans of their respective teams thought they contributed enough their "first" year.
Click to expand...

Understood. But (and I'm not trying to be a nitpicky pain in the @$$) you should know that tends to take a fair amount of credibility away from the 1/3.62 number you cite.
 
All three of the tackles were considered Left Tackles. As such, none of their respective teams chose to toss them into the fire at LT as a rookie. They weren't as dumb or desperate as we were. Gross was talented, big, and strong enough to play RT. Harris is more of a Wade Smith type, he plays LT or he doesn't play I think...plus he was ultra raw.

You have to evaluate it on a prospect by prospect basis. Foster was injured and a LT in nature and the Broncos knew it when they drafted him (plus they have a heck of a RT in Matt Lepsis) and so its understandable that he didn't play. Kwame Harris was considered ultra raw but having mad physical skills, a potential pro bowl LT when you shine him up a bit...but he's not a RT and won't be ready to man the LT spot in his first year. Gross was just plain the best OL in the draft, big and strong enough to play RT and fast and talented enough for LT but the Panthers just made the decision to ease him in by having him play RT where the pressure isn't as great...same as Luke Petitgout with the Giants.

The argument that OL drafted in the first can come in their "first" year and automatically become contributing factors in the teams success is invalid
Click to expand...

I'd certainly like to see that proven.

On average 1 out of 3.62 lineman drafted in the first make a contributing factor to the teams success their first year, going back to 2001.
Click to expand...

I think I'll look for myself, but like I said. Its a prospect by prospect thing. Some guys are taken knowing full well they probably won't be able to contribute in their first year (Kwame Harris and George Foster). Shawn Andrews is not considered one of those types. He doesn't have an injury getting in the way like Foster, and unlike Harris he's got plenty of tackle experience and is a natural fit at RT.
 
Originally posted by caneproud117
I'm not saying drafting OL for the future isn't a good idea. I think it is, but drafting an area of need and expect that person to start at a high level right away is invalid. That was the point of my argument.
Click to expand...

Okay, I see what you mean. That's reasonable. You're right, Andrews (or Smiley, or Carey, or Grove, or whoever) may not be all that great their first year; there's obviously a steep learning curve. To expect a Pro Bowl in year one is unrealistic.
 
So you don't believe in the back problems that many people have brought up here that Andrews has had? I have a feeling he'll be hurt most of his first year.
 
I believe if we're looking for a guy to come in and start right away at a high level for this year, it should be done via free agency. If you're drafting Andrews with the expectations that he is going to play at a high level from day one, I would not call that a smart statement. If on the other hand we have someone who can start right away and take the pressure off of Andrews (if we draft him) and work him into the line-up I'm fine with that, but just throwing him out there to the wolves is bad for this team no matter how big a hole there is at RG(RT).
 
I'll state Buffalo's Mike Williams for example, Buffalo had a huge hole at Tackle and threw him into the mix right away, thinking he could fill a huge void and come in and make an impact right away. We all know what happened there.
 
I did my own research on that a few weeks ago and I found that out of all the guards that were drafted in the 1st 2 rounds in the last 3 drafts, everyone of them became full time starters their rookie year. All of them continued to be fulltime starters, except for Steve Hutchinson who missed 12 games in '02 due to injury. That's a pretty phenominal success rate and should almost aleviate any concern about drafting a guard in the 1st 2 rounds.

As for tackles, I found that 9 out of 15 drafted in the 1st 2 rounds of the last 3 drafts started a majority of games their rookie seasons, and 8 out of 11 were starters their 2nd season. Not as successful as guards, but pretty good compared to some other positions.
 
When you say "majority" of their games what exactly is a majority of their games?
 
I had started another thread earlier about who most readers here thought could start on the oline the first year. The only consensus pick was Gallery though most seemed to think Andrews, Carey, Smiley, and maybe Grove if he starts at guard could go the first year. Other than those few, all the Olinemen in this draft are likely future prospects though someone will undoubtedly surprise.
 
I think reaching at any position in RD 1 is a BIG mistake, regardless of the need. If Andrews is gone round 1 (As I expect him to be) there is nobody IMO that is worth the 20th pick overall on OL. We'd be better served trading back and picking up another pick if we are set to draft OL so that we get value on our picks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom