Why draft O Line over WR? | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Why draft O Line over WR?

KingHydra

Club Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
1,825
Reaction score
4,572
Location
West Palm Beach
Who were the best 15 OTs last year, and where were they drafted?
They are specifically speaking first round Tackles vs first round WRs. If you search which round the very best receivers were drafted its enlightening to say the least.
I'd be more than satisfied to go Sewell or Slater at 6.
 

ANUFan

Club Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,992
Reaction score
18,779
They are specifically speaking first round Tackles vs first round WRs. If you search which round the very best receivers were drafted its enlightening to say the least.
I'd be more than satisfied to go Sewell or Slater at 6.

I hate the thought of doing this. But it’s not hard to understand why. If the current group of receivers/TE can stay healthy and with an improved OL then we should continue to ascend.
 

KingHydra

Club Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
1,825
Reaction score
4,572
Location
West Palm Beach
Except why did we jump back up to 6? We should have stayed at 12 and drafted Slater, Parsons or one of the top 3 receivers and kept all of our draft capital.
I don't think either are projected to go that high are they?
Everyone thought Bengals are going Sewell at 5. But we know their GMs are warm garbage so they probably go Chase cause who cares if Burrow gets murdered, right? Good luck passing to Chase from a hospital bed.
At 6 we are guaranteed one of the Tackles. At 12 zero guarantee.
I know fans despise drafting Tackles early but GMs like them as their success rate is absolutely insane.
 
Last edited:

Brasfin

Scout Team
Joined
Nov 16, 2020
Messages
122
Reaction score
215
Age
30
Location
Brazil
I don't think either are projected to go that high are they?
Everyone thought Bengals are going Sewell at 5. But we know their GMs are warm garbage so they probably go Chase cause who cares if Burrow gets murdered, right? Good luck passing to Chase from a hospital bed.
At 6 we are guaranteed one of the Tackles. At 12 zero guarantee.
I know fans despise drafting Tackles early but GMs like them as their success rate is absolutely insane.
If they wanted Sewell that badly, they would’ve stayed at 3. I’m not sure about Slater, but he’s widely considered the 2nd best tackle. Do you really want to move up to take the 2nd best tackle at the 6th spot? Not too sure about that... The move up to 6th is not about a tackle, IMO.
 

claytonduper

Starter
Joined
May 23, 2004
Messages
1,805
Reaction score
1,358
At the end of the day, I could live with a Tackle at 6. We still have enough draft capital for a great 2nd tier WR and RB.

Whoever we draft must be NFL ready. If the world is judging Tua in his 2nd year (ridiculous), we can't wait for projects to become productive in their 2nd and 3rd years. We will have a new regime and new QB by that point.
 

Danny

Finheaven VIP
Moderator
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Messages
43,314
Reaction score
72,852
Location
Kissimmee,FL
Why is anybody here listening to that idiot jets fan? of course he wants us to go corn once again. He doesn't want us to have any real playmakers on offense. Our O-line needs time to gel. It's to draft one more O-line guy but not at 6. That's be dumb. We didn't move back up to 6(by using a first round pick) just to draft an OT. We could have done that at 12.
 

ThePeopleShow13

Club Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Messages
1,487
Reaction score
3,244
Age
32
Location
New York
Jackson was 100% overdrafted. I understand the pick because his age gives him plenty of time to develop. Hunt is not a NFL RT on a team with a left-handed QB. He could be an exceptional RG, but his footwork and athleticism leave something to be desired in a blindside protector. Kindley was a 4th round pick for a reason; conditioning will be an issue for him. As will a lack of athleticism in space. He played better at LG, and should probably replace Flowers there in the long term.

Sewell would be the best lineman on our team the minute we drafted him. From a potential standpoint alone, I don’t think any of the guys on our roster are even in the same ball park. They project as serviceable to reliable starters while Sewell could be bringing in Pro Bowls and All Pros.
 

j-off-her-doll

Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
20,053
Reaction score
12,207
Location
Dream Songs
See if he's actually there at 18, but Tevin Jenkins makes a lot more sense for Miami. He's really good, an elite athlete, and a natural RT who has played RT. Instead of reshuffling your entire OL, you kick Hunt to RG, where he has a higher ceiling, and you just need a Center - or you need Skura to play well.

The idea is becoming more popular, so I assume most here have come across it, but your worst offensive lineman is more important than your best. It's a weak-link unit, and the difference between a good and elite offensive lineman is relatively negligible.

When you're drafting OL Top 10, you're paying for relative certainty, because, again, the difference between good and great isn't worth the difference in draft capital.

But, if you have good filters, and know what to look for, WR is just as likely to hit as OT in the 1st, and the difference between elite and good is much more significant at WR. Obviously, a lot of the NFL hasn't figured out what to look for in WR's. They draft guys who require too much projection, or they draft guys who have shown you exactly what they are (thinking of Ruggs) with the hope they'll be more.

So, it's not wrong to say that OL is a better bet in the 1st. It just lacks nuance.
 

Danny

Finheaven VIP
Moderator
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Messages
43,314
Reaction score
72,852
Location
Kissimmee,FL
See if he's actually there at 18, but Tevin Jenkins makes a lot more sense for Miami. He's really good, an elite athlete, and a natural RT who has played RT. Instead of reshuffling your entire OL, you kick Hunt to RG, where he has a higher ceiling, and you just need a Center - or you need Skura to play well.

The idea is becoming more popular, so I assume most here have come across it, but your worst offensive lineman is more important than your best. It's a weak-link unit, and the difference between a good and elite offensive lineman is relatively negligible.

When you're drafting OL Top 10, you're paying for relative certainty, because, again, the difference between good and great isn't worth the difference in draft capital.

But, if you have good filters, and know what to look for, WR is just as likely to hit as OT in the 1st, and the difference between elite and good is much more significant at WR. Obviously, a lot of the NFL hasn't figured out what to look for in WR's. They draft guys who require too much projection, or they draft guys who have shown you exactly what they are (thinking of Ruggs) with the hope they'll be more.

So, it's not wrong to say that OL is a better bet in the 1st. It just lacks nuance.
Was about to say your O-line is only as good as your weakest link.We don't need a HOF o-line guy. What we need is 5 players working together well. You need balance or else, the defense will attack your weak spot. It's amazing how people haven't learn yet that we're never going to have 5 pro bowlers up front but yet they want to use a top 5 pick on that O-line and pass on a playmaker once again.

Counting on our WR's again would be silly.
 

Gatorboy999120

Club Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
3,665
Reaction score
4,018
Age
34
Location
Boca Raton, Florida
Was about to say your O-line is only as good as your weakest link.We don't need a HOF o-line guy. What we need is 5 players working together well. You need balance or else, the defense will attack your weak spot. It's amazing how people haven't learn yet that we're never going to have 5 pro bowlers up front but yet they want to use a top 5 pick on that O-line and pass on a playmaker once again.

Counting on our WR's again would be silly.
Agreed.
 
Top Bottom