Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 102

Thread: The Offensive Tackle Mythology Index

  1. -31
    roy_miami's Avatar
    Rookies

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2008
    Posts:
    6,099
    vCash:
    24754
    Loc:
    Moncton, NB
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by spiketex View Post
    What if according to the Hickey rankings, the best player available happens to be a QB or a Center, who surprisingly falls in the Draft? I like many happen to believe that we have a decent QB in Ryan Tannehill, with better protection, he is set to improve. We also have a top Center in Mike Pouncey. However, if we are simply taking the BPA per the board, does that mean that we take the QB or the Center who we don't need but is surprisingly there at #19?
    I would argue that BPA has to match to some extent with team needs and is therefore strictly not BPA.
    This is why I don't like the phrase "we need to just draft bpa no matter what." We need to draft for value and part of that formula should be overall player rankings but team needs should also definitely be part of it. The value of a RT for us may be different than his value to a team needing a QB.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -32
    Gonzo's Avatar
    Administrator

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2004
    Posts:
    20,576
    vCash:
    18494
    Loc:
    Brooklyn
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Hydra logo
Gift received at 05-21-2014, 12:20 PM from DisturbedShifty1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by spiketex View Post
    What if according to the Hickey rankings, the best player available happens to be a QB or a Center, who surprisingly falls in the Draft? I like many happen to believe that we have a decent QB in Ryan Tannehill, with better protection, he is set to improve. We also have a top Center in Mike Pouncey. However, if we are simply taking the BPA per the board, does that mean that we take the QB or the Center who we don't need but are surprisingly there at #19?
    I would argue that BPA has to match to some extent with team needs and is therefore strictly not BPA.
    If he has a C in the top 19, we need a new GM. But theoretically, if one of the top QBs fell, I wouldn't be upset despite having faith in Tannehill. Solves the backup QB problem, gives a potential out if Tannehill suprisingly doesn't pan out this year, and gives us trade bait if he does.

    That being said, it's a highly unlikely scenario because there are enough teams smart enough to value QBs above all else, as they should.





    Quote Quote  

  3. -33
    LANGER72's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Nov 2006
    Posts:
    8,435
    vCash:
    24073
    Loc:
    Munchkin Land / Emerald C
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by spiketex View Post
    What if according to the Hickey rankings, the best player available happens to be a QB or a Center, who surprisingly falls in the Draft? I like many happen to believe that we have a decent QB in Ryan Tannehill, with better protection, he is set to improve. We also have a top Center in Mike Pouncey. However, if we are simply taking the BPA per the board, does that mean that we take the QB or the Center who we don't need but are surprisingly there at #19?
    I would argue that BPA has to match to some extent with team needs and is therefore strictly not BPA.

    I think you take the BPA and worry about the implications later. Pouncey could move to guard. If the QB drafted was the next Marino, Tannehill would be traded to Jacksonville in 2 seconds.
    A good GM is always looking to upgrade.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -34
    DzakkH13's Avatar
    Winning is a Habit

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    3,748
    vCash:
    1286
    Loc:
    Flagstaff, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Dolphin1972 Dolphins LogoJurassic WorldCam Wake 91
    Nice write up Spesh. Not sure I'd take a RT at 19, but there definitely needs to be talent along the OL as well as talent at impact positions.
    This draft is going to be very interesting because of the fact that at 19, we could have a number of talented players fall to us.

    Being that this draft is deep at OT, I could see us finding a rookie starting RT in the 2nd round. Only positions on the OL that I think warrant a 1st round pick are LT and C.


    - Hall of Fame Safety Rod Woodson on Dan Marino playing in today's NFL:
    "...the best quarterback I believe is Dan Marino..."
    "If he played with these rules, he'd throw for 100,000 yards."


    Twitter
    - https://twitter.com/ciscoholgate

    Quote Quote  

  5. -35
    DzakkH13's Avatar
    Winning is a Habit

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    3,748
    vCash:
    1286
    Loc:
    Flagstaff, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Dolphin1972 Dolphins LogoJurassic WorldCam Wake 91
    Quote Originally Posted by Zounds View Post
    Lets consider this: 11 of 12 playoff teams last year had a 1st round pick at a starting OT position. All 11 of those OT's were drafted by the teams they played on - none of them were free agent signings, they were all homegrown 1st round draft picks. Lets not kid ourselves into thinking OT shouldn't be seriously considered in the 1st round.
    But is this the exception or the rule? How many of those teams had a QB or pass rusher or play maker taken in the the 1st round?
    I am all for a 1st on a LT, but why spend a first on a guy to play RT? Albert is locked up to be our LT for at least 3 years.
    Our team has more pressing needs at premium position than to be getting a RT in the 1st. There will be better players available at 19 than Martin.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -36
    GoonBoss's Avatar
    Finheaven Templar

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2005
    Posts:
    19,063
    vCash:
    12197
    Loc:
    The Crossroads of TX
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Clearly, the game's paradigm has shifted since I was a kid, and increasingly to today.

    Like taxes, once a rule is in place, it's not likely to be pulled back....Ever. Now that
    the former players we all used to consider iron men and tough guys have opened
    up the can of worms, there's literally nothing the NFL can do except act in a manner
    that mitigates future damages.

    It's rapidly becoming flag football. I don't mean that literally, I mean that speed is
    what is going to be the determining factor rather than power. I love a power running
    game, but there's only going to be so much of a window for that sort of offense in the
    new NFL.

    What chaps my ass is that Tannehill would be a great, mobile, athletic QB if anyone
    would let him. Instead, he's just going to get killed, unless Lazor can actually do
    anything about it.

    I don't have much confidence in any move at this point.


    Quote Quote  

  7. -37
    Zounds's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    7,205
    vCash:
    16918
    Loc:
    Orlando
    Thanks / No Thanks
    1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo View Post
    We already have a 1st round pick starting at OT. Guess we can check that off.
    So then you understand that there is value in selecting an OL in the 1st round? or are you supporting the idea in the OP that no OL should be taken in the 1st round...
    Quote Quote  

  8. -38
    Fin Thirteen's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2010
    Posts:
    2,206
    vCash:
    6536
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Philbin and Hickey SAY they will go for BPA (it's easy to say, we'll see)

    By contrast, Here was Ireland's approach, though I imagine many of our contributors could say the same thing with a well chosen gif...

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/0...-approach.html
    Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. - S. Beckett
    Quote Quote  

  9. -39
    Gonzo's Avatar
    Administrator

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2004
    Posts:
    20,576
    vCash:
    18494
    Loc:
    Brooklyn
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Hydra logo
Gift received at 05-21-2014, 12:20 PM from DisturbedShifty1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by Zounds View Post
    So then you understand that there is value in selecting an OL in the 1st round? or are you supporting the idea in the OP that no OL should be taken in the 1st round...
    No, I understand that there can be some value in selecting an OL in the first round (OT only really), especially now that we don't have to invest so much cap in a non-playmaking position any longer. This is especially true when you are pretty much set at QB (we weren't with Long) and playmakers (we aren't). This is mostly because the old timer views of the league still prevail in some circles, the view that OT is the most important position in football (not even close) and so they continue to overdraft the position. This means that if you want one of the best, you're probably not going to get the best value and you're going to sacrifice a playmaking position to get one. If it comes down to either overdrafting the position or overpaying in FA for a proven starter, I'll take the playmaker in the draft and do what we did this offseason: overpay for a FA.

    Like Spesh, there are others that I liked better than Albert and I think injuries and age will force a future move earlier than others would have (certainly not in this draft outside of a midrounder to groom behind him), but I like the move overall because it frees us in the draft from fans losing their minds if we didn't draft an OT with 19 and saves us the time of an OT taken at 19 to figure out the pro game, something we don't have to wait for with Albert. He raped and pillaged our coffers though. He saw a weakness and fans absolutely losing their minds and took full advantage of being the "best available" OT. Good for him. He doesn't have much longer in the game, so he should get all the money he can.

    When it comes to interior line, I see very little value in drafting one in the 1st round, especially in the top 20. Bottom 5 of the first round? Little more reasonable. I don't think the changing league Spesh describes means that G and C has increased in value, just that OT has fallen in value and close to where G and C are. That being said, certain types of OL have increased in value a bit (again, rookie salary cap plays a role in that as much as the changing style of football). Of all the OL that could be available at 19, the only one I see any sort of value in, versus likely available playmakers, would be Martin and that's only because he also adds depth through his versatility. Nobody else. Even then, if somebody like Ebron falls, I'm taking him. Any of the likely available playmakers at 19 would carry far more value than Su'a-Filo and especially more than Moses. The gap in the talent levels of playmakers between 19 and 50 is wider than the gap between interior line and RT. There is less value in the latter.
    Quote Quote  

  10. -40
    Zounds's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    7,205
    vCash:
    16918
    Loc:
    Orlando
    Thanks / No Thanks
    1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo View Post
    No, I understand that there can be some value in selecting an OL in the first round (OT only really)
    Some value is value. The premise of the OP is that there is no value in taking an OT in the first round. And just because you include a wall of text with nothing but fluff, it doesnt make it more right.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. The Ireland Mythology Index
    By Spesh in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 01-01-2014, 12:53 PM
  2. Offensive tackle?
    By Killerphinz32 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-06-2013, 07:19 PM
  3. Ireland Mythology Index vol. 2
    By Spesh in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 03-11-2013, 02:54 PM
  4. Offensive Tackle
    By tapsmiled in forum NFL Draft Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-25-2012, 11:02 PM
  5. FF Index ranks the NFL's offensive lines:
    By baalworship in forum Beasts of the AFC East
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-31-2003, 09:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •