2024 Draft Class: OL

Originally posted by 49erFaithfullest:
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

No one here is saying it can't be done. Cause it has. I and I believe NY is saying we SHOULDN'T do it with our 1st round pick.

If you want to fo it in the middle rounds like where Nick's was drafted then by all means

Originally posted by NYniner85:

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

.

lol what are you thanking? He isn't saying what you are. He's saying why draft the OT that projects to guard when you can just draft the #1 guard. You're saying don't draft a guard at all in the first round.

Originally posted by 49ers808:
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.

I agree with you initial statement. I don't want a T in the 1st unless it's Latham or Mims. You can get similar prospects in rounds 2 or 3. I personally would go Rosengarten in the 2nd over an OT not mentioned above in the 1st.

I'm not saying it's a huge problem per se. I'm just saying if you want a Guard then draft a Guard. Most of the T to G transitions are mid round guys or because they couldn't hack it at T.

If there was only a handful of OL to choose because it was a weak class I again would understand. That's not the case in this particular draft

You guys are funny. Nobody scouts college basketball and thinks this 6'8 guy can't play power forward in the NBA just because he played center in college. You watch the tape and project his size, skills, strengths on your team. What range does he have with his shot? Do we think he can develop a 3? Does he have quick feet and can hedge screens? Will he be able to defend guys that play facing him? Etc, etc.

OL is no different. Zack Martin played LT at Notre Dame because he was the most athletic and best pass blocking player on the team. But he's a little light, little short, too short of arms to be a prototypical tackle in the NFL. You watch the tape. Can this guy play guard? Is he a mauler in the run game? Does he have the foot speed to pull and get to the next level? How does he handle stunts and blitzs? Turns out most people had a first round grade on him as a guard. Cowboys take him and only play him at guard and he will be a HOFer. Similar story to Barton here in terms of projecting a tackle to be the best IOL, but we'll see if the results are anywhere near as good.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
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.

I agree with you initial statement. I don't want a T in the 1st unless it's Latham or Mims. You can get similar prospects in rounds 2 or 3. I personally would go Rosengarten in the 2nd over an OT not mentioned above in the 1st.

I'm not saying it's a huge problem per se. I'm just saying if you want a Guard then draft a Guard. Most of the T to G transitions are mid round guys or because they couldn't hack it at T.

If there was only a handful of OL to choose because it was a weak class I again would understand. That's not the case in this particular draft

Very fair point and I agree with you. My argument was with NY talking out of both ends. He said he wants the best player at #31 to start off his post, then ends it with no guard in the first. Well, we're picking #31, a Guard or even Center may very well be the best player available there. That may be a guy like Barton, who played OT in college, but the experts project him to be a better G or C in the pros. That was my argument, that Barton may very well be the BPA where we are picking even though he's being projected to go inside in the pros.

Originally posted by scooterhd:
You guys are funny. Nobody scouts college basketball and thinks this 6'8 guy can't play power forward in the NBA just because he played center in college. You watch the tape and project his size, skills, strengths on your team. What range does he have with his shot? Do we think he can develop a 3? Does he have quick feet and can hedge screens? Will he be able to defend guys that play facing him? Etc, etc.

OL is no different. Zack Martin played LT at Notre Dame because he was the most athletic and best pass blocking player on the team. But he's a little light, little short, too short of arms to be a prototypical tackle in the NFL. You watch the tape. Can this guy play guard? Is he a mauler in the run game? Does he have the foot speed to pull and get to the next level? How does he handle stunts and blitzs? Turns out most people had a first round grade on him as a guard. Cowboys take him and only play him at guard and he will be a HOFer. Similar story to Barton here in terms of projecting a tackle to be the best IOL, but we'll see if the results are anywhere near as good.

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49ers808:
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.

I agree with you initial statement. I don't want a T in the 1st unless it's Latham or Mims. You can get similar prospects in rounds 2 or 3. I personally would go Rosengarten in the 2nd over an OT not mentioned above in the 1st.

I'm not saying it's a huge problem per se. I'm just saying if you want a Guard then draft a Guard. Most of the T to G transitions are mid round guys or because they couldn't hack it at T.

If there was only a handful of OL to choose because it was a weak class I again would understand. That's not the case in this particular draft

Very fair point and I agree with you. My argument was with NY talking out of both ends. He said he wants the best player at #31 to start off his post, then ends it with no guard in the first. Well, we're picking #31, a Guard or even Center may very well be the best player available there. That may be a guy like Barton, who played OT in college, but the experts project him to be a better G or C in the pros. That was my argument, that Barton may very well be the BPA where we are picking even though he's being projected to go inside in the pros.

Originally posted by krizay:
I agree with you initial statement. I don't want a T in the 1st unless it's Latham or Mims. You can get similar prospects in rounds 2 or 3. I personally would go Rosengarten in the 2nd over an OT not mentioned above in the 1st.

I'm not saying it's a huge problem per se. I'm just saying if you want a Guard then draft a Guard. Most of the T to G transitions are mid round guys or because they couldn't hack it at T.

If there was only a handful of OL to choose because it was a weak class I again would understand. That's not the case in this particular draft

Some of the very best guards in football were college tackles. Zack Martin was a left tackle at Notre Dame for four years. Joel Bitonio is another that was a college tackle for his entire time in college. Joe Thuney played most of his college snaps at right tackle. Martin was a 1st round pick, Bitonio was a 2nd round pick.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by krizay:
I agree with you initial statement. I don't want a T in the 1st unless it's Latham or Mims. You can get similar prospects in rounds 2 or 3. I personally would go Rosengarten in the 2nd over an OT not mentioned above in the 1st.

I'm not saying it's a huge problem per se. I'm just saying if you want a Guard then draft a Guard. Most of the T to G transitions are mid round guys or because they couldn't hack it at T.

If there was only a handful of OL to choose because it was a weak class I again would understand. That's not the case in this particular draft

Some of the very best guards in football were college tackles. Zack Martin was a left tackle at Notre Dame for four years. Joel Bitonio is another that was a college tackle for his entire time in college. Joe Thuney played most of his college snaps at right tackle. Martin was a 1st round pick, Bitonio was a 2nd round pick.

And from a team building perspective, it's probably quite a bit cheaper doing what Andy did. Paying high end money to T-C-T is probably much more expensive than building up an elite G-C-G combo with adequate T's. With T's you can always have a TE help in PP, if needed.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Some of the very best guards in football were college tackles. Zack Martin was a left tackle at Notre Dame for four years. Joel Bitonio is another that was a college tackle for his entire time in college. Joe Thuney played most of his college snaps at right tackle. Martin was a 1st round pick, Bitonio was a 2nd round pick.

I almost included a weak draft class from a G perspective. Which is what happened in the 2014 draft with Zack Martin and Bitonio. Only 1 true G was taken in the 1st 78 picks. So the guard prospects didn't match that of the tackle to guard prospects. This year, that isn't the case.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Some of the very best guards in football were college tackles. Zack Martin was a left tackle at Notre Dame for four years. Joel Bitonio is another that was a college tackle for his entire time in college. Joe Thuney played most of his college snaps at right tackle. Martin was a 1st round pick, Bitonio was a 2nd round pick.

I almost included a weak draft class from a G perspective. Which is what happened in the 2014 draft with Zack Martin and Bitonio. Only 1 true G was taken in the 1st 78 picks. So the guard prospects didn't match that of the tackle to guard prospects. This year, that isn't the case.

For me personally, I don't care either way. Just add some Gotdamn talent to the roster. Stop drafting from the 4th round on so those players don't threaten the "starters." Get starter talent in here, open up real competition (looking at you Foerster) and let the chips fall where they may.

Hello

Originally posted by 49erFaithfullest:
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

Carl Nicks was a 5th rd pick. We're not talking about 5th rd picks

Originally posted by 49ers808:
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

so go ask them lol? Oh okay…you're missing the point with that comment

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

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

.

lol what are you thanking? He isn't saying what you are. He's saying why draft the OT that projects to guard when you can just draft the #1 guard. You're saying don't draft a guard at all in the first round.

I'm saying don't draft a prospect who's played OT in college and the reason he's looked at as a 1st rd pick is because of his film playing OT…THEN converting him to a OG for the f**k of it.

Who's the true OG in this draft that's suppose to go on the 1st?? I don't see any. I see a bunch of conversation OTs who are being PROJECTED to be only OGs at the next level.

No I don't think drafting a OG in the first is worth the value…because it's f**king not. Especially in this draft. I mean should we take a kicker in the 1st if he's BPA? There should be a little nuance when talking about BPA.