Daniel Jeremiah - Jonah Williams is someone to watch

[thebandit27]

38 minutes ago, Logic said:

I don't believe this to be true. The best comparison for Jonah Williams, in my mind, is Zack Martin. Both were quality college tackles who were deemed not to have the size to stay at tackle in the NFL.

Here are scouting reports for each:

http://www.nfl.com/combine/profiles/zack-martin?id=2543480

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/jonah-williams?id=32195749-4c13-2676-fb3e-2b3d97cbfc66

Martin was projected as an early to mid 1st rounder and, lo and behold, he was drafted 16th. He has made 5 Pro Bowls.

Williams likely will ALSO be drafted in the teens. He, similarly to Martin DOES have the capacity to be a perennial Pro Bowl guard. If the word you have a problem with is "floor", then fine. Technically, any drafted player's floor is "total bust, out of the league". My PREDICTION (which I admit is as likely to be wrong as any other fan's prediction) is that his floor is Pro Bowl guard. It's not as if I pulled that out of my ass. Read just about anyone's scouting report on the guy. No one really seems to believe in him as a tackle, but just about everyone seems to believe he's OG1 in this draft and has the potential to be excellent inside.

 

I see more Justin Britt than I do Zack Martin...and again, this isn't as much about the player as much as it is about the principle of not drafting a non-premium position at #9 overall.

 

I think Jonah will play in the league for a long time. I believe his best positional fit to be center, but that he can probably be a fine guard and an adequate tackle.  I feel the same way about Risner, for whatever that's worth.

 

I also think that when you look at the free agent market and see names like Norwell, Osemele, Saffold, etc. hit the open market on an annual basis, it tells you that you don't need to be spending a high pick on those guys.

 

30 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I think that this is at least partially because it costs the same amount to apply the franchise tag to a Guard as it does to tag a Tackle. Am I correct?

 

Imo having a very good Guard at a bargain price for 5 years is a great thing. That said, #9 could be a bit early. I guess that much depends on the quality of the draft. Imo this one is quite average. How about you?

 

I agree that having any good OLmen at a bargain price for 5 years is great, but I also think that there's no great rush to pick a guard that high.

 

As for this draft, there are some guards that I like quite a bit. I think Lindstrom is a day 1 starter, and I think Risner could be one as well. If Cody Ford moves to OG, he could be dominant. That said, I think you'll see some day 2-3 guys like Benzschawel, McGovern, and Samia that become solid starters as well.

 

Anyway, have to run to a meeting, but I hope you're doing well.

[eball]

25 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Anyway, have to run to a meeting, but I hope you're doing well.

 

Is it a high level business meeting?

[thebandit27]

7 minutes ago, eball said:

 

Is it a high level business meeting?

 

Hah! I'm listening to a presentation about process instrumentation 

[CookieG]

49 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I think that this is at least partially because it costs the same amount to apply the franchise tag to a Guard as it does to tag a Tackle. Am I correct?

 

Imo having a very good Guard at a bargain price for 5 years is a great thing. That said, #9 could be a bit early. I guess that much depends on the quality of the draft. Imo this one is quite average. How about you?

9 may be a little early...but imo..so what?

 

I think they are in a great position to transform what was one of the worst OL (and one of the worst offenses in the NFL) in the NFL into one of the better ones. Will this mean possibly overpaying a bit? Maybe, but so be it. Now, if as you say, he'll be a multiple pro bowler...its by no means a reach. If he helps solidify an OL that can again run block and ...god forbid, pass protect, he's not a reach.

And getting that type of quality on a rookie contract is a bargain.

 

This is an offense that scored 269 points last year, with around 40% of those points coming in 3 games. I really like some of the offensive additions they made, but its a great opportunity to finish the job, or at least take it to another level. They are going to have the first choice at a number of OL, or maybe second choice.  It is well past time to solidify the OL across the board, rather than half a line or three fifths of a line.

 

If that means taking someone at 9 when he's "slotted" at 15-20...pfft..I'm not going to worry too much about it.  People like to scream "reach" but tbh, the bigger philosophical "reach" is to believe you can make your D so dominant that a below average to average O is all that's needed. It rarely happens that way. 

 

To me, there's a number of ways they can go here..

 

-Dillard at 9, move Dawkins inside to guard. You improve 2 positions with one pick.

-Williams...or another at 9. If its true that Williams stated he won't play anywhere but LT, that concerns me. I might look elsewhere.

-trade down for an extra pick ...hopefully an extra 2nd. You might still get your OL and still get a quality defensive player in the 2nd, pl;us a bonus pick.

-get the defensive player that people are having wet dreams about, whoever that is..and hope that a guy like Lindstrom, Risner or Jenkins is there in the 2nd.

 

Give your newly annointed franchise QB the best chance you can. Give him time in the pocket, give him back a running game. They've made a surprisingly good start in the offseason, its time to take the next step.
 

 

[Bill from NYC]

49 minutes ago, CookieG said:

9 may be a little early...but imo..so what?

 

I think they are in a great position to transform what was one of the worst OL (and one of the worst offenses in the NFL) in the NFL into one of the better ones. Will this mean possibly overpaying a bit? Maybe, but so be it. Now, if as you say, he'll be a multiple pro bowler...its by no means a reach. If he helps solidify an OL that can again run block and ...god forbid, pass protect, he's not a reach.

And getting that type of quality on a rookie contract is a bargain.

 

This is an offense that scored 269 points last year, with around 40% of those points coming in 3 games. I really like some of the offensive additions they made, but its a great opportunity to finish the job, or at least take it to another level. They are going to have the first choice at a number of OL, or maybe second choice.  It is well past time to solidify the OL across the board, rather than half a line or three fifths of a line.

 

If that means taking someone at 9 when he's "slotted" at 15-20...pfft..I'm not going to worry too much about it.  People like to scream "reach" but tbh, the bigger philosophical "reach" is to believe you can make your D so dominant that a below average to average O is all that's needed. It rarely happens that way. 

 

To me, there's a number of ways they can go here..

 

-Dillard at 9, move Dawkins inside to guard. You improve 2 positions with one pick.

-Williams...or another at 9. If its true that Williams stated he won't play anywhere but LT, that concerns me. I might look elsewhere.

-trade down for an extra pick ...hopefully an extra 2nd. You might still get your OL and still get a quality defensive player in the 2nd, pl;us a bonus pick.

-get the defensive player that people are having wet dreams about, whoever that is..and hope that a guy like Lindstrom, Risner or Jenkins is there in the 2nd.

 

Give your newly annointed franchise QB the best chance you can. Give him time in the pocket, give him back a running game. They've made a surprisingly good start in the offseason, its time to take the next step.
 

 

Excellent, well thought post.

[C.Biscuit97]

I know you need them and they are super important but is there anything worse than a 1st round o linemen?  I wish I knew if they were going to take one because I won’t go to Nashville if they do (well I still might because Nashville is a lot of fun). 

[Dopey]

4 hours ago, MrEpsYtown said:

Here's some info on Dion Dawkins. He started at left tackle for Temple for three years. His true freshmen year he started a couple of game at left and right tackle. His sophomore-senior year he started at left tackle exclusively. At the senior bowl he played really great at both guard spots and and also played really well at left tackle. Pre Draft, people felt he was best at guard. Not sure why though...all his measurables, 3 cone, and super longs arms point to tackle. Anyway, his rookie year, he got thrown into the guard spot for like 6 plays and was good. He played left tackle the rest of the way. In his rookie training camp, he took mostly right tackle reps and did not look great. He took left tackle reps too, and did not look great. The bottom line is that he looked pretty terrible in rookie camp and struggled all around in terms of trying to implement the techniques that Juan Castillo was teaching. It was not until he was thrust into a game at left tackle that he showed what he could do. 

• So he played really well at left tackle his rookie year, good enough for this regime to trade Cordy Glenn. 
• He played really well at guard at the senior bowl, both right and left guard. He also played left tackle there. 
• He looked terrible in training camp his rookie year, wherever he was put. 
• He has played a little bit on the right side. Most of his experience is at left tackle. 
• He might be better at guard than he is a left tackle, but he has not proven that he can't play left tackle. There is more evidence that he can, than there is evidence that he can't. 
• Juan Castillo's techniques forced him to re-learn everything he learned for four years at Temple, so a new line coach likely does a lot for him. 
• His arm length and other measures say he should be a left tackle. (His arms are longer than Williams, Dillard, guys like that )
• The idea that he can't play the right side of the line is simply not true
• He himself is going to say that he wants to be a left tackle. Like I said above, he should not want to move off the $$$$ position and he deserves an opportunity to prove himself before he is moved. 

This.

Not only should he NOT want to move, he would have to lose the competition at LT in order to be moved. JMO.

[CookieG]

24 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I know you need them and they are super important but is there anything worse than a 1st round o linemen?  I wish I knew if they were going to take one because I won’t go to Nashville if they do (well I still might because Nashville is a lot of fun). 

oh, its a boring pick to be sure.

 

I mean, no one jumps up and down screaming happily when the foundation to a building is done. Well, maybe the concrete guys.

 

But if its not done right, the rest of the building is off. It is no place to scrimp.

[Bill from NYC]

34 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

I know you need them and they are super important but is there anything worse than a 1st round o linemen?  I wish I knew if they were going to take one because I won’t go to Nashville if they do (well I still might because Nashville is a lot of fun). 

Sure, let's keep grabbing dbs and rbs in round 1. It sure has worked so far lol!!!

 

It only took us 30 or so years to draft a QB with out actual assigned 1st round pick (or trade up). What was the rush, right?

[thebandit27]

5 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Sure, let's keep grabbing dbs and rbs in round 1. It sure has worked so far lol!!!

 

It only took us 30 or so years to draft a QB with out actual assigned 1st round pick (or trade up). What was the rush, right?

 

So you're saying that positional value should rule the day?  I agree--spend your top-10 pick on a QB first, and then on the $$ positions like WR, pass rusher, and cornerback.  Maybe on a LT if you think the guy is elite and have the other positions covered.  Nothing else belongs in the first round, let alone the top 10.

 

[C.Biscuit97]

8 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Sure, let's keep grabbing dbs and rbs in round 1. It sure has worked so far lol!!!

 

It only took us 30 or so years to draft a QB with out actual assigned 1st round pick (or trade up). What was the rush, right?

Haha.  Well besides the excitement of drafting a defensive back in the 1st to see you melt down, I can say that is without a doubt the one position I do not want.

 

and I definitely understand why they take an o linemen and can’t get mad at it.  I do think it is a bit riskier than you might think though.  Guys like Gallery, Cooper, Greg Robinson, Luke Joeckel, Jason Smith, etc have been safe picks that have been total busts.  

[Bill from NYC]

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

 

So you're saying that positional value should rule the day?  I agree--spend your top-10 pick on a QB first, and then on the $$ positions like WR, pass rusher, and cornerback.  Maybe on a LT if you think the guy is elite and have the other positions covered.  Nothing else belongs in the first round, let alone the top 10.

 

I think that as a rule, teams should draft players in round 1 who they would want to re-sign if they play very well. For instance, the Giants did not re-sign Landon Collins, thinking that the cost would be too high for a safety. This was a smart move imo.

As for Williams, I don't know if Williams is viewed as "elite" by the Bills but if he is, they would be correct to ***** him right up imo. If they project him to Guard, it becomes a tougher call to make. I happen to believe that Guards are becoming more important, but hey, this is jmo. Defenses are getting smaller and there seems to be more pass rush coming up the middle in the NFL.

Even more important.....Josh needs protection. I have mentioned numerous times that the Colts drafted Tarik Glenn and Adam Meadows (2 elite OTs) the year before they took Manning. We absolutely MUST protect Allen. Pass protection and a better running game will do both.

[Bill from NYC]

10 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Haha.  Well besides the excitement of drafting a defensive back in the 1st to see you melt down, I can say that is without a doubt the one position I do not want.

 

and I definitely understand why they take an o linemen and can’t get mad at it.  I do think it is a bit riskier than you might think though.  Guys like Gallery, Cooper, Greg Robinson, Luke Joeckel, Jason Smith, etc have been safe picks that have been total busts.  

I agree, but I think that Williams is a low risk pick.

 

Actually I have not had a bad db tantrum in some time. I was semi-under control even when they stupidly walked away from Mahomes and Watson and took a corner.

[C.Biscuit97]

10 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I agree, but I think that Williams is a low risk pick.

 

Actually I have not had a bad db tantrum in some time. I was semi-under control even when they stupidly walked away from Mahomes and Watson and took a corner.

You thought on Williams is that if he’s not good enough for OT, he can become a good G?  I know you become a Bama fan when they got Saban ?, but how do you know which linemen are good because they are surrounded by blue chippers?

[blacklabel]

As they say, it's smokescreen season... they might know of a team slotted after them that is high on Williams so they could be leaking info saying they have their eye on him to see if any teams bite for a trade up. I still think they're going DL.

[LSHMEAB]

9 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

If anyone actually believed that Jonah's floor was perennial all pro guard, then he'd be talked about as a top 5 pick without prejudice.

 

Regarding the Colts, perhaps you didn't watch much of them, but I'd like to submit that their transformation had more to do with getting their all pro QB back on the field under the guidance of an offensive minded HC than it did the drafting of a LG.

 

Nelson's great, but I let's remember that teams find guards that are 90% as good in rounds 3-7 every year.

 

Spending a premium pick on a non-premium position is a bad investment.

Agree with the entire premise of your thread. Where I'd nitpick is that Nelson was a once a decade talent at the position. In hindsight, it represents solid value because he appears to be a perennial All-Pro. As a general rule, I'd never want to draft a guard in the top 10. But along the lines of your statement; I also don't see Williams floor as an all pro guard. I see his floor as a decent guard. He's a tactician who will likely be a solid player in the NFL. I don't see "special."

[Bill from NYC]

4 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

You thought on Williams is that if he’s not good enough for OT, he can become a good G?  I know you become a Bama fan when they got Saban ?, but how do you know which linemen are good because they are surrounded by blue chippers?

Actually, I became a Bama Fan around 1964.

 

The surrounding players are not what makes it hard to rate Bama players. Two, or even 3 other factors make it tough to rate them, at least for me:

 

1) For Bills Fans, lets call it the "Mike Williams" factor. Some of these kids are just so big and strong at their college positions, they are completely overpower their opponents but in the pros, everybody is big, strong, and fast.

 

2) The system is just that good CB. I heard a Bama player once say that he played on 3 NFL teams and the Saban defensive scheme was MUCH harder than any of them. I believe him.

 

3) Some kids get away from Saban and go nuts. Williams will not be one of these guys, nor will Jacobs. In fact, I don't expect this to happen this season at all. The last guy to go wild was Reuben Foster. CB, this kid could be the best LB in the NFL. He is mega-talented and an absolute predator but it won't do him any good if he is a criminal.

 

Do keep an eye on OLB Christian Miller. He just kept getting better and he is very smart. You can see him sack Kyler Murray in the bowl game on you tube. Williams and Damien Harris are also really smart kids. That said, wait until the 2020 draft!