You don't draft a guard in the 1st ... or do you?

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

I've seen this several times lately, stated as a certainty.

 

And it's at best questionable.

 

In the old days, when we were drafting around 10th year after year, I used to say that we shouldn't draft a guard there unless we were getting a Hutchinson or a Zack Martin. But drafting 25th, you don't need to be getting a Quentin Nelson.

 

Though it wouldn't hurt.

 

Here's a list of OGs drafted in the 1st in the last ten drafts. And there's at least one in 8 out of the last 10 years.

 

I underlined the guys who were arguably drafted at OT but have since moved to OG. I included the draft slot.

 

 

2021  14 Vera-Tucker, 17 Alex Leatherwood

2020  none

2019  14 Chris Lindstrom, 23 Tytus Howard

2018  6 Quenton Nelson

2017  none

2016  28 Joshua Garnett

2015  5 Brandon Scherff, 9 Ereck Flowers, 13 Andrus Peat, 28 Laken Tomlinson

2014  16 Zack Martin

2013  7 Jonathan Cooper, 10 Chance Warmack, 11 DJ Fluker, 19 Justin Pugh, 20 Kyle Long

2012  24 David DeCastro, 27 Kevin Zeitler

 

 

There are a few real washouts there. But I'd argue not many. A lot of solid to very good players there. Perhaps because DOGs don't generally get teams so hot and bothered this early that they reach.

 

Lemme know if I missed any.

 

I'd argue that this makes a pretty decent argument that you do pick an OG in the 1st if he's good enough. Every pick is affected by whether you do good job picking the right guy. Same at every position, though. These percentages don't make me pessimistic about DOGs in the 1st, though. 

 

Especially when Josh's health is affected, it's a priority. They should consider it. I'm sure they are. It's certainly a legit option, if there's a guy they like there and if things fall right.

 

 

 

 

Late in the first round is the perfect spot to pick a quality interior OL (guard or center) as well as a DB or a TE.  If you had included Center in your research, you'd have more evidence.  Both Nick Mangold and Maurkise  Pouncey, former multiple All Pro centers, were late first round picks as was the Bills former center, Eric Wood.   I'd be happy with a guard or center or cornerback in the first.

[Gugny]

We drafted a guard with our 38th pick in 2019 and that didn't work out very well.

 

And for those reasons ... I'm out.

 

[SoTier]

4 minutes ago, Gugny said:

We drafted a guard with our 38th pick in 2019 and that didn't work out very well.

 

And for those reasons ... I'm out.

 

 

The Bills drafted QBs with the 16th pick in the 2013 draft and with the 22nd pick in the 2004 draft.  Both "didn't work out very well".  By your reasoning, the Bills shouldn't have drafted a QB with the 7th pick in the 2018 draft, either.

[MrEpsYtown]

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Late in the first round is the perfect spot to pick a quality interior OL (guard or center) as well as a DB or a TE.  If you had included Center in your research, you'd have more evidence.  Both Nick Mangold and Maurkise  Pouncey, former multiple All Pro centers, were late first round picks as was the Bills former center, Eric Wood.   I'd be happy with a guard or center or cornerback in the first.

 

Yeah I don't agree with the process. They traded an all pro left tackle for a pick they used on a solid center who was the third best center in the draft. It just isn't a great use of assets especially since they could have drafted Max Unger in round 2. There just wasn't enough upside to justify the pick. I get that Wood was a solid player, but drafting solid is why we were so mediocre for so many years. 

[aristocrat]

Outside of Ford we've done pretty good at drafting o lineman. I'd love to see a wr in the first so we have serious depth and cheap contract at the wr spot and then cb in the second. Go guard guard after that. 

[Gugny]

Just now, SoTier said:

 

The Bills drafted QBs with the 16th pick in the 2013 draft and with the 22nd pick in the 2004 draft.  Both "didn't work out very well".  By your reasoning, the Bills shouldn't have drafted a QB with the 7th pick in the 2018 draft, either.

 

Too Shay.

 

My wording was lazy.  I just don't think taking the 3rd, 4th or 5th best OL that early is smart.  I'm guessing by the time our turn comes up, the top 4-5 best OL will be gone.

[Thurman#1]

s

1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

I don’t disagree and a good guard late in the first is ok, but you still struggle with the 5th year option piece.  

 

I believe the 5th year option is not position specific on the OL - so you are not paying him a 5th year option as a guard, but it includes Tackles salaries in the mix.

 

I would still pick a guard over a RB in the first, but it is not a premium position and this makes it harder on a borderline guy to pick up the option for a last chance.

 

 

 

 

The 5th year extension is used irregularly, and for a good reason. For example, last year, 17 of the first 20 picks from 2017 got their option picked up. 

 

But of the last 12 picks of the round, only 5 did: Frank Ragnow (since extended), Isaiah Wynn, DJ Moore (since extended), Calvin Ridley and Lamar Jackson.

 

Out of them, Calvin Ridley sticks out as a guy the tea must want more time to make a decision.

 

But as for the four others, who else needs more time? Wynn, maybe? It's mostly a way to get a bit cheaper 5thyear. And that's nice, but not wildly important, especially at guard where you're not going to make a ton unless you're really good. 

 

This late in the round, it's much more important to get the BPA than to worry about how to situationally use the 5th year option.

[MrEpsYtown]

10 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Outside of Ford we've done pretty good at drafting o lineman. I'd love to see a wr in the first so we have serious depth and cheap contract at the wr spot and then cb in the second. Go guard guard after that. 

 

I mean even going back Wood, Levitre were good. Peters was an all pro. Cordy Glenn was good. John Miller, Ford, Cyrus Kouandjio all terrible. Recently it has been better. 

 

But, good or bad, it never got us anywhere. There just isn't enough upside in drafting solid meh players. 

[Thurman#1]

4 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Too Shay.

 

My wording was lazy.  I just don't think taking the 3rd, 4th or 5th best OL that early is smart.  I'm guessing by the time our turn comes up, the top 4-5 best OL will be gone.

 

 

How they fit in the ranking of OLs is completely beside the point. Particularly whether any tackles and centers have gone or not.

 

Even how well they fit in with the other OGs doesn't matter. 

 

How they fit in with BPA, as determined by the Bills, that's what matters. It's about all that matters. If there are a few extra really good guys picked high (theoretically) it doesn't matter. Only how much the Bills like the OG that's next on their list compared to the other guys at other positions left on their list.

[aristocrat]

4 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

I mean even going back Wood, Levitre were good. Peters was an all pro. Cordy Glenn was good. John Miller, Ford, Cyrus Kouandjio all terrible. Recently it has been better. 

 

But, good or bad, it never got us anywhere. There just isn't enough upside in drafting solid meh players. 

 

Well we never had the qb.  Now we have the qb those guys would have been fantastic in this offense. Look at how different our o line was in December and playoffs compared to early in the year.  Bates was that difference. Get a guy better than him and this offense will eat. 

[Thurman#1]

1 minute ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

I mean even going back Wood, Levitre were good. Peters was an all pro. Cordy Glenn was good. John Miller, Ford, Cyrus Kouandjio all terrible. Recently it has been better. 

 

But, good or bad, it never got us anywhere. There just isn't enough upside in drafting solid meh players. 

 

 

It wasn'r picking OLs high that didn't get us anywhere. Picking other positions there wouldn't have gotten us anywhere without good GMs, good coaches an excellent QB and a good roster, most of which we never had or only very very briefly.

[MrEpsYtown]

6 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

Well we never had the qb.  Now we have the qb those guys would have been fantastic in this offense. Look at how different our o line was in December and playoffs compared to early in the year.  Bates was that difference. Get a guy better than him and this offense will eat. 

 

Yeah I hear ya, but we lost in the playoffs because our corners blew and we had zero pass rush. Had nothing to do with our offense. 

 

6 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

It wasn'r picking OLs high that didn't get us anywhere. Picking other positions there wouldn't have gotten us anywhere without good GMs, good coaches an excellent QB and a good roster, most of which we never had or only very very briefly.

 

Valid points, but we should used all of those picks to try and find a high end QB, or better skill players etc. Coaches was just a lost cause. 

Edited March 28, 2022 by MrEpsYtown

[Gugny]

14 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

How they fit in the ranking of OLs is completely beside the point. Particularly whether any tackles and centers have gone or not.

 

Even how well they fit in with the other OGs doesn't matter. 

 

How they fit in with BPA, as determined by the Bills, that's what matters. It's about all that matters. If there are a few extra really good guys picked high (theoretically) it doesn't matter. Only how much the Bills like the OG that's next on their list compared to the other guys at other positions left on their list.

 

You mad, bro?

 

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

First......at least 5 of those guys were drafted to play tackle but ended up at guard after they failed horribly outside.........Leatherwood being the most recent............very few players ever get selected strictly to play inside in round 1.

 

 

Just not true.

 

It's my fault that my original post didn't have the underlinings I mentioned. My fault. When I copied my document, the underlinings didn't make it over to the post. I've repaired that after seeing my original post, where I mentioned underlining the tackle/guard complications, but hadn't checked my copying. Again, my fault.

 

But they're there now, and it's just not true that "very few players ever get selected strictly to play inside in round 1," as you said. In only two of the last ten years did it NOT happen. It happened 13 times (two of the college tackles I underlined, I believe, were selected to play guard in the NFL) in the last ten years, and at least once in eight of the last ten years. It happens consistently. 

 

And with pretty good results.

 

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

And top interior OL often end up hitting free agency because its hard to justify paying them and because SMART teams fill their key positions in the draft and bad teams will always panic and overpay for interior OL in free agency.    Drafting interior OL early is just bad strategy and sets you up to be a farm team for others to steal from.  

 

 

Smart teams fill in their key positions in the draft. And on a team with Josh Allen, the OL is how best to keep him healthy. It's the opposite of unimportant.

 

 

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

The "can't go broke making a profit" mindset in the early part of the draft........picking the low hanging fruit at IOL and Running Back for instance........is how you end up without enough difference makers.  

 

 It's a matchup league.........which is why edge/island players make the big bucks.......they GET the one-on-one opportunities to change games..........those are the positions you draft early.

 

 

 

Nonsense. I'm not arguing this for RB. That's a different issue. 

 

When you look at my list of guards chosen in the 1st, you see a list of teams some of which are among the smartest in the league:  Pittsburgh, Indy and the Titans for three, though teams like Dallas are also on there. Belichick is smart as hell and he drafted a guard once in the first and once in the second when he didn't have a 1st round pick, and that was in his first year with the Pats.

 

Plenty of smart teams do this. 

 

Yes, it's a matchup league. Yes, QBs, CBs, WRs and pass rushers on the edge get most of the money.

 

Great points, both completely irrelevant to our discussion. You don't pay a rookie first rounder all that much. And if he keeps Josh Allen healthy, he might easily be worth a 2nd contract. Everyone gets one-on-one opportunities to change games, and for guards that means the ability to keep Allen uninjured (or not) on every play.

 

"Can't go broke making a profit" mindset in the draft isn't how teams get bad. Not going BPA at positions of need … that's how you screw up the draft and eventually your lineup. Reaching for glamour positions, that's the way to best maximize your mistakes.

 

It's not a coincidence that pretty much all good teams are BPA at positions of need.

[Max Fischer]

1 hour ago, ganesh said:

Or trade down by 10 picks and get an additional 3rd rounder and still pick one of your top of the board CB, WR or OG that will still be present.

 

But this isn't a video game. You don't get to name your price and expect a team to accept. 

[Thurman#1]

28 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

Valid points, but we should used all of those picks to try and find a high end QB, or better skill players etc. Coaches was just a lost cause. 

 

 

Oh, hey I certainly don't think they should have handled QB the way they did. But do you think that if they'd not done that with the linemen they'd instead have gotten a great team with the alternate picks?

 

I mean, I don't. But if you don't think so, I guess we can just agree to disagree.

 

 

21 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

You mad, bro?

 

 

 

Got no answer, hunh, bro?

 

It's utterly irrelevant and I pointed it out. 

 

 

Edited March 28, 2022 by Thurman#1

[CEN-CAL17]

If Olave, McDuffie, Booth Jr, Burks are gone I would contemplate Zion Johnson.  Who could also be a Morse replacement in 2 years.

[frogger]

Easy, yes if all you need to make a dominant team is a above average one.

 

where we stand currently, I am very pro drafting a guard early.

4/5 of our OL is average or above.

 

but we need a CB2 or CB1.  White and Jackson would be fine, but Tre Might not be there yet.  I don’t want to start a rookie, but we might not have a choice.

 

I am pro packaging the round two and next years 1st (hopefully pick 32) to move up to 19 and get Booth, then Zion Johnson at 25…both are battle tested and could start as rookies

[LABILLBACKER]

2 hours ago, Max Fischer said:

At #25, you don't get to be picky. Many "experts" believe it's rare there are 32 "first round worthy" players, especially this year.  Normally, from about 25 to 32, the "rules" seem to be different. For the Bills, it probably comes down to whether the "top" CBs and WRs are on the board, and if not, take the best offensive lineman.  However, if the Bills believe the OL is far ahead of a CB and WR, then go ahead and take Zion Johnson, I mean, whoever they really like. 

I agree,  I think Zion is the only guy worthy of 25. But it's more probable McB exhaust their CB/WR options first before going guard. I'm also convinced after that interview that McD will go RB in the 2nd round. Draft Hall or Walker to compliment Singletary. Moss and Brieda will be gone.

[Shaw66]

Thurm -

 

First, thanks for starting this.   I've been wondering about it.   As I've thought more about it, I think the answer is no, you don't draft a guard in the first round.  

 

Someone said something in a post that made me want to see a more thorough discussion.  He said you don't do it because of the option year on a first round pick.  You have to write a big check for that year, and it isn't likely the guy is going to be worth it.   So, you don't exercise the option, and then it's likely the guy walks after four years.  If you think about it, you'd much rather be one of the teams bidding for the guy when he comes off his rookie contract.   That's where you can get good value. 

 

In a sense, drafting a guard in the first round is like, but a little more reasonable, drafting a punter or a long snapper in the first round.  Closer call, but the same concept.   You can fill all three positions adequately in free agency.  At guard, Bills have been doing it for years, and although they haven't had read studs, they've gotten by.  Now they got a serious upgrade in Saffold, and Boettger is back on board, so the Bills are at least okay.  

 

The philosophy is get your long-term guys in the draft, but that doesn't mean the first round.   A second-round guard is just as good a gamble as a late first-round guard, but doesn't come with the same fifth-year price-tag.  

 

Compare it to a late-first round corner back like, say, Tre White.  You're willing to exercise a fifth round option on that guy, if he works out, because the position is important enough.  Same with a linebacker, an offensive tackle, and probably any d-lineman.  

 

I think for the same reason, you're reluctant to take a first-round running back.