Max Jean-Gilles

[DrAstroZoom]

I would take Jean-Gilles at 16. he is going to be a probowler. As for not taking guards this high. Most people want to pay Hutchinson a fortune to come play here as a guard why the big deal on drafting the next Hutchinson, by the way if you think high draft picks are never used on guards, Hutchinson was the 17th pick in 2001. Seems to have worked out for Seattle. If he is the BPA at that point. Grab him. If we can trade down and still get him all the better. If we can't, I'd take him. He is an instant starter and impat player which is exactly what you want your first rounder to be. Count me in with Boomer on this one.

Well, when you put it THAT way ...

 

[BlueFin]

I would take Jean-Gilles at 16. he is going to be a probowler. As for not taking guards this high. Most people want to pay Hutchinson a fortune to come play here as a guard why the big deal on drafting the next Hutchinson, by the way if you think high draft picks are never used on guards, Hutchinson was the 17th pick in 2001. Seems to have worked out for Seattle. If he is the BPA at that point. Grab him. If we can trade down and still get him all the better. If we can't, I'd take him. He is an instant starter and impat player which is exactly what you want your first rounder to be. Count me in with Boomer on this one.

Do you care more about drafting a Pro Bowler or winning a Superbowl?

16 is a reach for Jean Giles, guards are much easier to find than tackles or centers, or several other positions for that matter.

While some would be experts on this board think drafting a guard at 16 this year is a good idea, I'll guarantee you Nick Saban doesn't. It simply is not a good value.

You simply don't use a pick that is high enough to get valuable skill position players with on a guard.

 

[Canadi-Phin]

Do you care more about drafting a Pro Bowler or winning a Superbowl?

16 is a reach for Jean Giles, guards are much easier to find than tackles or centers, or several other positions for that matter.

While some would be experts on this board think drafting a guard at 16 this year is a good idea, I'll guarantee you Nick Saban doesn't. It simply is not a good value.

You simply don't use a pick that is high enough to get valuable skill position players with on a guard.

I said if he was the BPA then we take him. Lets not argue at whats easier to find, cause that will be silly. Not every team has probowl guards, they would if they were so easily found. Sure you can find servicable ones. We want impact players, like when we had Jamie Nails, he'd pull, run someone over, and create a huge hole for Ricky. RW had 1800 yards that year. Impact players can be found at every position. That's why people are going to pay Hutchinson a ton of money. The value of a great player is huge. Of course I want to win the superbowl, last time I checked it was done easier with probowl players. Both teams in the SB have probowl guards, funny how tha worked out. If he is the top graded player you take him regardless of position especially if you need a Right Guard like we do.

Don't give me a guarantee about what Saban is thinking, you have no clue.

 

[studsatele]

I said if he was the BPA then we take him. Lets not argue at whats easier to find, cause that will be silly. Not every team has probowl guards, they would if they were so easily found. Sure you can find servicable ones. We want impact players, like when we had Jamie Nails, he'd pull, run someone over, and create a huge hole for Ricky. RW had 1800 yards that year. Impact players can be found at every position. That's why people are going to pay Hutchinson a ton of money. The value of a great player is huge. Of course I want to win the superbowl, last time I checked it was done easier with probowl players. Both teams in the SB have probowl guards, funny how tha worked out. If he is the top graded player you take him regardless of position especially if you need a Right Guard like we do.

Don't give me a guarantee about what Saban is thinking, you have no clue.

i agree. how big is he? i dont have an issue taking a guard in the 1st espesially if he is what mjg is advertised as. will he fall to the 2nd? if our other guys arent there, do you think houck would yak this guy up till saban had to doit. we can pick up db, lb, qb, dl in the other rounds as well. if alabi is doing as good as said it might make sense to complete the o-line. saban did say it was his priority that and qb. daniels was in the 4th i beleive. hes workin out pretty good. count me on board to draft this guy if our most pursued guys are gone by the time we pick. i say pull the trigger on him.

 

[SWS84]

Best G in the draft, strong as an ox, solid 1st rounder. Would be happy with him ay 16

MJG HAS played LT for Georgia BTW, although mainly at G

I was just wondering about that. I was going to ask CK if he thought it would be reach at 16, but decided not to post it because I thought I was being silly. I'm glad to see that I'm not and someone else would be happy with an interior O-lineman, if the player is not a reach. I would be happy with a NT as well.

Steve


P.S. I haven't posted in quite a while due to college. I Hope things are going well in London with you and your family. :)

 

[Boomer]

You would take him at #16 ? I like the guy, but I just think that is kind of him for MJG. If we traded down and got him I would be happy.

Listen, I still bemoan the fact that we didn't draft Alan Faneca when we had the chance. MJG might not be as good as Faneca, but he's performed consistently well in the best conference in college football at a variety of positions. Sometimes you've just got to pull the trigger on the guys you just know are going to be players. For sure he's in my top 10 of guys we are looking at at 16. Whoever drafts him is going to have a hell of a player.

 

[Boomer]

Do you care more about drafting a Pro Bowler or winning a Superbowl?

16 is a reach for Jean Giles, guards are much easier to find than tackles or centers, or several other positions for that matter.

While some would be experts on this board think drafting a guard at 16 this year is a good idea, I'll guarantee you Nick Saban doesn't. It simply is not a good value.

You simply don't use a pick that is high enough to get valuable skill position players with on a guard.

Absolute nonsense. First of all, you have no idea WHAT Saban is thinking draft wise, so don't guarantee anything.

Secondly, you have NO IDEA how Miami stocks their draft board and how highly MJG is rated on that board. If he's rated as the #1 player on their board when they're on the clock then they take him.

Consistently Miami has problems on the OL and to add a player of this quality then you don't just shrug off the chance because 'Blue Fin' says its not viable. What valuable "skill position" player do you think we're targeting at 16? CB, OL, DT, FS.......not what I'd call valuable skill positions.

 

[BlueFin]

I said if he was the BPA then we take him. Lets not argue at whats easier to find, cause that will be silly. Not every team has probowl guards, they would if they were so easily found. Sure you can find servicable ones. We want impact players, like when we had Jamie Nails, he'd pull, run someone over, and create a huge hole for Ricky. RW had 1800 yards that year. Impact players can be found at every position. That's why people are going to pay Hutchinson a ton of money. The value of a great player is huge. Of course I want to win the superbowl, last time I checked it was done easier with probowl players. Both teams in the SB have probowl guards, funny how tha worked out. If he is the top graded player you take him regardless of position especially if you need a Right Guard like we do.

Don't give me a guarantee about what Saban is thinking, you have no clue.

I have much more of a clue about this than you do my Canadien friend, because it is a fact that NFL GM's know that guards are easier to find than other positions, it is an easier position to play on the line than the other line positions....that is a fact, and all your rhetoric doesn't change those facts.

Its about value, you simply don't use a top 20 pick on a guard, unless its an extremely rare guard, and there aren't impact players at other positions availalble, that WILL not be the case in this draft.

There are impact players at DB, LB, OT, and maybe even QB that will be available that you DON'T draft a Jean Jiles over.

 

[Boomer]

I was just wondering about that. I was going to ask CK if he thought it would be reach at 16, but decided not to post it because I thought I was being silly. I'm glad to see that I'm not and someone else would be happy with an interior O-lineman, if the player is not a reach. I would be happy with a NT as well.

Steve


P.S. I haven't posted in quite a while due to college. I Hope things are going well in London with you and your family. :)

Hi Steve, yep we're all good. Hope college is going well?

It's all about how you rate the players on your board. Blue Fin has no good idea what he's talking about. We have no idea how Saban and Mueller stack their board, but you look at last year and they went for solid college players who had played consistently at good schools, over a decent period of time - Auburn, Iowa, Florida, LSU - Brown, Roth, Crowder - a junior but with 3 years starting experience and outstanding value - and Daniels. You just don't turn your nose up at a guy as good as MJG who has manned the G and LT spot consistently against some of the best DT's and ends in the nation for the Bulldogs. And Saban will have been going up against him for 3 years, trying to get his DL past him.

If the players I was targeting are gone - so say the realistic targets have gone - Greenway (12 to Cleveland?), Huff (7 to the 9ers or to Atlanta?), Justice, Cromartie etc, then do you reach for a player that isn't rated as highly on your board - an Ashton Youboty or a Bobby Carpenter? Or do you go with the value pick, the guy that's higher on your board, despite being a G (which BTW is a dumb argument - you have spent the #2 pick on a TB, you have a legit 1800+ runner as well and yet Blue Fin thinks drafting a G is a reach).

 

[Boomer]

I have much more of a clue about this than you do my Canadien friend, because it is a fact that NFL GM's know that guards are easier to find than other positions, it is an easier position to play on the line than the other line positions....that is a fact, and all your rhetoric doesn't change those facts.

Its about value, you simply don't use a top 20 pick on a guard, unless its an extremely rare guard, and there aren't impact players at other positions availalble, that WILL not be the case in this draft.

There are impact players at DB, LB, OT, and maybe even QB that will be available that you DON'T draft a Jean Jiles over.

FLMAO.

What a no-mark you are. You have no better idea than anyone on this site so stop making out that you do. You clearly have no understanding of the draft and how to work a draft board if you continue with that moronic stance.

 

[BlueFin]

Absolute nonsense. First of all, you have no idea WHAT Saban is thinking draft wise, so don't guarantee anything.

Secondly, you have NO IDEA how Miami stocks their draft board and how highly MJG is rated on that board. If he's rated as the #1 player on their board when they're on the clock then they take him.

Consistently Miami has problems on the OL and to add a player of this quality then you don't just shrug off the chance because 'Blue Fin' says its not viable. What valuable "skill position" player do you think we're targeting at 16? CB, OL, DT, FS.......not what I'd call valuable skill positions.

The only nonsense is some of the drivel you post my friend, and if you don't understand that guards values are diminished in the top of the first round, and that NFL teams only reach for guards in the top half of round one in rare circumstances, then you need to re-read your "Everything You Ever Needed to Know About American Football Manual".

Just go back in the previous drafts and see how many guards were drafted in the top 16, then maybe you'll realize the only nonsense posted here was somebody thinking Jean Giles would be drafted at 16 or higher.

 

[BlueFin]

Listen, I still bemoan the fact that we didn't draft Alan Faneca when we had the chance. MJG might not be as good as Faneca, but he's performed consistently well in the best conference in college football at a variety of positions. Sometimes you've just got to pull the trigger on the guys you just know are going to be players. For sure he's in my top 10 of guys we are looking at at 16. Whoever drafts him is going to have a hell of a player.

Where was Faneca drafted? Not in the top 16.

 

[LIQUID24]

I agree with BlueFin on this. A guard would have to be pretty damn special for me to even consider him at 16. And I see Jean-Guilles as very good... but not special.

But that's MY philosophy (and many others), I have no idea how much value Saban places on guards.

 

[Zeke0123]

The only nonsense is some of the drivel you post my friend, and if you don't understand that guards values are diminished in the top of the first round, and that NFL teams only reach for guards in the top half of round one in rare circumstances, then you need to re-read your "Everything You Ever Needed to Know About American Football Manual".

Just go back in the previous drafts and see how many guards were drafted in the top 16, then maybe you'll realize the only nonsense posted here was somebody thinking Jean Giles would be drafted at 16 or higher.

:rolleyes2

 

[BlueFin]

FLMAO.

What a no-mark you are. You have no better idea than anyone on this site so stop making out that you do. You clearly have no understanding of the draft and how to work a draft board if you continue with that moronic stance.

Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black there MR. draft guru.

I've been watching drafts a lot longer than you have, and it is fact that guards are de-valued in the top half of round one because of the position they play. I happen to be friends with an ex-NFL head coach of 9 years.

We'll see come April if Jean Giles is a top 16 pick, and again, I challenge you to go back in previous drafts and count the number of guards that went in the top 16 picks.