Bad Year to Need OLT

[Doc]

C'mon old friend. How could you make a definitive statement such as the above?

Okay, let me amend what I said and say the odds of finding one are low.

[Captain Hindsight]

Wouldn't be happy 2 years from now trying to decide whether our 2012 top 10 pick LT is very good or not very good (because of the nature of the position, it may be hard to tell--recall that debate re: Jason Peters), while watching guys like Floyd or Fleener scoring points on teams who picked them after we passed..

I wasn't advocating that we pass over a player because we need a Tackle, personally I hate drafting for need but if we get Glenn in the second round and he turns out to be a solid player will we really care?

[Mr. WEO]

I wasn't advocating that we pass over a player because we need a Tackle, personally I hate drafting for need but if we get Glenn in the second round and he turns out to be a solid player will we really care?

Glenn in the second? Count me in.

[Doc]

Count me in as well. But Glenn won't make it to the 2nd round.

[peterpan]

I guess its all perception. Weren't nix's comments that he thought two or three guys could start for you day one, and that a few later round guys could be starters in a year or two?

 

That Naworski guy had Glenn at the front end of his 1B slot per the teams he talked to. That would put Glenn in the front end of the 11-22 range. I get the feeling Glenn is the guy Buddy likes, because he is SEC, has proto type size, and the starts (50).

Edited April 18, 2012 by peterpan

[Lurker]

Again, no rookie taken in this draft will be better than Hairston. And outside of Kalil, none of them seem to be any great shakes.

I don't buy that argument. Hairston was what he was--a rookie that didn't embarass himself, but also struggled at times.

 

He's a true ROT, that can fill in on the left side in a pinch but isn't a long-term solution there. I think any of the top 3-4 tackles this year could match that performance and eventually move beyond it...

Edited April 18, 2012 by Lurker

[Doc]

I dot't buy that argument. Hairston was what he was--a rookie that didn't embarass himself, but also struggled at times.

 

He's a true ROT, that can fill in on the left side in a pinch but isn't a long-term solution there.

I won't buy that argument until he's given a chance to start at LT this year. Again there were reasons why he struggled last year that won't be there this year (hopefully he stays healthy).

[Lurker]

I won't buy that argument until he's given a chance to start at LT this year. Again there were reasons why he struggled last year that won't be there this year (hopefully he stays healthy).

Well, that's a lot like having unprotected sex. Just keep your fingers crossed and hope for the best...

[Doc]

Well, that's a lot like having unprotected sex. Just keep your fingers crossed and hope for the best...

And hoping a rookie LT is up to the task is better?

[Pilsner]

It's a bad year to take a LT if you're an average or below average GM. If Nix and Whaley have a draft as good as last years then we might be ok in that department. Glenn seems to be the predominant pick here and perhaps it's what Nix is thinking but I believe he thinks he can draft a future starting LT in the middle rounds. Perhaps a Potter or whoever else Nix and clan think is worthy.

 

A project cannot be the first pick though. As much as I like Glenn's potential I would rather us get a guy who we can plug in right away and expect decent to good results from a rookie. I believe Buddy can draft another Hairston in the mid rounds and then one of our Hairstons can progress to become a solid starter. In the meantime Nix can get a solid stud in the 1st.

 

We need a BPA or damn close to it to stockpile talent, even if there is a good starter already there.

 

If we draft for need as opposed to drafting for talent the Bills will always be average. Of course if the BPA always fills our needs...well then. It never happens consistently though.

 

DeCastro, perhaps Gilmore or Kirkpatrick, maybe even a DE. Floyd if he gets a visit but he must be able to stretch the field. Just someone who can dominate and complement our team right away. Not someone we have to wait a few years to see what they're made of.

 

Damn wine has me rattling on. :0

[BillsVet]

I like Mike, but he's not infallibile and missed a few like anyone else.

 

 

 

 

That's why I'm still a fan of Glenn. He's not Kalil, but he's battle tested (50 starts), versatile and has the size/strength to hold up against NFL d-linemen from day one. Getting a solid, if non-Pro Bowl quality starter that can lock down that position for 5-10 years with the 10th pick is good value, IMO...

 

I haven't seen one reputable scouting report on Cordy Glenn that says he has the physical ability to play OLT well in the NFL and thus justify the 10th overall pick. He projects inside to G or perhaps someday to ORT where he has help and won't face better pass rushers in all probability. Having 50 starts is beside the point when a player is being graded as a pro prospect and where they fit on the NFL field. He's going to struggle handling speed rushers because being a LT means being left on an island. His lack of foot quickness prevents him from being a good pass blocker. As for his athleticism, when people note he ran a 5.15 40, I think about his vertical leap which measured barely 23 inches.

[John from Riverside]

I actually like Hairston.....and dont want to reach with that 10th pick

[Pilsner]

I actually like Hairston.....and dont want to reach with that 10th pick

 

I like Hairston too. Not too many LTs who could be thrown into the fray with not much prep time and still do a decent job. What else could be asked of him in those circumstances. A full year of training camp now plus at least another LT drafted (I hope mid round) and I believe we'll be ok.

[Kevin]

What Hairston did in his rookie season with a lockout involved was pretty damn good. Was he perfect? No, but he did do a very good job.

 

What I do know is this. Nix has a plan, and given his past drafts I fully believe that he has this team headed in the right direction as far as the draft goes. Whomever he selects in this draft I will have full confidence in.

 

If I were Nix, which thankfully I am not, I would draft tackle for depth in this draft unless Kalil fell to 10. At 10 I would take Floyd to give Fitzpatrick another weapon for his arsenal, or Kuechly to shore up the linebacking core.

[Thurman#1]

Again, no rookie taken in this draft will be better than Hairston. And outside of Kalil, none of them seem to be any great shakes.

 

 

That's an opinion, and not one with a whole lot to back it up, that none of them will be better than Hairston. It's not a fact.

 

Mayock believes Reiff will be a good LT, though not immediately.

 

Gil Brandt thinks Reiff is the tenth best player this year.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d82821dd1/article/hot-100-plenty-of-draftstock-movement-as-pro-days-wrap-up

 

There are plenty of contrasting opinions out there on most of the LTs. And really, unless you have a higher pick, it's often not a good year to need an OLT. There are so few of them out there that are slam dunks.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Thurman#1

[maddenboy]

With a top ten pick, and with our track record of first round misses, reaches, and general mediocre players, this is what I want:

 

Anybody who will

 

1) start from opening day

2) play well enough to keep starting for the next 4-5 years.

 

I am not being greedy. I change my mind on who I want almost every day. I cant remember feeling so wide-open before the draft. Part of it is faith that whoever nix takes will be a solid pick.

 

But for the love of anything holy, please not a running back in round 1. Not ever, for the rest of my life, please.

[Thurman#1]

And hoping a rookie LT is up to the task is better?

 

 

 

In the long term? Yeah, there's a good chance it is, IMHO.

[AllenToBrown2020]

In my opinion, the Bills' clear number one need is to find a good starting OLT. I disagree with those that say that Chris Hairston showed enough to warrant starting this year.

 

I am not suggesting that the team does not also have a crying need for another NFL starting-caliber WR and for 1-2 starting-caliber OLBs.

 

It looks to be a particularly bad year to need to find an OLT. We've been through the suspects ad-nauseum:

Reiff looks more like a RT or even a G to many.

Glenn looks like a RT on a good day and a G to many others. NFL Network's Mike Mayock recently said that he didn't think Glenn should go until round 2.

Jonathan Martin is not well-regarded by many and may be a stretch to eventually start at either OT position.

Mike Adams is a very talented under-achiever.

 

While I strongly believe that the offense will be grounded without a starting-caliber OLT, I don't particularly want to take my chances on any of the iffy players available who MIGHT be able to play that position. However, I am not much higher on any of the prospects at the Bills' other positions of need.

 

I am leery of Michael Floyd's off-field problems, however I am heartened by his year of trouble free behavior.

I am not totally sold on Luke Kuechly at OLB, but he seems a safe pick with a high floor.

 

The best-bets, in my opinion (based on my reading of Pro Football Weekly and Russ Lande - former NFL scout, as well as NFL Network's Mayock) are mostly defensive players:

DT Fletcher Cox is pretty highly regarded by many, but the Bills' seem pretty set at DT with Dareus and Kyle Williams.

DE Melvin Ingram looks like he could be a highly productive pass rusher, but I don't think he can play 4-3 OLB. Where does he play with Mario Williams on-board?

Pick-your-favorite CB among Kirkpatrick and Gilmore - Gilmore has less baggage, but Kirkpatrick has a bit better ability (again, based on what I've read).

S Mark Barron is highly regarded, but I think the Bills are pretty OK there with Byrd and Wilson. This guy is a dark-horse candidate for the 10th pick IMHO

 

To me, this is a very shaky year in terms of talent in the draft. I've been following the draft very closely for 25+ years and I don't ever remember being so under-whelmed with the possible Bills' selections in round 1. Now, I know that there might be some depth in the mid-rounds 2-4, but it's hard to make up for it, if the first round pick doesn't pan out.

 

I've flip-flopped all over the place on this, but at the moment my view is that I'd strongly consider Kuechley and Floyd at 10, with some consideration for Gilmore/Kirkpatrick and Barron. I think the OTs are all way too questionable to invest that high of a pick on, unless the Bills think that Erik Pears also needs to be replaced at RT. If that is the case, then Reiff/Glenn look a little more attractive as their fall-back position would also be considered a position of need.

 

Lastly, I am not in favor of this, BUT with the questions surrounding the top candidates at the Bills' main positions of need, it might make sense to take a chance on Ryan Tannehill.

 

Finally, I talked myself off the LT ledge by looking at the starting LT on last year's playoff teams. DO NOT read this to say that I don't believe that a good-very good LT is not an important part of a good offense. However, many teams last year were successful without pro-bowl caliber OLTs:

Hou: Duane Brown - drafted late first/early 2nd can't remember, but he wasn't ultra-highly regarded

Pitt: Max Starks - not a highly drafted guy

Balt: Bryant McKinnie - high draft pick who didn't live up to his status and wasn't in particularly good shape (reportedly) last year.

NE: Matt Light - 2nd round pick, who has done a good, not great job for the Pats

Jets: D'Brickashaw Ferguson - high number 1 pick who is good.

Den Ryan Clady - high number 1 pick who is good.

GB M. Newhouse - Don't know ANYTHING about this guy

Det Jeff Backus - career over-achiever whom they would like to replace

Atl Sam Baker/Will Svitek - Baker has disappointed and Svitek is a journeyman

NO Jermane Bushrod - nothing special

Giants: William Beatty - lightly regarded mid-round pick who wasn't considered tough enough

49ers: Joe Staley - wasn't highly regarded in the draft - OT/G tweener.

 

With all that in mind, maybe it is OK to take a chance on one of the OTs at 10 and hope that they are adequate at LT.

 

Constructive opinions welcomed.

 

Castonzo started for the Colts...I think more than 10 games too. IMO, you CAN find a serviceable/good/Pro Bowl LT anywhere, including as an UDFA, so we should go Floyd or Kuechly. But, I don't think they will go either, and I think it will end up being Kirkpatrick/Gilmore, Glenn, Tannehill or Ingram/Cox/other BPA.

 

Last year no rookie OT started at LT for his team...except for the Bills' Chris Hairston, and that was because of injuries. Expecting one to come in this year and start, much less play at a high level, is expecting too much.

 

My apologies to the OP...it wasn't you who made this statement about no rookie starting at LT, it was ^^^. Anyway, like I said, Castonzo from BC started like 12 games at LT for the Colts.

[bowery4]

Fleener is the right pick, OT in 2nd or even 3rd and one later. Nix says the draft is deep with them. If he says so we should be able to get by with a developing player. Hairston should start unless he is beaten out in camp.

Fleener is a playmaker, that is still a need. I would be okay with

Him in the 1st (yes I like him better than Floyd)

OT of choice in the 2nd (Gleen?)

CB or LB in rounds 3-5 (every pick so maybe 2 each?)

OT 6th

BPA rest of draft (maybe with a center in there)

or something like that.

[thewildrabbit]

I think you guys are way off base on this one.

 

Matt Kalil is an instant starter and upgrade over most of the LT's in the league.

 

Riley Reiff played at Iowa..."One of the things about Iowa football is that the players who come here are well-coached," Crennel said. "They're technique-sound, they play hard, try hard, they're competitive, and we know that. Last year there were a few more defensive guys coming out, this year a few more offensive guys are coming out. We know that you're going to get fundamentally-sound guys who are very competitive and who give you a good day's work." - The Sports Xchange

 

The guy wouldn't be ranked in the top 10-15 if scouts didn't think he was a starter. My take is he would be an upgrade over Hairston.

 

 

Jonathan Martin played LT at Standford, on a very potent pro style offense. Martin turned down the opportunity to be the first fourth-generation African-American Harvard student in history to become a scholar-athlete at Stanford.

 

So for the last three years his parents, both Harvard grads, watched him do something he only could have done at Stanford -- protect the blind side of quarterback Andrew Luck. And there is still a chance he will attend Harvard some day, to get a legal degree.

 

This guys draft stock is falling a bit because of missing the combine due to an illness and a poor pro day showing. Now he has stated he will pass on attending the NFL draft. This kid can do anything he wants in life. If he chooses to play LT in the NFL, I just don't see him failing at that.

 

His size and nasty streak are two things that have many intrigued and should help him come off the board in the top 15-20 picks.

 

 

 

 

http://www.cbssports...jonathan-martin

 

http://nwe.scout.com/2/1167574.html