Tackle at #9, Dawkins to LG

[Dat]

22 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

1...

Folks, we have posting guidelines for the OP to stay with threads they start. Doing so precludes Fly By Turd Dropping threads. There’s great discussion going on in this thread of how we should address the Draft. I hate to kill it, but not doing so encourages our not so bright FBTD crowd. 

 

For this thread specifically, I’ll let y’all decide.

 

Guideline Def- A general rule principle or piece of advice. By definition, following a guideline is never mandatory. Guidelines are not binding and are not enforced.

 

I think you are admitting it’s a good thread, guidelines are not black and white. You have other moderators posting in it.

 

Go Bills

[FeelingOnYouboty]

I'm cool with waiting on Andrew Thomas, Walker Little and Alaric Jackson next year

[Chandler#81]

2 hours ago, Dat said:

 

Guideline Def- A general rule principle or piece of advice. By definition, following a guideline is never mandatory. Guidelines are not binding and are not enforced.

 

I think you are admitting it’s a good thread, guidelines are not black and white. You have other moderators posting in it.

 

Go Bills

More to the point, the OP is a long time poster with quality posting history. If it were a noob pulling an FBTD, it would be closed. So it stays. 

Speaking of noobs, “Shhhhhhh”?? I gotcher Shhhhh!

[LSHMEAB]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

Could you guys please explain what it is about Dawkins and his play through college that leads you to believe he could become an effective pulling guard in the NFL?

I do know that he played guard in the Senior Bowl and was evaluated as both a guard and a tackle by pre draft pundits.

 

Thanks. 

 

He looked pretty mobile on that TD reception. Didn't he lead the team in that category in 2018?

[freddyjj]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

Could you guys please explain what it is about Dawkins and his play through college that leads you to believe he could become an effective pulling guard in the NFL?

I do know that he played guard in the Senior Bowl and was evaluated as both a guard and a tackle by pre draft pundits.

 

Thanks. 

 

See the NFL scouting report and Mayock's comments - his skill set project well to OG.  the 3 cone drill shows short area quickness which could help him in targeting LB/S at second level.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/dion-dawkins?id=2557875

 

 

[Logic]

17 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I get what you are saying...BUT...

 

The defense was #2 in the NFL despite playing a third of the season with a putrid offense and losing Milano.  Helping the offense and getting Milano back will also take pressure off the defense.  Plus, Oliver and Wilkins are getting a bit over hyped as if they have no risk.  They are not the same prospect as Quennin Williams.  I do agree we will absolutely add a DT or 2 between now and OTA's...but I just dont think it will be with the 9th pick.  

 

They drafted Harrison to specifically replace Kyle and he has yet to get the opportunity.  Plus they resigned Jordan.  I really don't think Beane is as concerned about the DT as many believe he is.  And Kyle was in the last year of his career, he wasn't the "Pro Bowl" version of Kyle last year.  Thats one thing people keep forgetting.  

 

Irony is I see people talking about how bad our DT's were last year, then also ironically talk about how hard it will be to replace Kyle.  Biggest loss with Kyle is his leadership.  He was solid, not great when he retired in terms of a DT.  Both Jordan and Harrison have the potential to replace the level of play we got out of Kyle last year.  

 

Honestly, if we make zero additions to the Defense right now, it will most likely still be better than last year.  Milano is back, Edmunds has a season under his belt, and the secondary has the depth back.  I really don't see anything about our D that is in crisis mode.  

 

For me...Oliver and Wilkins will be on the board at 9...neither will be picked by the Bills.  We will either trade down if we can...or we will take an EDGE, DK, TJ or OL.  And I suspect as we get closer to the draft this will start to narrow down more.  

Fair enough. I respect your opinion on this matter. I also respectfully disagree.

I don't feel that Harrison Phillips was drafted to replace Kyle Williams. I don't believe Harrison Phillips' best position is at 3T. He CAN do it, but not well enough to be the full time starter at that position. I believe Phillips' best position is 1T, or even as a versatile backup who can play both positions. I also don't believe that Jordan Phillips has shown enough to be counted on as "the answer" at that position. Knowing how heavily McDermott rotates the defensive line, knowing how many snaps Kyle Williams took last year, and knowing how crucial interior pass rush is to modern defense, I rate 3T as a pretty gigantic need currently. As such, I would be fine with the Bills spending a high draft pick on one. I also agree that Edge, TE, or OT would be good uses of high draft capital. I'm fine with any of the above, but I DO think a legitimate addition at 3T is perhaps more necessary and important than you're giving it credit for.

[TigerJ]

4 hours ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Lol....trade away TT and not bring Preston Brown back nor sign a MLB in free agency. Pretty sure Beane decided months before last years draft what positions he was drafting. 

And Im fairly certain he has decided that of these four positions TE, edge, OT, DT, three will be drafted in top three rounds if not all four with a trade down.

Of course Beane knows his positions of need, but if he's hell bent on picking a tackle at #9 and the value isn't very good, he'd be a fool to force the issue.  In preparation for the draft, the personnel team on the Bills discuss all kinds of scenarios with respect to who might be available  and what they would do if those scenarios actually happened.  As far as the particular needs you mentioned (TE, edge, OT, and DT) I think all four will probably be addressed in the draft.  With the signing of a couple quality OTs, and a quality tight end,  I'm not positive those positions will be addressed in the top half of the draft.  

[MrEpsYtown]

1 hour ago, freddyjj said:

See the NFL scouting report and Mayock's comments - his skill set project well to OG.  the 3 cone drill shows short area quickness which could help him in targeting LB/S at second level.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/dion-dawkins?id=2557875

 

 

 

That same short area quickness is essential for kick stepping to block edge rushers.What I don't understand about this thought process is that the people we want to replace Dawkins with do not project as well to left tackle as Dawkins. He has longer arms and a better three cone than the top draft prospects. Better bench press everything or if the numbers aren't better, they are really close. We are running with some comments Mike Mayock made and 7 plays during his rookie year. I don't understand it. And this rant is not directed at you freddyjj. I'm just quoting your stat. 

 

All of his numbers are better, his size and length project better, and he has two years of experience under his belt in the NFL. Why do we want to move him? He was a raw prospect from day 1 and needs refinement, but I do not believe he is a guard. 

 

Edited March 21, 2019 by MrEpsYtown

[LSHMEAB]

1 minute ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

That same short area quickness is essential for kick stepping to block edge rushers.What I don't understand about this thought process is that the people we want to replace Dawkins with do not project as well to left tackle as Dawkins. He has longer arms and a better three cone than the top draft prospects. Better bench press everything or if the numbers aren't better, they are really close. We are running with some comments Mike Mayock made and 7 plays during his rookie year. I don't understand it. 

 

All of his numbers are better, his size and length project better, and he has two years of experience under his belt in the NFL. Why do we want to move him? He was a raw prospect from day 1 and needs refinement, but I do not believe he is a guard. 

 

Little and Dillard are the two guys that project strictly to LT and neither represent value at 9, so you make a good point. Given the way this particular draft looks, I don't expect to see a shift in 2019.

 

If they were to wiggle their way up from 40, could be a different story.

 

If they take Taylor at 9, Dawkins stays at LT.

[freddyjj]

13 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

That same short area quickness is essential for kick stepping to block edge rushers.What I don't understand about this thought process is that the people we want to replace Dawkins with do not project as well to left tackle as Dawkins. He has longer arms and a better three cone than the top draft prospects. Better bench press everything or if the numbers aren't better, they are really close. We are running with some comments Mike Mayock made and 7 plays during his rookie year. I don't understand it. And this rant is not directed at you freddyjj. I'm just quoting your stat. 

 

All of his numbers are better, his size and length project better, and he has two years of experience under his belt in the NFL. Why do we want to move him? He was a raw prospect from day 1 and needs refinement, but I do not believe he is a guard. 

 

No offense taken

 

I believe the signing of Ty Nsekhe is the only reason we move him.  If Ty is better at LT, and he may very well be today, then why not entertain moving Dawkins? Morse is a very mobile C and pairing Dawkins with him at LG could really help the screen game and run blocking.  

 

Really believe OBD's idea is to get the 5 best OL on field at once.  Ty/Dawkins/Morse/Long/ Rookie RT might actually be one way the 5 best sort out.

Edited March 21, 2019 by freddyjj

[papazoid]

On 3/20/2019 at 2:33 PM, mjt328 said:

The more I examine the roster and our recent additions, I agree that we still need to draft another O-Lineman high.

 

We are set at center with Mitch Morse, and we need to have confidence that Dion Dawkins returns to form after a sophomore slump.  I think that Ty Nsekhe will be a significant upgrade over Jordan Mills, but he's already 34 and can't be counted on as a long-term answer.  We added some nice competition at the guard position, but neither Spencer Long or Jon Feliciano are guaranteed upgrades.  And we have no idea whether Wyatt Teller will develop.

 

I'm comfortable enough in our additions at Wide Receiver to let things play out, and we don't need to draft anyone else high.

 

Our biggest remaining needs (in order):

1. Tight End

2.  Offensive Line

3.  Defensive Tackle/3-Tech

4.  Defensive End

 

 

boom

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, Logic said:

Fair enough. I respect your opinion on this matter. I also respectfully disagree.

I don't feel that Harrison Phillips was drafted to replace Kyle Williams. I don't believe Harrison Phillips' best position is at 3T. He CAN do it, but not well enough to be the full time starter at that position. I believe Phillips' best position is 1T, or even as a versatile backup who can play both positions. I also don't believe that Jordan Phillips has shown enough to be counted on as "the answer" at that position. Knowing how heavily McDermott rotates the defensive line, knowing how many snaps Kyle Williams took last year, and knowing how crucial interior pass rush is to modern defense, I rate 3T as a pretty gigantic need currently. As such, I would be fine with the Bills spending a high draft pick on one. I also agree that Edge, TE, or OT would be good uses of high draft capital. I'm fine with any of the above, but I DO think a legitimate addition at 3T is perhaps more necessary and important than you're giving it credit for.

 

I dont really disagree with this, I know we will add a DT still.  However, the one thing I do disagree on is I think that Beane and McD like Harrison and Jordan more than you think they do.  Not saying that they believe they are for sure the answer, I just don't think they are as panicked as some posters on this board and media are about the retirement of Kyle.  The biggest loss with Kyle is his leadership and locker room presence.  

 

People talk about peak Kyle when talking about replacing him, not the Kyle we had the last 2 years which was not a "Pro Bowl" level of play, more like solid.  I think its more than plausible that Jordan and Harrison can replace Kyles actual on field performance the last 2 years...not his reputation...but his real play.  

 

And like I said before, I fully expect another DT or 2, I just do not think it will be the 9th pick.  I do think Simmons is a real possibility with our 2nd round pick or a move up from our 2nd round pick.  Beane loves getting value and Simmons is going to be a steal for someone at some point.  

 

Plus DT is pretty deep, he can get that DT in 2nd too even if Simmons isnt there.  So I just dont see it at 9...could be wrong, just my opinion on what I think Beane will do.  At least at this moment in time.

Edited March 21, 2019 by Alphadawg7

[thebandit27]

20 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I was about to say it was either Tampa or Oakland. There were a handful of snaps in another game again when Richie was dinged as well. But the drive where he came in and killed it was in that spell where we beat Oakland and Tampa. We couldn't run the ball at all early, Richie went down on the 1st or 2nd play of a drive... Dawkins came in at LG for the drive and we ran it down their throats went 60+ yards and scored. 

 

If we pass on Ed Oliver I think that is a mistake. He is one of the elite players in this draft. Wilkins I am high on but yea I can see the reasons for going elsewhere. If we pass on Ed Oliver we will regret it. 

 

It was TB. He came in for a few plays at guard and mowed people down.

[Bill_with_it]

On 3/21/2019 at 3:31 AM, Johnny Hammersticks said:

No need to move Dawkins.

 

Dawkins/Teller/Morse/Long/Nsekhe

100% never good to move a cornerstone one of which is very our rookie qb is very comfortable with. Lets not reinvent the wheel.

[Johnny Hammersticks]

13 minutes ago, Bill_with_it said:

100% never good to move a cornerstone one of which is very our rookie qb is very comfortable with. Lets not reinvent the wheel.

 

The more I learn about Nsekhe, the more I suspect they might want him at LT.  I agree with your sentiment, but if they liked Nsekhe at LT the line might look something like this.

 

Nsekhe/Dawkins/Morse/Teller-Long/Rookie (Risner)

 

I wouldn’t cry myself to sleep if this happened.

[LSHMEAB]

10 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

 

The more I learn about Nsekhe, the more I suspect they might want him at LT.  I agree with your sentiment, but if they liked Nsekhe at LT the line might look something like this.

 

Nsekhe/Dawkins/Morse/Teller-Long/Rookie (Risner)

 

I wouldn’t cry myself to sleep if this happened.

I don't hate that scenario, but there are egos involved. If you swing Dawkins over to LG for a 33 year old, it's hard to imagine him embracing the Bills long term. I suppose you could say the same for a rookie. I'd just feel more comfortable with the LT spot being "solidified," but since this is a big boy sport, you put your best five on the field and let the Dawkins situation play itself out. If it goes this way, we'll certainly need to add a bonafide long term LT in the next two seasons.

 

Lots of possibilities and lots of things that will be sorted out in the draft and in camp.

[thebandit27]

2 hours ago, Bill_with_it said:

100% never good to move a cornerstone one of which is very our rookie qb is very comfortable with. Lets not reinvent the wheel.

 

1) no idea how one could call Dawkins a cornerstone at this point 

2) there are few hard and fast rules to this, but "get your best five on the field" is one of them. If that means moving Dawkins from a position at which he could be "just fine" to one where he can be a pro bowler, then that's absolutely appropriate 

[Agent 91]

On 3/20/2019 at 2:52 PM, metzelaars_lives said:

Not sure why no one is mentioning that we desperately need a linebacker.  Our starters are good but we have ZERO depth.

And Lorenzo supposedly isnt supposed to be a full time starter. I hope we can get Kahlil Hodge, or someone similar 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

10 hours ago, TigerJ said:

Of course Beane knows his positions of need, but if he's hell bent on picking a tackle at #9 and the value isn't very good, he'd be a fool to force the issue.  In preparation for the draft, the personnel team on the Bills discuss all kinds of scenarios with respect to who might be available  and what they would do if those scenarios actually happened.  As far as the particular needs you mentioned (TE, edge, OT, and DT) I think all four will probably be addressed in the draft.  With the signing of a couple quality OTs, and a quality tight end,  I'm not positive those positions will be addressed in the top half of the draft.  

I don't think either OT or the TE signed are quality players.  In fact not many people do.  Most suggest the OTs are best served as the swing tackle that could start if needed.  Even if Nsehke proves capable at RT he is old and not a long term solution.  That said they may be good enough to pass on an OT in the first round and take a pass rusher.

[Bill_with_it]

7 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

1) no idea how one could call Dawkins a cornerstone at this point 

2) there are few hard and fast rules to this, but "get your best five on the field" is one of them. If that means moving Dawkins from a position at which he could be "just fine" to one where he can be a pro bowler, then that's absolutely appropriate 

We tried that best five in the field ordeal. Didn’t quite cut it.

1.  Piece of mind knowing what the 38th overall ranked tackle (https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/dion-dawkins/11818) can do in your offense with comfortability to your qb is better than trying to reinvent the wheel. 

2. Replacing your starting right tackle that is ranked higher than the one you just picked up (https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/ty-nsekhe/7636) for the sake of moving him isn’t good for anyone.

 

[thebandit27]

3 hours ago, Bill_with_it said:

We tried that best five in the field ordeal. Didn’t quite cut it.

1.  Piece of mind knowing what the 38th overall ranked tackle (https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/dion-dawkins/11818) can do in your offense with comfortability to your qb is better than trying to reinvent the wheel. 

2. Replacing your starting right tackle that is ranked higher than the one you just picked up (https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/ty-nsekhe/7636) for the sake of moving him isn’t good for anyone.

 

 

The best five from 2018 weren't good enough players, so I'd imagine very few options would've gone well.

 

Nsehke's best grades have all come at LT, but he also played OG in 2018, where he's not as effective.

 

But that's not really the point. 

 

Nsekhe has shown that he can be at least as effective at LT as Dawkins was last year, while Dawkins has shown in his short time at guard that he can be downright dominant at that spot.

 

"Don't mess with it" is a philosophy that is reserved for the successful; try-fail-adjust is what this team needs to be doing. I don't care what the final 5 looks like, but they should be exploring every possible option and combination to get it right.

[Bill_with_it]

1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:

 

The best five from 2018 weren't good enough players, so I'd imagine very few options would've gone well.

 

Nsehke's best grades have all come at LT, but he also played OG in 2018, where he's not as effective.

 

But that's not really the point. 

 

Nsekhe has shown that he can be at least as effective at LT as Dawkins was last year, while Dawkins has shown in his short time at guard that he can be downright dominant at that spot.

 

"Don't mess with it" is a philosophy that is reserved for the successful; try-fail-adjust is what this team needs to be doing. I don't care what the final 5 looks like, but they should be exploring every possible option and combination to get it right.

I disagree. For the team’s sake. What is more important for the offense and qbs is knowing what you have at lt. Which the o coord and tne qb both do oh by the way the guard doesn’t protect the second year rookies blind side.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:

 

The best five from 2018 weren't good enough players, so I'd imagine very few options would've gone well.

 

Nsehke's best grades have all come at LT, but he also played OG in 2018, where he's not as effective.

 

But that's not really the point. 

 

Nsekhe has shown that he can be at least as effective at LT as Dawkins was last year, while Dawkins has shown in his short time at guard that he can be downright dominant at that spot.

 

"Don't mess with it" is a philosophy that is reserved for the successful; try-fail-adjust is what this team needs to be doing. I don't care what the final 5 looks like, but they should be exploring every possible option and combination to get it right.

 

I am not as big of an Nsehke guy and to me you only move Dawkins to guard if you have decided he definitively is not your future left tackle. I don't think Nsehke is good enough to start messing about for a year or two with the position of a guy you still think could be your long term left tackle. 

 

I have always thought Dawkins' ceiling is higher at LG than any other position but if you move him then you need to look for a long term answer at LT because Nsehke both for age and talent is a sticking plaster solution and no more. 

[RyanC883]

On 3/20/2019 at 2:52 PM, metzelaars_lives said:

Not sure why no one is mentioning that we desperately need a linebacker.  Our starters are good but we have ZERO depth.

 

agreed.  taking White if he is there at 9 or getting a haul (switch 1 and get 2nd) from PIt or Balt.  

[thebandit27]

19 minutes ago, Bill_with_it said:

I disagree. For the team’s sake. What is more important for the offense and qbs is knowing what you have at lt. Which the o coord and tne qb both do oh by the way the guard doesn’t protect the second year rookies blind side.

 

So you'd rather go with a LT that admitted he played poorly in his second year instead of exploring options to upgrade because of familiarity?

 

That's not a good way to protect your young QB

[thebandit27]

16 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am not as big of an Nsehke guy and to me you only move Dawkins to guard if you have decided he definitively is not your future left tackle. I don't think Nsehke is good enough to start messing about for a year or two with the position of a guy you still think could be your long term left tackle. 

 

I have always thought Dawkins' ceiling is higher at LG than any other position but if you move him then you need to look for a long term answer at LT because Nsehke both for age and talent is a sticking plaster solution and no more. 

 

I wouldn't say that I'm settled on the idea that Dawkins isn't my future LT, but I am most definitely of the opinion that his best position is LG, and I think that the dropoff between Dawkins at Nsehke at LT is negligible at worst.

 

I would be looking at a guy like Scharping in round 3 to play RT, and then I'd draft a developmental LT on day 3.  Maybe I'm overconfident, but I haven't seen any evidence that teams have struggled to fill the pass-blocking LT spot in recent years, so if I have to find a guy on day 1 or 2 next year to slide into that role, I'm okay doing so.

[JBacks]

On 3/20/2019 at 7:45 PM, chris heff said:

The road to anything goes through New England. You beat Brady with a four and five man rush with pressure up the middle. If there is a guy available at 9 that excels at that, take him.

That's why I like Oliver. His ability to penetrate plus he's good against the run.

[Bill_with_it]

34 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

So you'd rather go with a LT that admitted he played poorly in his second year instead of exploring options to upgrade because of familiarity?

 

That's not a good way to protect your young QB

No I’d rather go with the best rated lt who is Dawkins. That he admitted he could play better is a feather in his cap! THANKS!

[thebandit27]

5 minutes ago, Bill_with_it said:

No I’d rather go with the best rated lt who is Dawkins. That he admitted he could play better is a feather in his cap! THANKS!

 

I'm glad that Dion wants to get better, but the fact that he didn't play as well at LT last year shouldn't be a feather in his cap.  At least not if you're looking for the line to improve.

 

If you want to hang your hat on PFF exclusively, then you should probably research Nsekhe a bit more than simply posting his overall grade, since he actually graded out better at LT than Dawkins in 2018.  His lower overall grade was due to his lower grade when playing LG.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-the-best-low-budget-options-available-in-free-agency

 

If you’re a team in need of short-term tackle help, there may be no better, or cheaper, option than the career backup. Calling him a backup does a disservice to how well the 33-year old has played in Washington though. On 1,287 snaps across every single position except center on the offensive line over the last four seasons, Nsekhe has a pass-blocking grade of 76.4 and a run-blocking grade of 70.

 

If you want to hang your hat on PFF exclusively, then you should probably research Nsekhe a bit more than simply posting his overall grade, since he actually graded out better at LT than Dawkins in 2018.  His lower overall grade was due to his lower grade when playing LG.

 

And again, this isn't about Dawkins or whether or not he can play LT. This is about doing what's necessary to get the best OL combination on the field. If that ends up being Dawkins at LT and Nsekhe at RT, great.  If that ends up with Dawkins kicking to LG, then that's great too.  There's no reason to be legalistic about it.

[Bill_with_it]

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I'm glad that Dion wants to get better, but the fact that he didn't play as well at LT last year shouldn't be a feather in his cap.  At least not if you're looking for the line to improve.

 

If you want to hang your hat on PFF exclusively, then you should probably research Nsekhe a bit more than simply posting his overall grade, since he actually graded out better at LT than Dawkins in 2018.  His lower overall grade was due to his lower grade when playing LG.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-the-best-low-budget-options-available-in-free-agency

 

If you’re a team in need of short-term tackle help, there may be no better, or cheaper, option than the career backup. Calling him a backup does a disservice to how well the 33-year old has played in Washington though. On 1,287 snaps across every single position except center on the offensive line over the last four seasons, Nsekhe has a pass-blocking grade of 76.4 and a run-blocking grade of 70.

 

If you want to hang your hat on PFF exclusively, then you should probably research Nsekhe a bit more than simply posting his overall grade, since he actually graded out better at LT than Dawkins in 2018.  His lower overall grade was due to his lower grade when playing LG.

 

And again, this isn't about Dawkins or whether or not he can play LT. This is about doing what's necessary to get the best OL combination on the field. If that ends up being Dawkins at LT and Nsekhe at RT, great.  If that ends up with Dawkins kicking to LG, then that's great too.  There's no reason to be legalistic about it.

 

Look don’t act irrational I just showed you according to off Dawkins is ranked 5 higher not to mention our starting second year qb is familiar with him protecting his blind side. Don’t act ridiculous any normal person can see the advantage. Nsekhe isn’t even close. Maybe in training camp but definitely not now.

[GunnerBill]

37 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I wouldn't say that I'm settled on the idea that Dawkins isn't my future LT

 

So while I agree totally with you his best position is LG I am not moving him from LT until I have the guy I think is my future franchise LT in the building and that guy is not Nsekhe.

[Bill_with_it]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So while I agree totally with you his best position is LG I am not moving him from LT until I have the guy I think is my future franchise LT in the building and that guy is not Nsekhe.

A guy that is worse than your current lt can’t be your lt. Especially when hen your qb ( 2nd year ) is comfortable with that lt.

[MrEpsYtown]

I think any tackle would be better at guard. Tackle is the more difficult position and that is why failed tackles are moved to guard. Tyron Smith is an awesome left tackle. He would be first ballot hall of fame at guard. This is an obvious concept in my opinion. 

 

The idea that Dawkins would be better at guard is pretty much true of every left tackle in the league. It's true, he would be better at guard, but that doesn't mean he can't be a great left tackle. The guy had a great 3 cone, 35 inch arms, and is a former defensive lineman so he is still a bit raw. Like Gunner said, you do not move him unless you know for sure he can't play tackle. Again this idea is coming from Mike Mayock's comments and like 7 plays during his rookie year. What about the like 600 plays he played awesome at left tackle  his rookie year? One is a small sample, and one is not. Yes he had  down year, and he admitted he got complacent. Sophomore slumps are not new. It happens. I think this is an idea that needs to die. 

[Bill from NYC]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I am not as big of an Nsehke guy and to me you only move Dawkins to guard if you have decided he definitively is not your future left tackle. I don't think Nsehke is good enough to start messing about for a year or two with the position of a guy you still think could be your long term left tackle. 

 

I have always thought Dawkins' ceiling is higher at LG than any other position but if you move him then you need to look for a long term answer at LT because Nsehke both for age and talent is a sticking plaster solution and no more. 

Agreed, and this is a very good thread.

 

I think that Dawkins is a good LT. By no means dominant mind you but good. Do you think that the Bills will want to sign him when his contract expires and give him 15 or 20 million per season to play LT? I am thinking maybe not.

 

If they can find a LT with a higher ceiling in the draft I want them to go for it. I always thought that Dawkins would make a top quality Guard.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Bill from NYC

[thebandit27]

30 minutes ago, Bill_with_it said:

 

Look don’t act irrational I just showed you according to off Dawkins is ranked 5 higher not to mention our starting second year qb is familiar with him protecting his blind side. Don’t act ridiculous any normal person can see the advantage. Nsekhe isn’t even close. Maybe in training camp but definitely not now.

 

It doesn't matter how many insults you sling, it doesn't make your argument stronger, so shelf that garbage and make a real argument.

 

The fact of the matter, as I showed you, is that Nsekhe's grade at LT is actually higher than Dawkins'...not that PFF grades should mean anything beyond a sidebar discussion point. Believe it or not, play on the field is what matters, not what a bunch of statisticians calculate in an office without having ever played the game.

 

And you're still missing the point--best combination of 5.  You want to be legalistic about it, and that's a very, very, very poor approach.  If you had your choice, Eric Wood never would've moved from RG to C...because "known quantity" and all that jazz.

 

14 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

I think any tackle would be better at guard. Tackle is the more difficult position and that is why failed tackles are moved to guard. Tyron Smith is an awesome left tackle. He would be first ballot hall of fame at guard. This is an obvious concept in my opinion. 

 

The idea that Dawkins would be better at guard is pretty much true of every left tackle in the league. It's true, he would be better at guard, but that doesn't mean he can't be a great left tackle. The guy had a great 3 cone, 35 inch arms, and is a former defensive lineman so he is still a bit raw. Like Gunner said, you do not move him unless you know for sure he can't play tackle. Again this idea is coming from Mike Mayock's comments and like 7 plays during his rookie year. What about the like 600 plays he played awesome at left tackle  his rookie year? One is a small sample, and one is not. Yes he had  down year, and he admitted he got complacent. Sophomore slumps are not new. It happens. I think this is an idea that needs to die. 

 

I have to disagree.  While tackle is considered more difficult, a tackle-to-guard transition isn't always good for a player.  Look no further than Nsekhe; he's much better at LT than LG. Same went for Andrew Whitworth.  Cincinnati moved him to LG at two different points in his career (once in 2008 and once in 2013--both for stretches of games).  Now, they didn't do that because they thought he'd be better at LG, but rather because they had a shortage at the guard spots and felt that Whitworth at LG and a backup at LT was a better combination of 5 than the other alternatives.  But make no mistake, Whitworth is much better at tackle.  Guards need to be able to move down the line and work in close quarters, which can sometimes be more difficult than having space to establish a pass set and utilize arm length.

 

Maybe Dawkins will be a great LT.  But again, this isn't about Dawkins per se.  This is about getting the best combination of 5. If the team feels that they can field the best front-5 with Dawkins at LG and Nsekhe at LT, then that's what they should do.

[Dr. Who]

11 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

It doesn't matter how many insults you sling, it doesn't make your argument stronger, so shelf that garbage and make a real argument.

 

The fact of the matter, as I showed you, is that Nsekhe's grade at LT is actually higher than Dawkins'...not that PFF grades should mean anything beyond a sidebar discussion point. Believe it or not, play on the field is what matters, not what a bunch of statisticians calculate in an office without having ever played the game.

 

And you're still missing the point--best combination of 5.  You want to be legalistic about it, and that's a very, very, very poor approach.  If you had your choice, Eric Wood never would've moved from RG to C...because "known quantity" and all that jazz.

 

 

I have to disagree.  While tackle is considered more difficult, a tackle-to-guard transition isn't always good for a player.  Look no further than Nsekhe; he's much better at LT than LG. Same went for Andrew Whitworth.  Cincinnati moved him to LG at two different points in his career (once in 2008 and once in 2013--both for stretches of games).  Now, they didn't do that because they thought he'd be better at LG, but rather because they had a shortage at the guard spots and felt that Whitworth at LG and a backup at LT was a better combination of 5 than the other alternatives.  But make no mistake, Whitworth is much better at tackle.  Guards need to be able to move down the line and work in close quarters, which can sometimes be more difficult than having space to establish a pass set and utilize arm length.

 

Maybe Dawkins will be a great LT.  But again, this isn't about Dawkins per se.  This is about getting the best combination of 5. If the team feels that they can field the best front-5 with Dawkins at LG and Nsekhe at LT, then that's what they should do.

I think MrEpsYtown brings good insight. He's usually very perceptive about o-line in particular. Nonetheless, I agree with your argument.

[GunnerBill]

38 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

I think any tackle would be better at guard. Tackle is the more difficult position and that is why failed tackles are moved to guard. Tyron Smith is an awesome left tackle. He would be first ballot hall of fame at guard. This is an obvious concept in my opinion. 

 

The idea that Dawkins would be better at guard is pretty much true of every left tackle in the league. It's true, he would be better at guard, but that doesn't mean he can't be a great left tackle. The guy had a great 3 cone, 35 inch arms, and is a former defensive lineman so he is still a bit raw. Like Gunner said, you do not move him unless you know for sure he can't play tackle. Again this idea is coming from Mike Mayock's comments and like 7 plays during his rookie year. What about the like 600 plays he played awesome at left tackle  his rookie year? One is a small sample, and one is not. Yes he had  down year, and he admitted he got complacent. Sophomore slumps are not new. It happens. I think this is an idea that needs to die. 

 

I don't think he did play awesome at LT in his rookie year. I think he was decent but to me he is a middle of the league level starting LT. That said I remain not for replacing him at that spot until I have in the building a guy I think is a better long term left tackle than Dawkins. 

[MrEpsYtown]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think he did play awesome at LT in his rookie year. I think he was decent but to me he is a middle of the league level starting LT. That said I remain not for replacing him at that spot until I have in the building a guy I think is a better long term left tackle than Dawkins. 

 

There is some great all 22 film of him smashing people  at tackle in 2017 and I think a lot of that had to do with being next to Richie. 

[TigerJ]

34 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

I think any tackle would be better at guard. Tackle is the more difficult position and that is why failed tackles are moved to guard. Tyron Smith is an awesome left tackle. He would be first ballot hall of fame at guard. This is an obvious concept in my opinion. 

 

The idea that Dawkins would be better at guard is pretty much true of every left tackle in the league. It's true, he would be better at guard, but that doesn't mean he can't be a great left tackle. The guy had a great 3 cone, 35 inch arms, and is a former defensive lineman so he is still a bit raw. Like Gunner said, you do not move him unless you know for sure he can't play tackle. Again this idea is coming from Mike Mayock's comments and like 7 plays during his rookie year. What about the like 600 plays he played awesome at left tackle  his rookie year? One is a small sample, and one is not. Yes he had  down year, and he admitted he got complacent. Sophomore slumps are not new. It happens. I think this is an idea that needs to die. 

That's not necessarily true.  Tackles do generally need quicker feet because they are more likely to be playing in space down in and down out.  However, some (not all) tackles have a tough time getting low enough to play guard.  Guards are generally lined up across the biggest, strongest players on defense.  They need to play low to get good leverage on defensive tackles, who often are not that tall.  Dawkins, not being a real tall tackle does not have a problem at guard.  He's plenty strong and plays with good leverage.  Nsekhe, as has been pointed out, can play guard, but is better at tackle.  The reason may will be his height and the associated leverage issues.  I'm not really an advocate of moving Dawkins inside though.  If he struggles again this year, as he did in 2018, I'll start thinking about it, but I think his problems at tackle this year had more to do with the unsettled situation at guard just to his right.

[GunnerBill]

22 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Maybe Dawkins will be a great LT.  But again, this isn't about Dawkins per se.  This is about getting the best combination of 5. If the team feels that they can field the best front-5 with Dawkins at LG and Nsekhe at LT, then that's what they should do.

 

My philosophy is slightly different. My view remains that LT and C are the cornerstone spots. So I am not moving guys from those spots until I am convinced I have better long term solutions. At the moment my belief is that the Bills' best two linemen both now and for the longer term are Dawkins and Morse. I want them at those two premium spots if possible.