O-line prospects podcast by Geoff Schwartz

[stitches]

https://art19.com/shows/blockem-up/episodes/85673c3a-b386-4c47-92cf-b5cb0f12ec39

 

I don't know if you guys are familiar with it, but Geoff Schwartz, the new guard for the Detroit Lions has a podcast and in this one him and Duke Manyweather discuss the O-line prospects. It's an interesting listen for a team that's likely to address O-line needs coming from a current O-line player in the league. Some highlights:

-he loves Ryan Kelly, compares him to the best centers in the game

-he likes Taylor Decker better than both Ronnie Stanley and Jack Conklin

-points to the fact that there will be A LOT of centers taken in this year's draft(and higher than usually)

-he likes Josh Garnett best from the guards. Says Westerman is good fit for a zone-blocking scheme.

 

(EDIT: I just realized the rankings are actually by Duke Manyweather, not by Geoff Schwartz, but still worth a listen. )

[Track Guy]

7 hours ago, stitches said:

-he loves Ryan Kelly, compares him to the best centers in the game

-he likes Taylor Decker better than both Ronnie Stanley and Jack Conklin

 

Interestingly he's high on the names of guys who many on this forum don't seem to want at 18. Although it seems like many of these posters simply don't want any O-lineman at 18, which still baffles me. 

 

Thanks for sharing this, it's interesting 2 days out before the draft.

[richard pallo]

9 minutes ago, Track Guy said:

 

Interestingly he's high on the names of guys who many on this forum don't seem to want at 18. Although it seems like many of these posters simply don't want any O-lineman at 18, which still baffles me. 

 

Thanks for sharing this, it's interesting 2 days out before the draft.

I agree.  They think it's a sin to take an OL at 18.  Even if he is a plug and play starter and a potential all pro in an important position of need.  Helping protect our most important player run an effective offense.  It baffles me too. 

[CheezyColt]

38 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I agree.  They think it's a sin to take an OL at 18.  Even if he is a plug and play starter and a potential all pro in an important position of need.  Helping protect our most important player run an effective offense.  It baffles me too. 

 

Way to exaggerate.  I've not seen many (if any) posts saying we absolutely should not draft o-line in the first. Just posts saying there will likely be more valuable options available.

[Gavin]

2 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

 

Way to exaggerate.  I've not seen many (if any) posts saying we absolutely should not draft o-line in the first. Just posts saying there will likely be more valuable options available.

Worrying about value is flawed thinking. Its about the BPA on your board, If that's a Center then you take him

[CheezyColt]

Just now, Gavin said:

Worrying about value is flawed thinking. Its about the BPA on your board, If that's a Center then you take him

 

You use your board to determine where the value is. I agree that if the Center is BPA on your board then you take him.

 

I was responding to pallo stating that people here think it's a sin to draft o-line at 18, when I haven't seen that sentiment here. I've seen much more of "We MUST draft O-Line in round 1" than I have seen of the hard line stance the opposite way.

[weslo1812]

1 hour ago, Track Guy said:

 

Interestingly he's high on the names of guys who many on this forum don't seem to want at 18. Although it seems like many of these posters simply don't want any O-lineman at 18, which still baffles me. 

 

Thanks for sharing this, it's interesting 2 days out before the draft. 

What I believe it is, is that many here feel that Kelly is not likely to be BPA on Colts board when we pick. Me personally I'd say chances are about 7 outta 10 that we go defense in the first. That's just my feeling. But who really knows. I also think there's a real good chance for a complete supprise.

[Track Guy]

52 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

 

I've seen much more of "We MUST draft O-Line in round 1" than I have seen of the hard line stance the opposite way.

 

Are we reading the same forum?  I see so many mocks on here that wait till round 3, 4, or even 5 to pick up an O-lineman. To me it feels like most people hate going O-line in the 1st, insist that we must go defense. It's interesting your feeling reading stuff on here is more the opposite. 

 

I think O-line is the biggest key for this team. But if there is some kind of run on O-linemen early or some stud player somewhere else is staring us in the face at 18... You gotta have that outweigh need. 

[Dustin]

1 hour ago, Gavin said:

Worrying about value is flawed thinking. Its about the BPA on your board, If that's a Center then you take him

 

Ok. The BPA is a QB. What now? 

[Clem-Dog]

3 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

Ok. The BPA is a QB. What now? 

 

Trade the pick to Denver.

[Gavin]

5 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

Ok. The BPA is a QB. What now? 

Your boards next highest rated prospect in our case

[BOTT]

1 hour ago, Gavin said:

Worrying about value is flawed thinking. Its about the BPA on your board, If that's a Center then you take him

No it's not.  Bill Polian and many other GM's thought/think this way.  It's called positional value.

[Gavin]

Just now, BOTT said:

No it's not.  Bill Polian and many other GM's thought/think this way.  It's called positional value.

Sure but positional value is more of a guideline on how to build a team not how to build your board based on the player you consider BPA, Your not building boards based on positional value

[BOTT]

3 minutes ago, Gavin said:

Sure but positional value is more of a guideline on how to build a team not how to build your board based on the player you consider BPA, Your not building boards based on positional value

Sure you are.  Polian ever draft and interior lineman in the first round during his colts tenure?  He didnt see the value in drafting them that high.

[Dustin]

10 minutes ago, Gavin said:

Your boards next highest rated prospect in our case

 

But that is considering value isn't it?

[Gavin]

2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

Sure you are.  Polian ever draft and interior lineman during his colts tenure?  It wasn't coincidence.

Steve Mckinney

Ryan Diem

Steve Sciullo

Jake Scott

Dylan Gandy

Robert Hunt

Michael Toudouze

Mike Pollak

Steve Justice

Jaimie Thomas

Jacques Mclendon

 

 

 

[BOTT]

Just now, Gavin said:

Steve Mckinney

Ryan Diem

Steve Sciullo

Jake Scott

Dylan Gandy

Robert Hunt

Michael Toudouze

Mike Pollak

Steve Justice

Jaimie Thomas

Jacques Mclendon

 

 

 

I edited and put 1st round.  You really didn't think I meant he never drafted an interior lineman did you? Lol

[Gavin]

5 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

But that is considering value isn't it?

That's considering we have our QB and have no reason to draft a QB

[Gavin]

Just now, BOTT said:

I edited and put 1st round.  You really didn't think I meant he never drafted an interior lineman did you? Lol

I caught it late but I wondered why you put that

 

No he didn't but we don't really know (at least I never heard him say) that he was against drafting an interior O Lineman in the 1st round. Again flawed thinking if that's what he thought

 

[Superman]

25 minutes ago, Gavin said:

That's considering we have our QB and have no reason to draft a QB

 

That's because there's little value to a backup QB, assuming he never plays. 

 

Value is very important, and good teams absolutely take positional value into consideration. If the player is good enough to influence your player rankings despite him playing a less valued position, that's great. Jalen Ramsey is a good example; he's probably an NFL safety, but he's going to go in the top five, where safeties traditionally don't go. Doesn't matter, he's really freaking good. Elliott is probably going to go top 15, maybe top 10 or higher, despite RBs being devalued. That doesn't mean teams are ignoring the value of the position, it means the player's talent makes up for it.

[BOTT]

22 minutes ago, Gavin said:

I caught it late but I wondered why you put that

 

No he didn't but we don't really know (at least I never heard him say) that he was against drafting an interior O Lineman in the 1st round. Again flawed thinking if that's what he thought

 

He has pretty much said it.  He has given a rundown several times of what positions he values in the first round.

[Gavin]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's because there's little value to a backup QB, assuming he never plays. 

 

Value is very important, and good teams absolutely take positional value into consideration. If the player is good enough to influence your player rankings despite him playing a less valued position, that's great. Jalen Ramsey is a good example; he's probably an NFL safety, but he's going to go in the top five, where safeties traditionally don't go. Doesn't matter, he's really freaking good. Elliott is probably going to go top 15, maybe top 10 or higher, despite RBs being devalued. That doesn't mean teams are ignoring the value of the position, it means the player's talent makes up for it.

I'm not saying you don't take into account value but who you consider BPA on your board overrides value. An example would be Zack Martin in Dallas who was drafted in the 1st round, Now he was listed as a Tackle in the process but the Cowboys drafted him as a Guard.

 

Travis Frederic also taken by the Cowboys was an interior lineman (Mostly Center played both Guard spots) drafted as a Center in the 1st

[Gavin]

Just now, BOTT said:

He has pretty much said it.  He has given a rundown several times of what positions he values in the first round.

If so that's flawed thinking. That's a good way to miss out on a lot of talent

[stitches]

15 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's because there's little value to a backup QB, assuming he never plays. 

 

Value is very important, and good teams absolutely take positional value into consideration. If the player is good enough to influence your player rankings despite him playing a less valued position, that's great. Jalen Ramsey is a good example; he's probably an NFL safety, but he's going to go in the top five, where safeties traditionally don't go. Doesn't matter, he's really freaking good. Elliott is probably going to go top 15, maybe top 10 or higher, despite RBs being devalued. That doesn't mean teams are ignoring the value of the position, it means the player's talent makes up for it.

How good must Kelly be for us to be justified in taking him at 18? If he turns into a Frederick level player is he worth taking at 18?

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

How good must Kelly be for us to be justified in taking him at 18? If he turns into a Frederick level player is he worth taking at 18?

 

In this draft, I'm having trouble saying he's not. To me, there's not a big difference between #15 and #30. I have three receivers in there, a handful of DBs that I'm not over the moon about, some linebackers I don't really like... I think Kelly is top 30.

 

Adjusting for positional value is important. Center is the least physically demanding position on the line, and the difference between a good center and an average center doesn't mean a whole lot for your offense. However, a GREAT center can upgrade your team drastically. I'm not sure Kelly will be great, but he has a far better chance of being great than any other center in this draft. Him being so much better than Nick Martin, IMO, affects his value, even as a center. And if he's ready to run block like Frederick was as a rookie, then he overhauls the entire offensive line, IMO. 

[Superman]

24 minutes ago, Gavin said:

I'm not saying you don't take into account value but who you consider BPA on your board overrides value. An example would be Zack Martin in Dallas who was drafted in the 1st round, Now he was listed as a Tackle in the process but the Cowboys drafted him as a Guard.

 

Travis Frederic also taken by the Cowboys was an interior lineman (Mostly Center played both Guard spots) drafted as a Center in the 1st

 

It's all a part of building your board.

[ztboiler]

12 hours ago, Gavin said:

If so that's flawed thinking. That's a good way to miss out on a lot of talent

Grigson has made it pretty clear in his explanation of how they do things over the years that BPA on his board is a rating inclusive of positional value.  In fact, it makes no sense to compare players of different positions without relative value assigned to the impact that their position and expected performance can have on the performance delta of your team.

[Gavin]

13 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

Grigson has made it pretty clear in his explanation of how they do things over the years that BPA on his board is a rating inclusive of positional value.  In fact, it makes no sense to compare players of different positions without relative value assigned to the impact that their position and expected performance can have on the performance delta of your team.

Its pretty simple....If you have a Center rated at 8.0 and a pass rusher at 7.0 you either: A.Try to trade back and grab that pass rusher or B.If a trade back is not possible you take that Center. If that pass rusher s a need then still take the Center based on grade