Why draft O Line over WR? | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Why draft O Line over WR?

j-off-her-doll

Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
20,045
Reaction score
12,167
Location
Dream Songs
Agree with the premise -
2 hurdles for me:

1. Can point to multiple weak links.
All positions showed some inconsistency
For ex. I thought at times to Oline played better with Kindley at LG. Maybe a true RT solidifies the right side and Kindley/ Flowers handle LG. Still questions at Center and need development at LT

2. Mental block of having to reinvest more assets to the OL. Last year we spent #18, #39, and 3 years 30 mill Flowers.
I’m waiting to see if some quality falls to #36- Darrisaw- Slater- Mayfield I think his name OT Michigan.

Honestly, if you have a bunch of picks like Miami does, you can afford to continue to spend early picks on OL. OT in particular is a good investment. But, all those picks also give you plenty of opportunities to draft the guys you need to score at a high rate - receivers. If you have a WR and OT with similar Ceiling/Floor projections, WR will make a bigger impact - so long as you're not desperate for an OT. If you are, you have to fill that need before you can do much of anything.

I don't think Miami is desperate at OT. They've put themselves in the position where they have to feel comfortable rolling with Jackson and Hunt at OT. Jackson is young and flashed some good play before the injury, and Hunt was good for a rookie at RT.

36 is a good spot to target OL (agreed). Pitts + D. Smith/J. Horn/E. Moore or Smith/Chase/Waddle + Horn/Moore/Marshall and then OL at 36 is going to make a bigger long-term impact than any scenario with OL at 6 or 18.

You're either adding two proven playmakers or a playmaker and a star CB, who perfectly fits what Miami needs out of its CB's. Forget about needs. You don't pass on that kind of talent unless you have a similar blue-chip talent at a position more valuable or as valuable but you need more.
 

ANUFan

Club Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,350
Reaction score
17,344
Nope. You made a redicilous comparison. Play it off all you want, it's not even remotely comparable.

The More You Know....

You might want to start reading my post in this thread from the beginning.
My post have been in support of acquiring and developing OL talent.

My post stand for themselves and their overall themes are clear.
 

ANUFan

Club Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,350
Reaction score
17,344
Yes, but there is a similarity between Tua’s worst games (Denver/LV) and Mahomes in the SB. When a defense doesn’t respect your OL, and knows they can get to the QB all day, it is going to be a rough game. It’s not knocking the rookies so much as saying we need a long term solution at center and either a guard or RT.

You shouldn't have to explain the meaning further to the poster. The post was pretty clear in it's meaning and wasn't trying to put rookies on the same level as all-pros. It's clear the point as you've broken-down for the OP is the importance of good overall OL play and it's effects on Wins and Losses.
 

Zachofferdahl

Rookie
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
13
Reaction score
13
Age
46
Location
Colorado
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.
This makes too much damn sense!!
 

Ikema

For me to poop on!
Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
2,032
Reaction score
911
Age
61
Location
Connecticut
Yeah this is starting to get a lot of momentum. The question becomes is Miami’s OL play on the field last season a reflection of lack of talent or lack of experience?
true, but in my estimation you never stop investing into these vital parts, offensive lineman, quarterback, cornerback these positions are essential in today's NFL. One caveat: you don't always have the ability to draft for depth while your building, it is a luxury.
 
Last edited:

danstilldaman

Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
1,130
Reaction score
1,208
Where does this come from? Lol I haven't heard a thing about omg a HS incident....
It's never good to be tied to situations or allegations like this, however I don't see how anybody could pretend that situations like this don't happen throughout all college athletics. It's typically the same stuff that you see in fraternities and sororities as well, not saying the situations should be overlooked or justified but they do take place.
 

ANUFan

Club Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
19,350
Reaction score
17,344
true, but in my estimation you never stop investing neutral parts offensive lineman, quarterback, cornerback these positions are essential in today's NFL

I don't think anyone here would disagree with you. The question becomes what capital are you using to invest in those parts?

Are we talking about middle to late rounds which i don't think anyone would argue with or the high premium picks which is the heart of the debate.

Right now some are understanably uneasy about spending a potential 6 overall pick on another 1st round OL prospect for this team.
 

Zachofferdahl

Rookie
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
13
Reaction score
13
Age
46
Location
Colorado
It's definitely going to be interesting that's for sure, I also didn't see as much of Sewell as I did Slater. From what I seen I take Slater over Sewell, Slater absolutely faced more NFL ready talent. Hell his performance against Chase Young was quite impressive. But I don't like either at 6, now if we traded back with Denver at 9 I wouldn't be disappointed with Slater or Sewell, but I personally would rather have Parsons or Waddle if that was the case and they're still on the board.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the front office had every intention of trading up to 6 with the hopes of trading back down in the top 10 to obtain another 2nd or 3rd round pick for this year. That’s playing chess when everyone else is playing checkers. Of course, Grier still needs to make the right pick. That’s an entirely different conversation.
 

tay0365

Super Donator
Club Member
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
15,367
Reaction score
7,781
Location
NJ
Food for thought


Also, remember that later rounds (2-4) has netted some of the best receivers currently playing.
I look forward to see the Jets take an O-linemen with their second 1st round pick, and hear Greeny be extremely happy that they did not take the loads of quality receivers that will still probably be there.
 

Zachofferdahl

Rookie
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
13
Reaction score
13
Age
46
Location
Colorado

I thought this would add to the conversation. I find it interesting that the NFL does not really have a standard wins above replacement value for nfl positions. For example, it makes a ton of sense to invest resources up the middle in baseball (center fielder, SS, catcher) since those positions affect the outcome of the game greater than the left fielder.
Another interesting point, PFF points out their WAR analysis contradicts the nfl’s positional salary value.
 
Last edited:

Mach2

Club Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
12,250
Reaction score
22,478
Age
57
Location
Boynton Bch, Fl
I wouldn’t be surprised if the front office had every intention of trading up to 6 with the hopes of trading back down in the top 10 to obtain another 2nd or 3rd round pick for this year. That’s playing chess when everyone else is playing checkers. Of course, Grier still needs to make the right pick. That’s an entirely different conversation.
Giving up a first to move to six, then getting a second or third to move back down is playing chess?

I can't see the logic of that statement. Best case it's a wash. They could have made a much better deal by holding the SF first as ammunition.

Grier might not be a top evaluation guy, but he isn't stupid about manipulation of draft assets. They have at least two options in mind @6, and they may end up trading out, but it won't be for just a damn rd3.
 

SCOTTY

Club Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Messages
6,620
Reaction score
7,359
Giving up a first to move to six, then getting a second or third to move back down is playing chess?

I can't see the logic of that statement.
You think working for 3 weeks, setting up 2 trades contingent, keeping the other teams quite, leaking nothing to the public isnt chess strategic? (And in the end doesn't effect the player drafted)
 

Zachofferdahl

Rookie
Joined
Jan 30, 2021
Messages
13
Reaction score
13
Age
46
Location
Colorado

I thought this would add to the conversation. I find it interesting that the NFL does not really have a standard wins above replacement value for nfl positions. For example, it makes a ton of sense to invest resources up the middle in baseball (center fielder, SS, catcher) since those positions affect the outcome of the game.
Another interesting point, PFF points out their WAR analysis contradicts the nfl’s positional salary value
Giving up a first to move to six, then getting a second or third to move back down is playing chess?

I can't see the logic of that statement.
Is the value considered different when trading this year’s 2nd for next year’s 1st round pick? Not sure if I worded this correctly. What you said does make sense.
 

Mach2

Club Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
12,250
Reaction score
22,478
Age
57
Location
Boynton Bch, Fl

I thought this would add to the conversation. I find it interesting that the NFL does not really have a standard wins above replacement value for nfl positions. For example, it makes a ton of sense to invest resources up the middle in baseball (center fielder, SS, catcher) since those positions affect the outcome of the game greater than the left fielder.
Another interesting point, PFF points out their WAR analysis contradicts the nfl’s positional salary value.
Interesting article. Thanks for posting.

I can't argue with the raw numbers, as I'm sure they did the legwork.

I do disagree with some of their blanket conclusions. There are too many situation specific variables to apply universally.
 

Mach2

Club Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Messages
12,250
Reaction score
22,478
Age
57
Location
Boynton Bch, Fl

I thought this would add to the conversation. I find it interesting that the NFL does not really have a standard wins above replacement value for nfl positions. For example, it makes a ton of sense to invest resources up the middle in baseball (center fielder, SS, catcher) since those positions affect the outcome of the game.
Another interesting point, PFF points out their WAR analysis contradicts the nfl’s positional salary value

Is the value considered different when trading this year’s 2nd for next year’s 1st round pick? Not sure if I worded this correctly. What you said does make sense.
There are those that believe that a year later pick loses a round of value. My opinion is that it depends on the situation, and the value doesn't actually change. It's just the cost of doing business for the team with less leverage.
 
Top Bottom