2024 Draft Class: OL

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
right.

For me just grab the best player at 31. Doesn't have to be a lineman. I just don't want to draft a OT to convert them inside. Draft an OT to play OT. After the 1st if you want to project guys to different positions, I can live with that.

I'd rather not use a 1st on a guard, especially in this draft

Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

NY is allergic to the word "guard." Guards are people too. We know. Haha.

I mean, we're knocking the "patchwork IOL" for not being good enough to consistently block *checks notes* Chris f**king Jones in the superbowl.

If it's not a projected top 8 NFL guard in his rookie season level prospect, I'm pretty disappointed if we go guard in the 1st.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
right.

For me just grab the best player at 31. Doesn't have to be a lineman. I just don't want to draft a OT to convert them inside. Draft an OT to play OT. After the 1st if you want to project guys to different positions, I can live with that.

I'd rather not use a 1st on a guard, especially in this draft

Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

NY is allergic to the word "guard." Guards are people too. We know. Haha.

imo Troy Fautanu is the perfect pick, legit LT/RT even though he's projected an awesome G

Originally posted by NCommand:
Or you can just man up and admit you were dead wrong for YEARS as the 7 year-leader of the 5 member "good enough" crew. It clearly wasn't. Nor is your devaluation of the G position. Any 49er fan would know that CLEARLY by now. But not you. You know better.

You're so thick headed that you miss the YEARS of me mocking lineman to SF.

I never said the OL couldn't get better. I said you don't need to draft a guard in the first round to have success. You conveniently leave all that out….and have a hissy fit when anyone adds any context to the reason we lost games outside of your lovefest with guards or the lack of them being "tier 1" or whatever b******t you toss in here.

You never provide any feedback about who we should look at and why. You copy and paste Brandon thorn like he's the gospel. You might as well be in a cult with how obsessed you are over it and how little you actually know about it

Originally posted by NCommand:
NY is allergic to the word "guard." Guards are people too. We know. Haha.

lol if you looked at my past drafts, you'd see I projected some f**king damn good OGs and they wouldn't have costed a 1st rd. I f**ked up on Joshua Garnett. So did SF and a lot of people.

you're just lazy and can't evaluate players. You see a guy plays a certain position and you want to draft them. I swear you don't listen to anyone. You just argue if someone didn't think we need to draft a OG in the 1st rd or spend a billion dollars on them in FA

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

Don't spend a 1st on that…that's my point. Stop projecting players elsewhere and assuming they will be better at it. Morgan has never played anything besides LT.

Originally posted by 49erFaithfullest:
imo Troy Fautanu is the perfect pick, legit LT/RT even though he's projected an awesome G

IMO he's a OT all day.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

Don't spend a 1st on that…that's my point. Stop projecting players elsewhere and assuming they will be better at it. Morgan has never played anything besides LT.

I thought you said for you just grab the best player at 31? What if that best player is someone who "projects" better as a guard? You should adjust your statement to you want the best player who isn't projected to play anywhere else and isn't a guard 😂

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

Don't spend a 1st on that…that's my point. Stop projecting players elsewhere and assuming they will be better at it. Morgan has never played anything besides LT.

I thought you said for you just grab the best player at 31? What if that best player is someone who "projects" better as a guard? You should adjust your statement to you want the best player who isn't projected to play anywhere else and isn't a guard 😂

LOL.

Originally posted by 49ers808:
I thought you said for you just grab the best player at 31? What if that best player is someone who "projects" better as a guard? You should adjust your statement to you want the best player who isn't projected to play anywhere else and isn't a guard 😂

How can you say someone is the best player at a position you're projecting them to play and not seen them play consistently?

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

I base mine off of nfl draft buzz that tells you where they played and how they fared.

In what many are saying is a deep draft at OL. I don't understand the logic of drafting a T to kick inside when the 1st, 2nd, 3rd best OG is still on the board. Why draft a player and project how he'll play when you have similar talent available who has already shown how he can play at that position.

Now if we had 2 good tackles and only needed a G and we wanted to draft and stash the guy to eventually replace Trent. Then ok I get it. Have him start at guard or what have you.

Giving our current state of needing one of each. It would be idiotic to draft a Tackle to play guard. IMO

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

I base mine off of nfl draft buzz that tells you where they played and how they fared.

In what many are saying is a deep draft at OL. I don't understand the logic of drafting a T to kick inside when the 1st, 2nd, 3rd best OG is still on the board. Why draft a player and project how he'll play when you have similar talent available who has already shown how he can play at that position.

Now if we had 2 good tackles and only needed a G and we wanted to draft and stash the guy to eventually replace Trent. Then ok I get it. Have him start at guard or what have you.

Giving our current state of needing one of each. It would be idiotic to draft a Tackle to play guard. IMO

.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

I base mine off of nfl draft buzz that tells you where they played and how they fared.

In what many are saying is a deep draft at OL. I don't understand the logic of drafting a T to kick inside when the 1st, 2nd, 3rd best OG is still on the board. Why draft a player and project how he'll play when you have similar talent available who has already shown how he can play at that position.

Now if we had 2 good tackles and only needed a G and we wanted to draft and stash the guy to eventually replace Trent. Then ok I get it. Have him start at guard or what have you.

Giving our current state of needing one of each. It would be idiotic to draft a Tackle to play guard. IMO

I went to high school with an All Pro G drafted by the Saints and won a Superbowl. Carl Nicks was a Tackle in Nebraska but was a Pro Bowl Guard and got a massive contract in Tampa but unfortunately his career was cut short bc of the facilities in Tampa. MRSA

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
I thought you said for you just grab the best player at 31? What if that best player is someone who "projects" better as a guard? You should adjust your statement to you want the best player who isn't projected to play anywhere else and isn't a guard 😂

How can you say someone is the best player at a position you're projecting them to play and not seen them play consistently?

The keyword is best "player". So the #6 OT or #5 CB might not be the best player at #31. And I ain't the one making those projections to other positions, the guys that do this stuff for a living are the ones saying it, so go ask them

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
Transitioning from OT to OG is not as monumental a move as you been trying to portray, literally happens all the time. It isn't some big position change either that requires big changes or anything like that, literally a foot length (width) of a move 😂 A lot of these guys that played OT "projected" to play inside have actually played inside before so it won't be a foreign position that they have "never" played like some of you like to throw around. Maybe I have a different definition of never than you folks

I base mine off of nfl draft buzz that tells you where they played and how they fared.

In what many are saying is a deep draft at OL. I don't understand the logic of drafting a T to kick inside when the 1st, 2nd, 3rd best OG is still on the board. Why draft a player and project how he'll play when you have similar talent available who has already shown how he can play at that position.

Now if we had 2 good tackles and only needed a G and we wanted to draft and stash the guy to eventually replace Trent. Then ok I get it. Have him start at guard or what have you.

Giving our current state of needing one of each. It would be idiotic to draft a Tackle to play guard. IMO

It would also be idiotic to reach for the #6 or whatever OT just because we need a tackle when, as you mentioned, with us needing both, the #1 Guard or Center is available. If that guy played OT in college because that's what the team needed him to do, but in the pros he'd be a better guard or center because of length or whatever else they say, I don't see that as a huge problem like you guys are trying to make it out to be. The league agrees, Tackles converts to Guards ALL THE TIME.