Would you trade up to 5 for Kalil?

[NeverOutNick]

I wouldn't and I don't think Nix would either

 

Would you give up Marshawn Lynch and Paul Posluszny for Joe Thomas? I know I would...2007 draft (Thomas went #3 but if he slipped to 5 this scenario compares to the question)

[aristocrat]

if minn stays put and doesn't take him he falls to the 10 spot imo.

[Dragonborn10]

Yea obviously given our need and he is the best non-qb in this draft. The more I think about it, Minnesota could very well draft Blackmon.

Or they could draft Claiborne

[NeverOutNick]

if minn stays put and doesn't take him he falls to the 10 spot imo.

 

Why wouldn't STL take him? Jason Smith is a bust...i'm sure they would think about taking him at 6 (i'm assuming thats why hes saying trade up to 5)...Also i'm sure other teams would try and trade up to get Kalil if Minny didn't take him seeing how he's the only LT without questions

Edited April 12, 2012 by NeverOutNick

[Bud Adams]

Below is my take on this from March 31 in another post. It remains unchanged.

 

This.

 

Arguably the three toughest positions to fill in FA:

 

• Franchise QB
  
• Franchise LT
  
• Franchise DE (check!)
   
  

With Kalil, we have a chance of filling the second of those three positions. This doesn't just help improve one position. Maybe it helps Ftizpatrick buy more time so that he doesn't have to release the ball right away. That could help him improve his accuracy. True, Fitz would have to adjust -- and that's where coaching comes in. But he's smart enough to grasp the concept, methinks.

 

Here is how Kalil could fall to #6 -- and, as mentioned in another thread, the Rams are likely to shop the pick:

 

• 1. Colts: Andrew Luck
  
• 2. Redskins: RG III
  
• 3. Dolphins: Ryan Tannehill (Trade up by Miami with Minnesota -- Yes, I think they're desperate enough to make this move, fearing Cleveland will take him. Also, I think this makes sense for Minnesota, as they have so many needs. True, so does Miami -- but their GM and owner are utterly inept).
  
• 4. Browns: Trent Richardson / Justin Blackmon
  
• 5. Bucs: Trent Richardson / Morris Claiborne
  

I think swapping 1st-rounders and a second gets it done with the Rams. And I'd do it in a heartbeat. I'm sick of OLs who "convert" to tackle. We could have a chance of drafting potentially one of the best pure LTs in many years without breaking the bank or mortgaging the future. AND, this guy plays with a mean streak. We need that, too.

 

BA

[thewildrabbit]

Well Pdaddy thats part of the problem.

We (you and me ) dont know about Hairston besides what little we saw. and that might've been unfair considering circumstance. Some folks have written him up very well after seeing him play. He is also by some to be a RT. so if we go for Kalil we are secured at LT and have one hell of a swing Tacle in the making and potential starter at right side in a couple years. I am going on the somewhat uneducated that Kalil IS the real deal and that is the tipping point of this whole discussion for me. if i thought there were risks like reiff and martin i would not even consider the trade.

 

To give some insight on this LT, here is what scout.com thinks:

 

Based on family history, Matt Kalil was destined to be an outstanding physical specimen. His father was a pro football player, his brother is a starter in the NFL and his mother was Miss California.

Now pro scouts say he soon may be regarded as the best in the family, not counting mom of course, although Matt was recognized by Playboy Magazine himself - as a 2011 Preseason All American.

"Genetics are obviously a huge part," acknowledged Pittsburgh Steelers General Manager Kevin Colbert, who considered Kalil's situation similar to that of the NFL's famous Mathews family, which begat current Green Bay Packers linebacker, Clay, and tracks back three generations to grandfather Clay (49ers in 1950s) and includes uncle Bruce (Houston Oilers/Tennessee Titans 1983-2001; Pro Football Hall of Fame).

Matt's father, Frank, was drafted by the Buffalo Bills and played for the USFL's Arizona Wranglers and Houston Gamblers. Matt's older brother Ryan was a star center at USC (2003-2006) and after being drafted in the second round by the Carolina Panthers has become one of the best centers in the NFL.

Vikings General Manager Rick Spielman says Kalil is not only the best tackle the draft, but he has a nasty temperament to go with his physical abilities that could make him one of the best in the NFL and, oh yes, possible best in the family.

Matt credits his father for instilling him with work ethic and technique to enhance his bloodlines.

"Hours on end of going to the park and working on technique," Kalil said when asked what he remembered about getting help from his father. "Watching film in high school and coming home on weekends during college and going over film with my dad. That's what he taught us, there's always something you can improve. You strive for perfection, but you never get there."

 

NFL scouts believe he is as close to perfect as they can expect and one of the most complete offensive tackles to come out of college since USC's Tony Boselli, who was the second player selected in the 1995 draft by the Jacksonville Jaguars. Not a relative, but a highly-regarded alumn.

http://www.cbssports...players/1631888

 

 

From everything I've read, if teams weren't so desperate for QB's, Kalil would be the #1 overall. So yea, I'd say he is worth moving up for!

 

 

 

The problem is, since the Vikings saw the Redskins give up 3 #1's for that #2 spot to get RG3, they might want the farm for that #3 spot. Now, should the Dolphins trade up with the Vikes to get Tannehill and the Browns already having a top LT , things could come down to a trade with Tampa Bay for the #5 spot, which might actually work with a #1 at 10 and #2 at 41. Then the problem arises that every other team in the NFL already knows how good Kalil is and if they need a LT they will also be trying to trade up. Like the Vikings who covet him

Edited April 12, 2012 by Fear the Beard

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Why wouldn't STL take him? Jason Smith is a bust...i'm sure they would think about taking him at 6 (i'm assuming thats why hes saying trade up to 5)...Also i'm sure other teams would try and trade up to get Kalil if Minny didn't take him seeing how he's the only LT without questions

We actually have several prominent posters who live in the St. Louis area.

 

I'd love to hear what they have to say.

 

What I've read is that the Rams feel that they need to get Sam Bradford more weapons. I would not equate an offensive tackle with a weapon.

 

As far as their offensive tackle situation goes, Rodger Saffold played LT as a rookie and played quite well. I believe they viewed him as the answer at LOT.

 

Then last year he seemingly regressed.

 

Obviously we don't know what the new coaching staff feels about Saffold but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Rams draft Kalil if he drops to them.

 

JMO.

 

 

[BuffaloBillsSD]

To give some insight on this LT, here is what scout.com thinks:

 

Based on family history, Matt Kalil was destined to be an outstanding physical specimen. His father was a pro football player, his brother is a starter in the NFL and his mother was Miss California.

Now pro scouts say he soon may be regarded as the best in the family, not counting mom of course, although Matt was recognized by Playboy Magazine himself - as a 2011 Preseason All American.

"Genetics are obviously a huge part," acknowledged Pittsburgh Steelers General Manager Kevin Colbert, who considered Kalil's situation similar to that of the NFL's famous Mathews family, which begat current Green Bay Packers linebacker, Clay, and tracks back three generations to grandfather Clay (49ers in 1950s) and includes uncle Bruce (Houston Oilers/Tennessee Titans 1983-2001; Pro Football Hall of Fame).

Matt's father, Frank, was drafted by the Buffalo Bills and played for the USFL's Arizona Wranglers and Houston Gamblers. Matt's older brother Ryan was a star center at USC (2003-2006) and after being drafted in the second round by the Carolina Panthers has become one of the best centers in the NFL.

Vikings General Manager Rick Spielman says Kalil is not only the best tackle the draft, but he has a nasty temperament to go with his physical abilities that could make him one of the best in the NFL and, oh yes, possible best in the family.

Matt credits his father for instilling him with work ethic and technique to enhance his bloodlines.

"Hours on end of going to the park and working on technique," Kalil said when asked what he remembered about getting help from his father. "Watching film in high school and coming home on weekends during college and going over film with my dad. That's what he taught us, there's always something you can improve. You strive for perfection, but you never get there."

 

NFL scouts believe he is as close to perfect as they can expect and one of the most complete offensive tackles to come out of college since USC's Tony Boselli, who was the second player selected in the 1995 draft by the Jacksonville Jaguars. Not a relative, but a highly-regarded alumn.

http://www.cbssports...players/1631888

 

 

From everything I've read, if teams weren't so desperate for QB's, Kalil would be the #1 overall. So yea, I'd say he is worth moving up for!

 

 

 

The problem is, since the Vikings saw the Redskins give up 3 #1's for that #2 spot to get RG3, they might want the farm for that #3 spot. Now, should the Dolphins trade up with the Vikes to get Tannehill and the Browns already having a top LT , things could come down to a trade with Tampa Bay for the #5 spot, which might actually work with a #1 at 10 and #2 at 42. Then the problem arises that every other team in the NFL already knows how good Kalil is and if they need a LT they will also be trying to trade up. Like the Vikings who covet him

 

Thanks for the info, I was all in on Floyd at 10 but if the Bills can swing a move up for Kalil with only the 10 and 41 I would not mind. I think he has to fall to 5 or 6 for that to work though. I am hesitant to give up next years one or this years 3 along with the 1 and 2.

[thewildrabbit]

Thanks for the info, I was all in on Floyd at 10 but if the Bills can swing a move up for Kalil with only the 10 and 41 I would not mind. I think he has to fall to 5 or 6 for that to work though. I am hesitant to give up next years one or this years 3 along with the 1 and 2.

You are welcome

 

Kalil has the bloodlines to be not only a great LT, but a future HoFer.

 

 

To all the Floyd lovers out there, has he made a visit to the Buffalo Bills? If not I kinda doubt the Bills have interest.

[Mr. WEO]

I'd much rather have 15-22 playmakers than be one of those that are always wanting to trade back and have a roster of 53 guys named Joe. We don't need 9-12 rookies on this roster. 3-5 playmakers will do soooooooooooooooooo. I'd do it immediately.

 

 

You do know we don't have a left tackle right now don't you ???

LT is not a playmaker position. Hairston is LT right now.

 

 

 

 

You are making a false assumption that if you take an OT with your first pick you won't be able to get a quality receiver with a following pick. This draft has a lot more quality receivers than it does OTs. I'm not advocating reaching for any position in this draft. If they have some OTs ranked relatively high on their draft board then they need to seize the oppportunity to address this currently poorly staffed position.

 

Please don't use your standard weak argument that you can get a qualaity OT in the lower rounds. You can say that for all of the positions.

 

I'm making the assumption that it is a better value to draft a playmaker/scorer such as WR in the 1st than an LT. You can only fill your WR corps with so many 7th rounders and guys like Easley (one year wonders from dubious programs) and keep hoping for the best.

 

Sure, you can say that any position can be filled with quality from rounds after the first--but as there are only 32 players chosen in the first round that's not a very persuasive argument given what we are talking about. You are just restating the obvious--most players (good or bad) are drafted outside the 1st round. Look at the teams that have used a top 10 pick for LT ("the blind side QB protector") the past few years have faired. Cleveland's passing offense has sucked despite perenial Pro Bowler Joe Thomas at LT. Since drating him, they have remained amongst the worst offenses in football. Maybe they should have considered Adrian Peterson. And how about Miami after spending a number 1 pick on Long? They passed over Matt Ryan for an LT. How has that worked out? Parcells should be barred from the HOF for that decision alone.

 

I don't see LT, even Khalil, leading to an obvious difference in the scoring output from day one. It's an ensemble position like any lineman. The impact of the position by nature is severly limited.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Adam Schefter was just on ESPN saying that talking to sources around the league he dosent believe that Kalil is a lock for the number 3 pick by the vikings. Since Cleveland has an All-Pro caliber tackle in Joe Thomas and Tampa has a bunch of money invested in Donald Penn, would you be willing to trade up to 5 and edge out St. Louis if this situation occurs? If we give our first and second pick (1780 pts) it should equal the 5 overall pick (1700 pts) according to the trade value chart.

 

Personally I would love to since it means if we can get Levitre locked up we have our offensive and defensive lines set for the next five years. Your thoughts?

 

If I recall correctly, Bradford in St Louis was sacked an ungodly number of times last year and his completion percentage sucked (it's hard to throw completions when you're about to be thrown on your a**).

In addition to needing a WR, St Louis badly needs a left tackle - so if this situation occurs, what would keep St Louis from moving up?

[JohnC]

LT is not a playmaker position. Hairston is LT right now.

 

 

 

I'm making the assumption that it is a better value to draft a playmaker/scorer such as WR in the 1st than an LT. You can only fill your WR corps with so many 7th rounders and guys like Easley (one year wonders from dubious programs) and keep hoping for the best.

 

Sure, you can say that any position can be filled with quality from rounds after the first--but as there are only 32 players chosen in the first round that's not a very persuasive argument given what we are talking about. You are just restating the obvious--most players (good or bad) are drafted outside the 1st round. Look at the teams that have used a top 10 pick for LT ("the blind side QB protector") the past few years have faired. Cleveland's passing offense has sucked despite perenial Pro Bowler Joe Thomas at LT. Since drating him, they have remained amongst the worst offenses in football. Maybe they should have considered Adrian Peterson. And how about Miami after spending a number 1 pick on Long? They passed over Matt Ryan for an LT. How has that worked out? Parcells should be barred from the HOF for that decision alone.

 

I don't see LT, even Khalil, leading to an obvious difference in the scoring output from day one. It's an ensemble position like any lineman. The impact of the position by nature is severly limited.

 

Both Thomas and Long were marvelous picks. Each player is a perennial all-pro caliber player. Of course they haven't had a dramatic affect on the offense for their respective teams but that isn't their fault. The problem lies with the caliber of the qbs directing their offenses.

 

I agree with you that adding playmakers is going to help the offense. How is it going to hurt? Do you always have to draft a playmaker in the first round? Of course not.

 

Take a look at our roster. As of now there is only one potential starting LT prospect, Hairston, on the roster. If he doesn't work out or gets hurt then who is going to fill that gaping hole on the line. Where I stongly disagree with you is your claim that the LT position can be filled with any pedestrian lineman. That doesn't make sense. The LT usually squares off with the DE or OLB who are the best pass rushers for the defense. Why are premier LTs in the draft taken at the very top of the draft? Why do you think that premier LTs are some of the highest played players in the league?

 

Just to remind you I am not advocating reaching in the draft to fill a need. If Blackmon should happen to fall I would definitely take him over any LT prospect (other than Kalil). One way or another this franchise needs to get a starting LT out of this draft. The best way to accomplish that is to use a high pick to fill that critical need.

Edited April 12, 2012 by JohnC

[CBD]

Would you give up Marshawn Lynch and Paul Posluszny for Joe Thomas? I know I would...2007 draft (Thomas went #3 but if he slipped to 5 this scenario compares to the question)

Would you give up Darrelle Revis and Lamarr Woodley for Levi Brown (OT)? I know I wouldn't.

[tennesseeboy]

Like most I am not all THAT impressed with Cordy Glenn. He can play numerous positions...fine. I'd love him if he could play gaurd and tackle at the same time. Unfortunately that isn't the case.... He is one of four or five good prospects.

 

Weaknesses? From draftek

 

Weaknesses

- Struggles with speed rushers, may be relegated to ROT or OG at next level - Can get lazy with technique, as he overpowers college competition - Needs to improve hand placement after initial punch - Inconsistent on initial drive off the ball (quickness)

 

After Williams I'm a little tired of lazy tackles.

 

The move down to Kalil at 5 sounds like a gift from heaven and we should definitely go for it. If not...go with Reiff or possibly Martin.

[Deadstroke]

Adam Schefter was just on ESPN saying that talking to sources around the league he dosent believe that Kalil is a lock for the number 3 pick by the vikings. Since Cleveland has an All-Pro caliber tackle in Joe Thomas and Tampa has a bunch of money invested in Donald Penn, would you be willing to trade up to 5 and edge out St. Louis if this situation occurs? If we give our first and second pick (1780 pts) it should equal the 5 overall pick (1700 pts) according to the trade value chart.

 

Personally I would love to since it means if we can get Levitre locked up we have our offensive and defensive lines set for the next five years. Your thoughts?

 

No way Jose!

 

There are other fish in the pond just a hair under him. Go for one of them!!

[Captain Hindsight]

Would you give up Marshawn Lynch and Paul Posluszny for Joe Thomas? I know I would...2007 draft (Thomas went #3 but if he slipped to 5 this scenario compares to the question)

Those two players, yes. Hell Ill even give up the coach and GM team that drafted those guys. This regime, id rather have those picks because they wont waste them

[Mr. WEO]

Both Thomas and Long were marvelous picks. Each player is a perennial all-pro caliber player. Of course they haven't had a dramatic affect on the offense for their respective teams but that isn't their fault. The problem lies with the caliber of the qbs directing their offenses.

 

I agree with you that adding playmakers is going to help the offense. How is it going to hurt? Do you always have to draft a playmaker in the first round? Of course not.

 

Take a look at our roster. As of now there is only one potential starting LT prospect, Hairston, on the roster. If he doesn't work out or gets hurt then who is going to fill that gaping hole on the line. Where I stongly disagree with you is your claim that the LT position can be filled with any pedestrian lineman. That doesn't make sense. The LT usually squares off with the DE or OLB who are the best pass rushers for the defense. Why are premier LTs in the draft taken at the very top of the draft? Why do you think that premier LTs are some of the highest played players in the league?

 

Just to remind you I am not advocating reaching in the draft to fill a need. If Blackmon should happen to fall I would definitely take him over any LT prospect (other than Kalil). One way or another this franchise needs to get a starting LT out of this draft. The best way to accomplish that is to use a high pick to fill that critical need.

 

How were they "marvelous picks"? Because they went to the PRo Bowl? They are All-Pros? If that's the case then you've made the argument about the limited impact LT alone has on a struggling offense. Despite having the best LTs in the league, there has been no sigificant improvement for either offense. And an easy argument could be made that both teams would have been better off taking Peterson and Ryan.

 

Pedestian lineman? Maybe. Look, I would bet most here would have been pleased or at least satisfied if Bell (a "pedestrian lineman", I would say) was re-signed to a long term contract. Why? Because he did an adequate job (some viewed him as a PB candidate last year!). When we were 5-2, no one was clamoring for a future HOF LT. Now that Bell is going to Philly to spell Peters for a year, we not only have to draft an LT in the first round, we should sacrifice extra picks to get Khalil. It makes no sense.

 

Why do GMs pay LTs so much? Why not ask why they spend insane amounts on FA CBs while you're at it? Or why they move up the draft to pick guys like JPL and Brady Quinn? (I could go on with poor GM habits, but you know them already). It can't all be based on results (value). The reality is that most teams don't break the bank for LT.

 

Hairston is our LT now. Who will replace or beat him out? Why not an LT taken in round 2 or 3?

 

I have looked at our roster. It's a little thin on playmakers on offense. Fitz, Freddy, Stevie are the significant standouts.

Edited April 12, 2012 by Mr. WEO

[Bud Adams]

No way Jose!

 

There are other fish in the pond just a hair under him. Go for one of them!!

Just curious... Did you watch Kalil play every game at USC like I did? If you did, you wouldn't say there are others "just a hair under him." The guy is a BEAST, and anyone else is a DISTANT second.

 

BA

[JohnC]

How were they "marvelous picks"? Because they went to the PRo Bowl? They are All-Pros?

 

Absolutely!!! If a GM knew that their first round selection was going to be a perennial all-pro, no matter the position, they would be ecstatic. Only you would find fault with that type of return.

 

If that's the case then you've made the argument about the limited impact LT alone has on a struggling offense. Despite having the best LTs in the league, there has been no sigificant improvement for either offense. And an easy argument could be made that both teams would have been better off taking Peterson and Ryan.

 

The fault with the respective offenses has little to do with the LT position. It is with the mediocre caliber of the qbs for the respective teams. With respect to Matt Ryan I agree with you that Parcells should have taken Ryan over Long. Not drafting the franchise qb when he had an opportunity to do so set that franchise back. There is no doubt that the qb position is the most influential position on the offense and team. If you have the opportunity to acquire an upper tier caliber qb should should do so.

 

 

 

Pedestian lineman? Maybe. Look, I would bet most here would have been pleased or at least satisfied if Bell (a "pedestrian lineman", I would say) was re-signed to a long term contract. Why? Because he did an adequate job (some viewed him as a PB candidate last year!). When we were 5-2, no one was clamoring for a future HOF LT. Now that Bell is going to Philly to spell Peters for a year, we not only have to draft an LT in the first round, we should sacrifice extra picks to get Khalil. It makes no sense.

 

What makes no sense is your fatuation with Bell. He was an often injured and inconsistent LT who demonstrated that he was not a LT who could be counted on. Why you continue to use him to argue for your proposition that drafting lower round tackles is a workable policy makes no sense. Bell, the LT, refutes not supports your claim that quality LTs could easily be had in the lower rounds.

 

Why do GMs pay LTs so much? Why not ask why they spend insane amounts on FA CBs while you're at it? Or why they move up the draft to pick guys like JPL and Brady Quinn? (I could go on with poor GM habits, but you know them already). It can't all be based on results (value). The reality is that most teams don't break the bank for LT.

 

The reality is that upper tier LTs are paid at a very high rate. The obvious reason is that they are valuable commodities. Mediocre players, no matter the position, are not paid so generously.

 

Your bringing up why GMs move up the draft to ultimately take unproductive players is a distraction that has little to do with our discourse on this topic.

 

Hairston is our LT now. Who will replace or beat him out? Why not an LT taken in round 2 or 3?

 

If Nix takes a LT with his first round selection then he is making the judgment that there won't be a starting caliber available with the later selections.

 

I have looked at our roster. It's a little thin on playmakers on offense. Fitz, Freddy, Stevie are the significant standouts.

 

The Bills were 6-10 last year. They have been out of the playoffs for an embarrassingly dozen years. Needless to say the Bills are thin at a lot of positions. You don't need to point out the obvious.

Edited April 12, 2012 by JohnC

[PDaDdy]

Would you give up Marshawn Lynch and Paul Posluszny for Joe Thomas? I know I would...2007 draft (Thomas went #3 but if he slipped to 5 this scenario compares to the question)

 

Sort of. We actually moved up to get Poz in the second and he was OK. Lynch has been a workhorse NFL RB. Despite neither being on the team anymore those were two decent picks. I'm not saying best ever but good. Lynch had off field issues which eventually got him run out of Buffalo and Poz couldn't cover a TE to save his life but they were good starters.