Why draft O Line over WR?

[Danny]

So what guy did the move up for that is a sure fire hit?

I never said any player is a sure thing but we've been using high picks on that O-line for years and we're still searching for that "perfect' Oline. In the meantime we can't make any big plays when we need them. Maybe is time to try something different like let all those young O-line guys have some time working together and maybe we can use some of those high picks on guys that actually score points.

 

[Gatorboy999120]

DeVonta Smith also dominated in 2019, when he wasn't moved around as much. His game vs Stingley Jr is perhaps the best one game by a CFB WR when accounting for level of competition and what he was actually doing (beating press).

But, the overall defenses in 2020 don't matter. The CB play is what matters, and Smith faced some legit NFL CB's - Stingley Jr, Horn, Stokes, Joseph, etc..

Don't forget Kaiir Elam..and yes, it does matter..but I get your point, though.

 

[Gatorboy999120]

Exactly and one of them was Eric Fisher. No one talked about it that much but cmon - if those guys played, Mahomes has time to throw and it’s a different game. Since you can’t stash 1st round backups on the depth chart, you have to chalk that up to bad luck and **** happens. Doesn’t make more of an argument that we should take ANOTHER T in round 1 this year.

All the "Experts" said it wouldn't matter..but it ain't like Eric Fisher is the second coming of say...J. Ogden, either!

 

[3rdandinches]

Agreed but I would rather get one of the top 3 RBs at 36 if one is still there. There are 3 very good centers in Dickerson, Humphreys, or my favorite Meinerz who might be there in the 3rd rd. Dickerson is maybe the best but has injury issues, and Humphreys is the best communicator/leader. Would love to have either on the team, although after Pouncey a center with injury issues scares me.

I’m on the Harris train myself but I have a feeling we will look at a 5th round RB or even later to complete the rotation we have already.

 

[Gatorboy999120]

I get the sarcasm but you can't deny the sinking/falling of your entire team and it's relationship to the OL.

Hell just look at the recent SB.

Tampa had great OL play the entire playoffs and especially during the SB.
Look at KC and how they looked once Mahommes really had to start running for his life.

All of a sudden those great pass catchers etc didn't matter.

One great O-Lineman won't fix the whole line, either, though. And we just drafted THREE last year in the 1st, 2nd and 4th rounds..

 

[royalshank]

All the "Experts" said it wouldn't matter..but it ain't like Eric Fisher is the second coming oh J. Ogden, either!

Agreed. They tried to have us believe that it would still be a fair match up on in the trenches. The backups got abused all game. They looked like turnstiles out there.

 

[ONole1]

Couple of things here. First, I didn't mean for anybody to get insulted. Second, where these WR's go really matters almost as much as to where QB's go. Many times those WR's that get drafted high go to bad teams that are asking them to be #1 from day one. Sometimes those teams don't have a good QB. There are many reasons why sometimes it doesn't work.

As far as going WR being a "must".......I'd be fine with Pitts or any of the top WR's. I think even you'd agree that we need one or two guys that can make big plays. it was hard watching last year with all those short passes never going very far while other teams will hit the same 5 yard passes that would go 40 to 50 yards.

Last, all this stuff that you shouldn't draft for need imo is total BS. Teams draft for need all the time. Now I'd agree you shouldn't draft a guy like Charles Harris just because we needed a DE. I'm pretty sure we needed more than just that position so we could/should have gone a different way. As far as WR tho, there are some top playmakers that we can pick from at 6 and it'd not be reaching for one so I don't see the problem with taking a top player at a position of need. Chase/Pitts/Waddle are all ranked top 10 on most big boards so that'd not be reaching.

I absolutely agree they need guys that can get separation and chunk yards, but who is to say they can't find that later? Imagine going Sewell at #6 and taking Toney at #18, or Brown at #50, Eskirdge, Rogers, or Atwell in round 3?

There are so many options at WR. I know they would fine room for them, but would any receiver they bring in at #6 come in day one and start over someone on the roster (don't say Fuller because he's out game one...LOL)?

Pitts doesn't start over Sicki, Parker, or Fuller.
Chase doesn't start over Fuller or Parker, and doubt he starts in the slot
Smith doesn't start over Fuller or Parker, doubt he starts in the slot
Waddle doesn't start over Fuller or Parker, possible start in the slot of the cut Wilson.

Granted, they would all get playing time and they would find a way to work them and, and any one of them could be starting by the end of the season.

Sewell and Parsons are day one starters and make an immediate impact.

 

[Danny]

I’m on the Harris train myself but I have a feeling we will look at a 5th round RB or even later to complete the rotation we have already.

I hope that's not the case. Our running game has struggle for years. We need a top RB. Not saying we have to draft one at 18 but I'm hoping we don't wait for day 3 once again

 

[KingHydra]

I get the sarcasm but you can't deny the sinking/falling of your entire team and it's relationship to the OL.

Hell just look at the recent SB.

Tampa had great OL play the entire playoffs and especially during the SB.
Look at KC and how they looked once Mahommes really had to start running for his life.

All of a sudden those great pass catchers etc didn't matter.

I think we could point this out ad nauseam and nothing will change their minds. Most fans want flashy players in the first round. But, when it comes to building a team; QB and O-line are where you start as its the true anchor of the offense.

Someone pointed out Teven Jenkins. Id love to get him @18.

 

[ONole1]

I never said any player is a sure thing but we've been using high picks on that O-line for years and we're still searching for that "perfect' Oline. In the meantime we can't make any big plays when we need them. Maybe is time to try something different like let all those young O-line guys have some time working together and maybe we can use some of those high picks on guys that actually score points.

I don't completely disagree with that, and if they decide to go that route I hope it works out. I have no doubt they will get guys that can score points in this draft, I'm just not so sure it comes at pick #6.

 

[royalshank]

One great O-Lineman won't fix the whole line, either, though. And we just drafted THREE last year in the 1st, 2nd and 4th rounds..

Exactly and w all the young guys we took, wouldn’t we be wise to see what we have after a year of development? They should improve. And if they don’t then why let the guy who drafted all of them have another go at it. By the way we absolutely SUCK at picking o-linemen. The last good one we drafted was Jake Long. Think about it. Tunsil I guess, as well. But I do think he’s overhyped and wasn’t even good enough as a rookie to beat out a decrepit Fat Albert and his Junkyard Band so please no one confuse him w the aforementioned Long who would have sent Albert into retirement the first day of camp. Dallas Thomas, Billy Turner, Jamal Douglass, Michael Dieter and so on. It’s a long list of bad players in rounds 1-4.

 

[1972forever]

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 have no problem with taking Sewell at 6 and then drafting a WR at 18. Of course they would likely end up drafting Bateman or Toney at 18 in this scenario because I don’t see any of the top 3 WR’s still being available at 18.

While I think the Falcons will draft Pitts at 4. A lot of mock drafts have the Falcons trading out of the pick or taking a QB with the 4th pick if they stay at 4. I will be surprised if Pitts is still on the board at 6 but If he is, Grier will have a big decision to make if Pitts, Sewell, and 2 of the top 3 WR’s are still available at 6.

 

[danstilldaman]

I personally would much rather take Parsons at 6 then Sewell or Slater if we don't go with the best offensive weapon available. I absolutely do think Sewell and Slater are going to be really good, but my worry is being so young on the offensive line are we going to be able to have sustainability with all those players. Let's say all the picks from the oline pan out as quality starters, are we going to be able to keep afford all of them. I do know that this is a problem that most teams have to deal with as well but it still should be considered.

 

[Blake the great]

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've stopped looking at it that way. I just see it as we traded down 3 spots from #3 to #6 and gained a 1st and 3rd and we still get one of our guys we wanted.

 

[Mach2]

Couple of things here. First, I didn't mean for anybody to get insulted.

Reread your sentence. It implies that anyone who sees it differently is just oblivious to the obvious, and isn't thinking logically. Sometimes it isn't what someone says. It's how they say it.

Second, where these WR's go really matters almost as much as to where QB's go. Many times those WR's that get drafted high go to bad teams that are asking them to be #1 from day one. Sometimes those teams don't have a good QB. There are many reasons why sometimes it doesn't work.

That is true but, whatever the reasons, it doesn't change the reality of the likely outcome. Aren't you expecting a guy drafted that high to come in and make immediate impact as well?

As far as going WR being a "must".......I'd be fine with Pitts or any of the top WR's. I think even you'd agree that we need one or two guys that can make big plays. it was hard watching last year with all those short passes never going very far while other teams will hit the same 5 yard passes that would go 40 to 50 yards.

I'm on board with drafting Pitts if available because I can see a unique player that can be used to create physical mismatches from multiple alignments. If he were a typical TE, I wouldn't even consider it. That is exactly how I see the WRs in question, typical. Not bad players, but not anything special either. I don't see that big of a gap between the top three, and the next half dozen to focus on a single, written in stone strategy. When/if Tua becomes a top QB (the game slows down, he makes the reads, executes without hesitation) those chunk plays will come.

We did have issues at WR that need to be addressed, no doubt about it.

First of all, we need a speed guy that can run good routes and can catch. Fuller can be that, albeit temporarily. Wilson is another option. Waddle certainly fits that requirement as well.

I've never said ignore the position, I just question if the best way to go about it is spend #6.

There are two types of teams that lean towards drafting solely for need in the top two rounds. Those that already have a strong overall roster, and those that never will. Anyway, in my first reference, I said "value", not need. I see them as two different things.

A team may "need" a center or gaurd, but it's generally not a good value to take one in the top half of rd1. That was the context of "need". Can you see the subtle difference in terms?