I am the first to admit when I may be wrong (RT 1st Round)

[Thurman#1]

I have stated several times that Pro football dictates no first round RT's and for most all of NFL History it has been that way. But it seems things are changing somewhat. My brother who is a Vikings season ticket holder speaks with one of their scouts from time to time at events etc. He gets tidbits and insights etc. from the guy. He doesn't 'know him' as in he has his cell phone number type deal. They have just kind of gotten to know each other and he doesn't mind talking with my brother some.

 

That said they ran into each other at the Kansas Jayhawks Spring game last weekend. ( I think the guy is an alum like my brother) and they talked football. I had told my brother about the discussions here and he decided to ask the guy what the deal was with RT's not going in the first.

 

Well the guy pointed out the obvious BUT he said its changing somewhat. Teams are now wanting speed on both sides of the DL And OLB's to pressure the passer from both sides to further take away their comfort zones even further. So they are looking harder at RT's esp high in round 2 if they are athletic enough. The caveat is they normally plan to move them to LT in a year or so if they are that athletic.

 

So bottom line it is possible we could take a RT in the first, but it isn't likely. Our #9 in the 2nd is a real definite possibility to solidify the OL although 3rd round is more likely. With the Mathews situation the kid is so damn athletic he is most likely going to be a LT for someone in the NFL.

 

The other issue is top athletic guys want to be LT's because LT pay will always be much higher than RT. So if we were to trade down and take Mathews in the 1st we are going to have a big problem in about 4 years. Who do you pay? Glenn is a LT And has proven himself as a damn good LT And he is going to want to stay there and get paid LT pay, who can blame him. At some point one will leave the team as you cant pay a LT And RT Left Tackle money, it hurts the cap too much.

 

Personally I want to see a trade down a few spots and take Ebron if still there or the top LB. If its LB take say Austin S Jenkins even with a slight move up and if we have another 2nd by trading down, take say JaWan James from Tenn to play RT for us.

 

 

The Niners weren't trying to replace Joe Staley at LT when they drafted Anthony Davis at #11. Staley was already playing at a very high level. And the Niners just re-signed Davis to a second contract, at around $6 mill per year, making him the second-highest paid RT in the league.

 

The Niners are a very good team with a front office that makes very good decisions.

 

Part of the reason that Davis signed for $6 mill may well have been that the Niners were extending him, giving him that bonus a year before his contract ended. Other teams can do that too, it's not against the law, even for very good players.

 

The Packers recently drafted tackles in the first round two years in a row. Another very good front office there.

 

More and more, RTs are being paid more and drafted higher.

 

I actually think that RT is the 2nd most important position on the line but that doesn't change the fact that I wouldn't take one at 9. To go back to NoSaint's question what RT would you trade the 9th pick for?

 

 

Anthony Davis, for one. Vollmer. Strief, maybe, if he's young enough and healthy enough.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

NoSaint asked the subject-defining (and one hoped, ending) question. There answer: there is no RT anyone would take over the #9 pick.

 

Posters are simply trying a little early to get comfortable with and trying to convince themselves of the wisdom of blowing a #9 on a RT.

 

 

 

RB Ron Dayne

WR Koren Robinson

DT John Henderson

DT Kevin Williams

WR Reggie Williams

CB Carlos Rogers

LB Ernie Sims

WR Ted Ginn Jr.

LB Keith Rivers

DT B.J. Raji

RB C.J. Spiller

OT Tyron Smith

LB Luke Kuechly

CB Dee Milliner

 

 

Those are the #9 picks since the year 2000.

 

Would I trade, say, RT Anthony Davis for most of them? Yeah, in a second. A few of them no way. I wouldn't trade Raji or Tyron Smith or Kuechly. One or two others. But an easy majority, yeah, absolutely I'd trade a very good RT for them.

[maryland-bills-fan]

The Eagles I'll give you, and the Seahawks to a degree because while James Carpenter was taken in the 1st, he didn't pan-out even at RT (he was a college LT) and is now an OG. Reid drafted Fisher to replace Albert.

Actually it is pretty common to draft a college offense tackle and project him as a guard in the pros. The OT has to be big and nimble to handle both bull rushes and loops to the outside from the DE. The guard can be a smaller guy, he can have short arms and has the benefit of working in limited space. Best college o-linemen are usually put at tackle and the lesser ones at guard. Read the draft reports and see the projections.

[NoSaint]

 

 

 

The Niners weren't trying to replace Joe Staley at LT when they drafted Anthony Davis at #11. Staley was already playing at a very high level. And the Niners just re-signed Davis to a second contract, at around $6 mill per year, making him the second-highest paid RT in the league.

 

The Niners are a very good team with a front office that makes very good decisions.

 

Part of the reason that Davis signed for $6 mill may well have been that the Niners were extending him, giving him that bonus a year before his contract ended. Other teams can do that too, it's not against the law, even for very good players.

 

The Packers recently drafted tackles in the first round two years in a row. Another very good front office there.

 

More and more, RTs are being paid more and drafted higher.

 

Anthony Davis, for one. Vollmer. Strief, maybe, if he's young enough and healthy enough.

 

But even Davis who many around here would point to as the best of the best at RT is valued by the niners at 6m per year.... Stevie gets paid more, levitre and Byrd got way more, Glenn's about to get closer to double that.

 

 

When the 15th(?)-25th(?) (not trying to start an argument so I left the range pretty wide- doesnt change the point) best WR is paid better than a top 5 RT, it shows you how little the value has really changed so far.

Edited April 21, 2014 by NoSaint

[Kellyto83TD]

@ Thruman, good stuff.

 

@ Saint, things are changing somewhat. That is what we have been trying to say.

 

Now in the discussions on this thread it give pause for a moment. The Seahawks and Niners are going back to old school football. Great Defense, RUN the damn ball as well as pass. Do we jump that curve now and stay ahead of it and wait till say Round 2 for a good RT or we take a RT in round one to be more of a passing team like most of the league?

 

Me, I trade down period I want another #2 pick. I also want another OLB who can do everything opposite Kiko and lets get the D up to speed or shock folks and get that DE that can solidify the spot opposite Marrio. It will be interesting come May 8th :-)

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

I come at this a little differently than some on this board. I am not a big believer in the commonly used phrase it is a "copy cat" league. This implies that everyone starts doing what the successful teams have just done, and it is believed to be the correct approach. Some may be trying to copy, but it is in many cases the wrong strategy. There are a multitude of ways to be successful, and it is your organizations job to figure out what works for you. The copy cat league thing is the kind of phrase used by former players and broadcasters that sounds great in retrospect, but fails the BS test. Seattle has won by hitting on a number of later round picks, especially at QB,CB,LB etc, probably not a strategy that you can count on if you are some of these other franchises. They have also emphasized speed, defense, and the ability to run on offense. I just don't see that in retrospect they copied anyone's approach of recent success. Not NE, not GB, not NO, not Indy. There are many examples in history of teams coming along and just being more creative,and more innovative. They may have success due to something that was tried before, but it is not always what is being done by the previous champs. That is all retrospective media talk. Bottom line, if the Bills want to be successful, they will have to create the right mix for their situation.

Edited April 21, 2014 by 75Bills

[thebandit27]

Actually it is pretty common to draft a college offense tackle and project him as a guard in the pros. The OT has to be big and nimble to handle both bull rushes and loops to the outside from the DE. The guard can be a smaller guy, he can have short arms and has the benefit of working in limited space. Best college o-linemen are usually put at tackle and the lesser ones at guard. Read the draft reports and see the projections.

 

It's common, but not for 1st round picks. A first-round OT is practically always expected to play tackle in the NFL...the Seahawks did NOT draft Carpenter to be a backup guard; they drafted him to play RT. He was moved to guard because he's performed very, very poorly.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

 

The Niners weren't trying to replace Joe Staley at LT when they drafted Anthony Davis at #11. Staley was already playing at a very high level. And the Niners just re-signed Davis to a second contract, at around $6 mill per year, making him the second-highest paid RT in the league.

 

The Niners are a very good team with a front office that makes very good decisions.

 

Part of the reason that Davis signed for $6 mill may well have been that the Niners were extending him, giving him that bonus a year before his contract ended. Other teams can do that too, it's not against the law, even for very good players.

 

The Packers recently drafted tackles in the first round two years in a row. Another very good front office there.

 

More and more, RTs are being paid more and drafted higher.

 

 

 

 

Anthony Davis, for one. Vollmer. Strief, maybe, if he's young enough and healthy enough.

The 49ers paid Davis because they had a 2nd round pick playing QB on his rookie salary. It is the same thing that is going on in Seattle (even though they just let their RT walk). Once these QBs are due their extensions you will see these teams making tough decisions at certain positions. The positions will be the ones that you can plug inexpensive players in and get serviceable play (RT, OG, S, run stuffing LB, RB).

[NoSaint]

 

 

It's common, but not for 1st round picks. A first-round OT is practically always expected to play tackle in the NFL...the Seahawks did NOT draft Carpenter to be a backup guard; they drafted him to play RT. He was moved to guard because he's performed very, very poorly.

 

And at LT it's nice to have the safety net of RT, then potentially guard to fall back to if the guy can't hack it at LT... Helps protect against total busts.... But the ones that you plan to move definitely go day 2-3.

[Beerball]

John do you feel Lewan has too many off the field questions? Just asking. I can't see lewan being the pick at #9. I see Ebron or a trade down. I would prefer a Trade down, we want more picks in this draft

I'll give my opinion on Lewan and would really like it if someone who has watched him closely chimes in. His off field issues bother me, if one of them proves true "bother" is much too tame a word.

 

What really makes me want to back away from Lewan though is the level of competition in the Big 10. Their conference schedule is full of cupcakes and they do not play anyone decent in non-conference. How can you evaluate him when they don't play anyone outside of OSU & MSU? How did he perform in those games and Michigan's bowl games?

 

Would I prefer an offensive or defensive "play maker" at 9? Most definitely. But, I could not be disappointed by Matthews. I'm strongly in the trade back crowd, but, that's much easier for us to talk about than it is for a team to execute.

[NoSaint]

The 49ers paid Davis because they had a 2nd round pick playing QB on his rookie salary. It is the same thing that is going on in Seattle (even though they just let their RT walk). Once these QBs are due their extensions you will see these teams making tough decisions at certain positions. The positions will be the ones that you can plug inexpensive players in and get serviceable play (RT, OG, S, run stuffing LB, RB).

And that's why you can get good cheap vets at a lot of those spots instead of top picks. The good teams can also draft the #1 guard, RT or a top safety at their pick in the 20s making their free agents more disposable. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule but generally speaking those are spots that hit free agency a lot and it makes sense when you dig into the process

[Kirby Jackson]

 

And that's why you can get good cheap vets at a lot of those spots instead of top picks. The good teams can also draft the #1 guard, RT or a top safety at their pick in the 20s making their free agents more disposable. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule but generally speaking those are spots that hit free agency a lot and it makes sense when you dig into the process

Exactly!! You need to use top 10 picks on the people that are hard to get otherwise (LT, QB, pass rush, elite skill players).

 

Their were tons of players available this year at those easier to fill positions including the elite players (Byrd, Ward, Strief, Asamoah, Spikes, etc...).

[C.Biscuit97]

The Niners weren't trying to replace Joe Staley at LT when they drafted Anthony Davis at #11. Staley was already playing at a very high level. And the Niners just re-signed Davis to a second contract, at around $6 mill per year, making him the second-highest paid RT in the league.

 

The Niners are a very good team with a front office that makes very good decisions.

 

Part of the reason that Davis signed for $6 mill may well have been that the Niners were extending him, giving him that bonus a year before his contract ended. Other teams can do that too, it's not against the law, even for very good players.

 

The Packers recently drafted tackles in the first round two years in a row. Another very good front office there.

 

More and more, RTs are being paid more and drafted higher.

 

 

 

 

Anthony Davis, for one. Vollmer. Strief, maybe, if he's young enough and healthy enough.

 

The 49ers were not a good team when they drafted Davis. They hadn't made the playoffs in a long time, went 8-8 the year before, and then went 6-10 the first year with Davis. It wasn't until the got the best coach in the NFL (IMO) to join their team that they improved.

 

Bryan Bulaga was drafted #23, not #9. Huge difference. And he has started 33 games in 4 years.

 

I'm gearing up for a RT at #9 and hope it works out. But I hate it. There are a ton of 1st round bust LTs and it is extremely rare to draft a RT that high. Everything being equal, you go with a playmaker. They are rarer to find and OTs can be found later in the draft. RT at #9 equals major bonerkiller.

 

I'll give my opinion on Lewan and would really like it if someone who has watched him closely chimes in. His off field issues bother me, if one of them proves true "bother" is much too tame a word.

 

What really makes me want to back away from Lewan though is the level of competition in the Big 10. Their conference schedule is full of cupcakes and they do not play anyone decent in non-conference. How can you evaluate him when they don't play anyone outside of OSU & MSU? How did he perform in those games and Michigan's bowl games?

 

Would I prefer an offensive or defensive "play maker" at 9? Most definitely. But, I could not be disappointed by Matthews. I'm strongly in the trade back crowd, but, that's much easier for us to talk about than it is for a team to execute.

 

Agreed. He probably will be a solid RT but he was hardly dominant this year. I thin khe would be an awful LT. The one thing I can somewhat tolerate about a RT at #9 is the ability to shift to LT as Glenn insurance. But IMO, Lewan isn't good insurance. His best case is Joe Runyan, a solid but not special OT.

[machine gun kelly]

I wouldn't take Lewan at 9. If you have one of the other two available, I would do it. Trading down made sense last year, as EJ was not rated high enough to take him where we were. Only if the two tackles are gone, then go with a skill player. don't forget we still need a pass rusher opposite williams given we're moving back again to a 4-3.

 

These are the best ranked DE. Who do you think we should pick given Clowney will be gone.

1 *Jadeveon Clowney DE 1 South Carolina Jr 6-5 266 1 23 Dee Ford DE 2 Auburn rSr 6-2 252 1 35 *Kony Ealy DE 3 Missouri rJr 6-4 273 1-2 43 *Demarcus Lawrence DE 4 Boise State rJr 6-3 251 2 49 *Scott Crichton DE 5 Oregon State rJr 6-3 273 2 55 Kareem Martin DE 6 North Carolina Sr 6-6 272 2 71 Trent Murphy DE 7 Stanford rSr 6-5 250 2-3

[C.Biscuit97]

I wouldn't take Lewan at 9. If you have one of the other two available, I would do it. Trading down made sense last year, as EJ was not rated high enough to take him where we were. Only if the two tackles are gone, then go with a skill player. don't forget we still need a pass rusher opposite williams given we're moving back again to a 4-3.

 

These are the best ranked DE. Who do you think we should pick given Clowney will be gone.

1 *Jadeveon Clowney DE 1 South Carolina Jr 6-5 266 1 23 Dee Ford DE 2 Auburn rSr 6-2 252 1 35 *Kony Ealy DE 3 Missouri rJr 6-4 273 1-2 43 *Demarcus Lawrence DE 4 Boise State rJr 6-3 251 2 49 *Scott Crichton DE 5 Oregon State rJr 6-3 273 2 55 Kareem Martin DE 6 North Carolina Sr 6-6 272 2 71 Trent Murphy DE 7 Stanford rSr 6-5 250 2-3

 

I like Trent Murphy a lot. He could be the Hansen to Mario's Bruce. He has a "high motor."

[Doc]

Actually it is pretty common to draft a college offense tackle and project him as a guard in the pros. The OT has to be big and nimble to handle both bull rushes and loops to the outside from the DE. The guard can be a smaller guy, he can have short arms and has the benefit of working in limited space. Best college o-linemen are usually put at tackle and the lesser ones at guard. Read the draft reports and see the projections.

Rarely are college OT's, especially those who played LT like Carpenter, who are picked in the first round, drafted to play OG.

[Bill from NYC]

NoSaint raised an interesting question in another thread that still hasn't been answered. What RT would you trade the 9th overall pick for?

 

DJ Fluker. He was a #11. His qb had a much better season, they ran better, and the team made the playoffs.

 

Next question?

[NoSaint]

 

 

DJ Fluker. He was a #11. His qb had a much better season, they ran better, and the team made the playoffs.

 

Next question?

 

fluker is a possible one i suppose, and he went early because he is VERY good even though hes seen as a pure RT. that offense also changed scheme, had more than one new starter on the line, a new OL coach, and in 2012 was among the most injured position groups in the league (think similar to our secondary early this year). id be curious to hear someone that watched him week in and week out to comment on how much his addition helped specifically in the COMPLETE overhaul that happened.

Edited April 21, 2014 by NoSaint

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

DJ Fluker. He was a #11. His qb had a much better season, they ran better, and the team made the playoffs.

 

Next question?

He graded out average as a run blocker and below average in pass protection. While I think that Fluker has a future as a RT (& is a guy not capable of ever playing the left side). I would never trade the 9th pick for him. You don't use the 9th pick on solid players. If the Bills called the Chargers and said we will give you the 9th pick for DJ Fluker I imagine that SD wouldn't spend too long contemplating.

[C.Biscuit97]

DJ Fluker. He was a #11. His qb had a much better season, they ran better, and the team made the playoffs.

 

Next question?

 

I'm sure a 1,000 yard and 8td season by a 3rd round rookie wr didn't help at all either.