2024 Draft Class: OL

Fun fact:

Of the 15 highest paid Left Guards. Only two were first td picks Nelson and Skoronski because of his current rookie contract (where he was taken).

6 of the top 15 right guards were 1st rd picks. But you got old guy like Will Hernandez, Zeitler, Scherff all on 1 yr deals making up that list. Only 1st rd guys making real $ are linstorm and Martin. Even Ruiz's contract is fluff if you look at his GTD cash ($18M total).

so many good OGs in this league not taken in the 1st for a reason

it's very similar to RB imo.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:

So it is plausible we could literally find starting caliber RT, C, and another tackle in the first three picks. Obviously one tackle waits a year or two with spot play. This isnt sexy, but it could lead to rapid oline improvement and longevity.

I think going OL with their first 3 picks is overkill. They need future starters all over the place, not just at OL.

I don't see any scenario where THIS front office uses the first 3 pics on OL. I think more realistic is 2 OL within the first four rounds and then one towards the end of the draft.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Fun fact:

Of the 15 highest paid Left Guards. Only two were first td picks Nelson and Skoronski because of his current rookie contract (where he was taken).

6 of the top 15 right guards were 1st rd picks. But you got guys old guy like Will Hernandez, Zeitler, Scherff all on 1 yr deals making up that list. Only 1st rd guys making real $ are linstorm and Martin. Even Ruiz's contract is fluff if you look at his GTD cash ($18M total).

so many good OGs in this league not taken in the 1st for a reason

it's very similar to RB imo.

Kyle Shanahan isn't gonna do two things, 1) Draft a Guard in the 1st round. 2) Pay top dollar for a Guard.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Kyle Shanahan isn't gonna do two things, 1) Draft a Guard in the 1st round. 2) Pay top dollar for a Guard.

And thats pretty on par with the rest of the league.

he's shown he will take one in the second (was part of that in Cleveland as well).

Originally posted by Oilcan:
I don't see any scenario where THIS front office uses the first 3 pics on OL. I think more realistic is 2 OL within the first four rounds and then one towards the end of the draft.

I hope they come away with multiple lineman, but yeah I don't think it will be 3 straight picks on the position.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
No there is a difference.

Why does it have to be a OL or bust at 31 anyway? If there's a premium position prospect available then go that route. Whether it's DB/DL/WR.

if an OT is special they will play OT not OG. I mean maybe they toss a OT inside to OG knowing that he will be the long-term OT. I just feel if he's good he will beat Colton out regardless

Reaching for a non impact position like OG or if people have a problem drafting the the 6th overall OT in a great OT class (I don't have a problem doing that) then go get a premium position prospect at a different spot that dropped.

Disagree with this. Have you seen some of the contracts being handed out? Guard is a premium position, especially when your QB is undersized. Look at the other top teams around the league and the investments they've made at building up a strong interior OL.

If anything, with the way refs are allowing dominant edge rushers to be held like crazy, tackle might be slightly devalued.

Oh boy. You just triggered my boy. LOL

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
There it is. Exactly.

Like already noted, not much difference in this system between T-G's anyhow. Ideally it's not a G at 31. Ideally, it's not a position switch either.

But if a top 2 C-G is available at 31 over the 8th best T, you consider all options here. Including a position switch if that T is special. Just add more talent.

You're going to need all 3 at some point in the draft anyhow.

No there is a difference.

Why does it have to be a OL or bust at 31 anyway? If there's a premium position prospect available then go that route. Whether it's DB/DL/WR.

if an OT is special they will play OT not OG. I mean maybe they toss a OT inside to OG knowing that he will be the long-term OT. I just feel if he's good he will beat Colton out regardless

Reaching for a non impact position like OG or if people have a problem drafting the the 6th overall OT in a great OT class (I don't have a problem doing that) then go get a premium position prospect at a different spot that dropped.

I hear you.

So if the 2nd best C or G is there or the 8th best T, do you still go T because you feel he'd still be a big upgrade over McKivitz?

PS: For a team that's clearly lost because of its G-play, as a 49er fan, it's weird you're still calling the G position a "non-impact" position. It literally impacted 2 Superbowl losses. It doesn't get more impactful than that, IMHO.

Now, if THIS regime could ID top G prospects in the 3rd round+, great. But we have zero evidence of that after 7 years.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Oh boy. You just triggered my boy. LOL

Nope just dropping some knowledge

They're being handed out because they're free agents. If they were so vastly important they won't be leaving their own team. You never see prime OTs leaving for FA. These teams blowing cash on OGs on the open market have to spend their money on something. Especially when it's a s**t FA overall….oh & checkout where the two top OGs paid this offseason were drafted. Guess what not the 1st rd.

I'm looking at the top 15 graded OGs this past season and only two were 1st rd picks.

what top teams? KC? They spent up for a OG and got another one in the 6th rd. Go look at that 2019 OL…I can't even tell you who the last OG was that they invest a 1st for. Who's the last guard the Ravens drafted in the first? We all talk about the eagles and how much they invest on the OL. Who's the last OG they drafted in the first? Lions are regarded as having a "tier 1" OL. Last 1st rd pick they spent at OG…Laken Tomlinson

Who are all these top teams investing a bunch of 1sts at the guard spot?

they still call holding plenties, just apparently not during the Super Bowl.

Fun fact:
Of the 15 highest paid Left Guards. Only two were first td picks Nelson and Skoronski because of his current rookie contract (where he was taken).

6 of the top 15 right guards were 1st rd picks. But you got old guy like Will Hernandez, Zeitler, Scherff all on 1 yr deals making up that list. Only 1st rd guys making real $ are linstorm and Martin. Even Ruiz's contract is fluff if you look at his GTD cash ($18M total).

so many good OGs in this league not taken in the 1st for a reason

it's very similar to RB imo

Originally posted by NCommand:
I hear you.

So if the 2nd best C or G is there or the 8th best T, do you still go T because you feel he'd still be a big upgrade over McKivitz?

PS: For a team that's clearly lost because of its G-play, as a 49er fan, it's weird you're still calling the G position a "non-impact" position. It literally impacted 2 Superbowl losses. It doesn't get more impactful than that, IMHO.

Now, if THIS regime could ID top G prospects in the 3rd round+, great. But we have zero evidence of that after 7 years.

With all due respect, THIS regime selected a T in the 1st round that many questioned the fit. And appears that many was correct.

THIS regime drafted a guard in the 2nd many guestioned the fit. My opinion many was correct
There are well.

My conclusion is, NO ONE should have faith in this regime selecting OL period if we are judging off of evidence.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Oh boy. You just triggered my boy. LOL

Nope just dropping some knowledge

They're being handed out because they're free agents. If they were so vastly important they won't be leaving their own team. You never see prime OTs leaving for FA. These teams blowing cash on OGs on the open market have to spend their money on something. Especially when it's a s**t FA overall….oh & checkout where the two top OGs paid this offseason were drafted. Guess what not the 1st rd.

I'm looking at the top 15 graded OGs this past season and only two were 1st rd picks.

what top teams? KC? They spent up for a OG and got another one in the 6th rd. Go look at that 2019 OL…I can't even tell you who the last OG was that they invest a 1st for. Who's the last guard the Ravens drafted in the first? We all talk about the eagles and how much they invest on the OL. Who's the last OG they drafted in the first? Lions are regarded as having a "tier 1" OL. Last 1st rd pick they spent at OG…Laken Tomlinson

Who are all these top teams investing a bunch of 1sts at the guard spot?

they still call holding plenties, just apparently not during the Super Bowl.

Fun fact:
Of the 15 highest paid Left Guards. Only two were first td picks Nelson and Skoronski because of his current rookie contract (where he was taken).

6 of the top 15 right guards were 1st rd picks. But you got old guy like Will Hernandez, Zeitler, Scherff all on 1 yr deals making up that list. Only 1st rd guys making real $ are linstorm and Martin. Even Ruiz's contract is fluff if you look at his GTD cash ($18M total).

so many good OGs in this league not taken in the 1st for a reason

it's very similar to RB imo

Since the dawn of time, GM's have stuck with the T-C-T model. All you're doing in pointing out what most GM's prefer.

But now? RT's are just as important as LT's as pass rushers rush from both sides. GM's that can't draft and develop are paying top dollar for interior OL as they value QB protection.

T's are traded, resigned, allowed to test FA as well. It's rare any top OL hit FA. And when they do, it doesn't matter if they're a T, C or G. They're getting paid.

Had THIS team had just 1 above average RG (could run right, pass protect), we might have #6 and #7 and a shot at another.

And again, you're focused on an old model and NOT focusing on this team. It's no secret THIS teams biggest need is at G esp. given Banks will hit FA next year. If the FO showed at acumen at identifying and developing top IOL, I'd be all about your more common model.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Re-watched some Kingsley Suamataia from the Senior Bowl pic.twitter.com/RZ2lkO7D3u

— Billy M (@BillyM_91) March 26, 2024

didn't look as bad as reports I've heard from, looked pretty damn good to me

Originally posted by NCommand:
I hear you.

So if the 2nd best C or G is there or the 8th best T, do you still go T because you feel he'd still be a big upgrade over McKivitz?

PS: For a team that's clearly lost because of its G-play, as a 49er fan, it's weird you're still calling the G position a "non-impact" position. It literally impacted 2 Superbowl losses. It doesn't get more impactful than that, IMHO.

Now, if THIS regime could ID top G prospects in the 3rd round+, great. But we have zero evidence of that after 7 years.

First off, I'm not going OG in round one. Period. So check it off your list. Center is different. I value it more. It's more important in this scheme as well. OG is like drafting a RB in rd 1. I'm not doing it.

only center worth drafting in round one is JPJ imo. Love if he fell to us. After that you have a projection in Barton to play center. I think he could be good there. Then you have Frazier who's not a 1st rd talent imo.

the 8th best OT in one of the best OT draft classes in 15yrs is probably still a damn good prospect overall.

Listen, I can't take your we lost because of a OG take seriously anymore because you refuse to acknowledge ANY of the other issues that occurred in both SBs that led to the loss. You won't talk about it because it deflates your narrative. Go back to the OL thread if you are gonna continue that s**t.

They've literally taken UDFA/day 3 picks, a certified bust in round 1 and a dude off the street and gotten to multiple super bowls and NFCCs. I'm not asking them to stuff in a bunch of 7th rd and UDFAs to play the position. I'm saying spending a 1st on one of the least impactful positions is f**king dumb.

I've already shown you (multiple times) how the rest of the league isn't doing it either. Most of the high end OGs are NOT 1st rd picks. You can't say that at other premium positions. Why? Because they're harder to find and often require premium picks.

so instead of arguing with me about. Tell me what prospects you want and why? I'm still waiting to have a legit convo with you about OL prospects…since it so near and dear to your heart.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I hear you.

So if the 2nd best C or G is there or the 8th best T, do you still go T because you feel he'd still be a big upgrade over McKivitz?

PS: For a team that's clearly lost because of its G-play, as a 49er fan, it's weird you're still calling the G position a "non-impact" position. It literally impacted 2 Superbowl losses. It doesn't get more impactful than that, IMHO.

Now, if THIS regime could ID top G prospects in the 3rd round+, great. But we have zero evidence of that after 7 years.

With all due respect, THIS regime selected a T in the 1st round that many questioned the fit. And appears that many was correct.

THIS regime drafted a guard in the 2nd many guestioned the fit. My opinion many was correct
There are well.

My conclusion is, NO ONE should have faith in this regime selecting OL period if we are judging off of evidence.

Right? That's kind of the bigger issue.

1) They don't prioritize the OL even with what the FO considers a FQB,; and
2) When they do, outside of a clear HOF LT, can't identify (talent) or develop them (reach top potential) through the draft

Let's hope that all changes now.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Since the dawn of time, GM's have stuck with the T-C-T model. All you're doing in pointing out what most GM's prefer.

But now? RT's are just as important as LT's as pass rushers rush from both sides. GM's that can't draft and develop are paying top dollar for interior OL as they value QB protection.

T's are traded, resigned, allowed to test FA as well. It's rare any top OL hit FA. And when they do, it doesn't matter if they're a T, C or G. They're getting paid.

Had THIS team had just 1 above average RG (could run right, pass protect), we might have #6 and #7 and a shot at another.

And again, you're focused on an old model and NOT focusing on this team. It's no secret THIS teams biggest need is at G esp. given Banks will hit FA next year. If the FO showed at acumen at identifying and developing top IOL, I'd be all about your more common model.

Oh b******t. Top end OTs are not testing FA. Guards are ALWAYS available and get overpaid because it's FA. Teams HAVE to spend money and if they don't have talent on their own damn team, they then have to spend it elsewhere.

Like I said, damn near ALL of the highest earning OGs (as a collection) are NOT 1st rd picks. Your boy Thuney…when was he drafted? You had hard on for Norwell forever. Dude wasn't even drafted.

If this team didn't fumble the ball, muff a punt, miss an EP, had a QB that could read hot routes correctly (both times), been able to throw a deep ball, contain on a QB draw, had our STARTING RG not get hurt, Greenlaw not get hurt etc etc. you wouldn't have the whole offensive guard was the only reason we loss shtick.

all I'm saying is don't use a 1st on OG. You're acting like I'm saying we can't draft a OG or spend any money on one…I never said that. You're arguing with yourself once again f**king stop it.