Jump to content


I am the first to admit when I may be wrong (RT 1st Round)


  • Please log in to reply
167 replies to this topic

#1 Kellyto83TD

Kellyto83TD

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,343 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 06:27 PM

I have stated several times that Pro football dictates no first round RT's and for most all of NFL History it has been that way. But it seems things are changing somewhat.  My brother who is a Vikings season ticket holder speaks with one of their scouts from time to time at events etc. He gets tidbits and insights etc. from the guy. He doesn't 'know him' as in he has his cell phone number type deal. They have just kind of gotten to know each other and he doesn't mind talking with my brother some.

That said they ran into each other at the Kansas Jayhawks Spring game last weekend. ( I think the guy is an alum like my brother) and they talked football. I had told my brother about the discussions here and he decided to ask the guy what the deal was with RT's not going in the first.

Well the guy pointed out the obvious BUT he said its changing somewhat. Teams are now wanting speed on both sides of the DL And OLB's to pressure the passer from both sides to further take away their comfort zones even further. So they are looking harder at RT's esp high in round 2 if they are athletic enough. The caveat is they normally plan to move them to LT in a year or so if they are that athletic.

So bottom line it is possible we could take a RT in the first, but it isn't likely. Our #9 in the 2nd is a real definite possibility to solidify the OL although 3rd round is more likely.  With the Mathews situation the kid is so damn athletic he is most likely going to be a LT for someone in the NFL.

The other issue is top athletic guys want to be LT's because LT pay will always be much higher than RT. So if we were to trade down and take Mathews in the 1st we are going to have a big problem in about 4 years. Who do you pay? Glenn is a LT And has proven himself as a damn good LT And he is going to want to stay there and get paid LT pay, who can blame him. At some point one will leave the team as you cant pay a LT And RT Left Tackle money, it hurts the cap too much.

Personally I want to see a trade down a few spots and take Ebron if still there or the top LB. If its LB take say Austin S Jenkins even with a slight move up and if we have another 2nd by trading down, take say JaWan James from Tenn to play RT for us.

Edited by Kellyto83TD, 19 April 2014 - 06:28 PM.


#2 San-O

San-O

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,086 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 07:08 PM

Good points.  RT has become more valuable, and I have read more than a couple times teams are willing to draft linemen other than LT high as they can get
potentially more years of service from an O lineman, and developing a good line doesn't happen over night.

IF the Bills can tarde down, I say trade down and get more picks: they are more than a couple players away from contending in any meaningful way, and we still don't really know what we have at QB, if anything. IMO.

Also, the draft experts say this draft is so deep in WR talent in the 2nd and even 3rd rounds.  We may see the top couple WRs go high and then not see any for a while.  ?

Also like you mentioned get a RT this year, and see what happen with Glenn.

#3 26CornerBlitz

26CornerBlitz

    Read The FN Manuel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,738 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 07:22 PM

View PostSan-O, on 19 April 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

Good points.  RT has become more valuable, and I have read more than a couple times teams are willing to draft linemen other than LT high as they can get
potentially more years of service from an O lineman, and developing a good line doesn't happen over night.

IF the Bills can tarde down, I say trade down and get more picks: they are more than a couple players away from contending in any meaningful way, and we still don't really know what we have at QB, if anything. IMO.

Also, the draft experts say this draft is so deep in WR talent in the 2nd and even 3rd rounds.  We may see the top couple WRs go high and then not see any for a while.  ?

Also like you mentioned get a RT this year, and see what happen with Glenn.

There's also talk of the NFL pendulum swinging back toward more balanced offense with a greater reliance on the run game as a result of the Seahawks SB win.  Teams want to pound edge rushers who mostly rely on speed/quickness that makes them susceptible to the power running game at the POA.

#4 maddenboy

maddenboy

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 820 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 08:42 PM

View PostKellyto83TD, on 19 April 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:

So if we were to trade down and take Mathews in the 1st we are going to have a big problem in about 4 years.
You lost me right here.

Surely you mean "trade UP" and take Matthews in the first.  Matthews might not be there at 9.

I'm not saying trade up, but I am wondering if you misspoke.  Maybe trade down and get Lewan, maybe, but not Matthews.

Edited by maddenboy, 19 April 2014 - 08:43 PM.


#5 Max997

Max997

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,438 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 08:51 PM

Teams wanting speed on both sides of the defense isn't anything new

First round picks usually get 4 year deals with team options for a 5th year so at worst they won't have to worry about an extension for 5 years.

Glenn was a second round pick and signed a 4 year deal I believe and if extended it will be in the next year or two at which point this years first round pick would still have 3-4 years left on his rookie deal. What it will take to resign whoever they pick at 9 shouldn't and won't be a factor in who they decide to pick

Edited by Max997, 19 April 2014 - 08:51 PM.


#6 San-O

San-O

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,086 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 09:07 PM

View Post26CornerBlitz, on 19 April 2014 - 07:22 PM, said:

There's also talk of the NFL pendulum swinging back toward more balanced offense with a greater reliance on the run game as a result of the Seahawks SB win.  Teams want to pound edge rushers who mostly rely on speed/quickness that makes them susceptible to the power running game at the POA.

Maybe the Bills can be ahead of the curve for one time!  I would like that.  :thumbsup:

A balanced team does well in any given season, and should be able to adjust from time to time.  The Pats do it all the time it seems.

#7 Kellyto83TD

Kellyto83TD

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,343 posts

Posted 19 April 2014 - 09:24 PM

View Post26CornerBlitz, on 19 April 2014 - 07:22 PM, said:

There's also talk of the NFL pendulum swinging back toward more balanced offense with a greater reliance on the run game as a result of the Seahawks SB win.  Teams want to pound edge rushers who mostly rely on speed/quickness that makes them susceptible to the power running game at the POA.
That is what I would love to see in Buffalo. Never liked the CJ pick esp at #9.  I wouldnt' gripe if we took a really good RB that could maybe carry the rock 20+ x per game. Get a road grader at RT along with LB and TE in this draft and we might be on track.  I will never gripe at a pound the ball approach. Many want 'exciting offense'. I find making the playoffs exciting and would really find winning a superbowl very exciting

View Postmaddenboy, on 19 April 2014 - 08:42 PM, said:

You lost me right here.

Surely you mean "trade UP" and take Matthews in the first.  Matthews might not be there at 9.

I'm not saying trade up, but I am wondering if you misspoke.  Maybe trade down and get Lewan, maybe, but not Matthews.
Nope I meant down. We have seen guys drop before and we have at least 3 teams ahead of us or so that need QB's. If we trade down and miss him then we do I can live with that.  Id love to have 2 2nd rounders this year as deep as the draft is

#8 OldTimer1960

OldTimer1960

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,607 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 06:33 AM

View PostKellyto83TD, on 19 April 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:





Well the guy pointed out the obvious BUT he said its changing somewhat. Teams are now wanting speed on both sides of the DL And OLB's to pressure the passer from both sides to further take away their comfort zones even further. So they are looking harder at RT's esp high in round 2 if they are athletic enough. The caveat is they normally plan to move them to LT in a year or so if they are that athletic.



If this part is true, then I would expect RT pay to eventually catch up with LT pay.

#9 Doc

Doc

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,599 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 06:51 AM

View PostKellyto83TD, on 19 April 2014 - 06:27 PM, said:

The caveat is they normally plan to move them to LT in a year or so if they are that athletic.
This part kills the premise of taking a strict RT high in the draft.  No team drafts an OT high with the intention of keeping him at RT.  They play him there for a year to get him acclimated to the NFL and then try to move him to LT.  If he can't hack it, they move him back to RT and at least salvage the pick, but it's not what the team wanted.

#10 Fingon

Fingon

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:05 AM

If Matthews is there it's a no-brainer. He can play every single position on the line, even center. In fact, some scouts say that might be his best position. The amount of versatility he offers is well worth the pick.

He probably won't be there at 9 though.

#11 1billsfan

1billsfan

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:29 AM

View PostFingon, on 20 April 2014 - 07:05 AM, said:

If Matthews is there it's a no-brainer. He can play every single position on the line, even center. In fact, some scouts say that might be his best position. The amount of versatility he offers is well worth the pick.

He probably won't be there at 9 though.

Has a center ever been picked at #9 overall? I kid since I know you're not considering him as a center, but the mere suggestion that an OT prospect may be at his best at center hopefully voids the possibility that the Bills pick him.

The Bills have their LT and will hopefully use their second round pick for that RT position. That way there's no looming drama or headache with Glenn down the line. I'm hoping they use the #9 pick on either Ebron or Donald. While Ebron is a TE and you usually don't take TEs at #9, I see him as a Gronk or Graham who would both be top 10 picks if NFL teams knew what they were going to become. Donald looks like a lock that he's going to be a pain to opposing QBs and RBs. The impact either of those guys would make is worth the #9 pick to me.

#12 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,290 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:35 AM

NoSaint raised an interesting question in another thread that still hasn't been answered. What RT would you trade the 9th overall pick for?

#13 maryland-bills-fan

maryland-bills-fan

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 483 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:53 AM

Due to the rookie salary cap and slotting, anybody we draft at #9 is going to be paid at a top 7 LEFT OFFENSVE TACKLE rate.  The offer the Bills could make (and be refused on) for the 5th year option, would be like a franchise tag rate at LEFT offensive tackle.  Expect that to be refused.


I look at our needs, what we have done in FA and think the weighted draft priorities (upgrade need  X  difficulty of drafting a better player) as DE...OT.....LB....safety.....OG.    We can get a good RIGHT offensive tackle in the upper second round.  We don't have a very good defensive end, who is good against the pass and the rush, to play opposite Mario.  Since our new defense will depend upon the front 4 to get pressure and contain blockers and set BOTH edges of the LOS, that is our top need and can be filled (like ROT) in the 15->50 range.  We don't have a hard need for somebody with the #9 pick (unless something weird happens), so getting an extra 2nd or high 3rd is the priority.

Now everybody seems to be saying that if one of the top 3 LEFT offensive tackles is available, well we just have to take him (even though we have a very good LOT).  That is sorta brain dead to my way of thinking.  Many people place a lot of faith that one of the top QB's will drop to #9 and somebody will be in a frenzy to move up and trade picks.   My question is why wouldn't somebody just love to trade up to #9 if one of the rare top LEFT offensive tackles drops to #9?????  Maybe some of these Bills fans are afraid of wetting their pants if they have to wait until the second round or lower first round pick to get a ROT.   The following teams need offensive line: Lions, Rams, Ravens, jests, fsih, Chiefs, Bengals, Browns, Saints, Panthers ** as one of their top 3 picks.   I'll give it a 30:70 shot that Lewan will drop to us and we will grade down based upon that.

Edited by maryland-bills-fan, 20 April 2014 - 07:55 AM.


#14 Johnny Hammersticks

Johnny Hammersticks

    You want a beer? How about some ether?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:59 AM

View PostKirby Jackson, on 20 April 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

NoSaint raised an interesting question in another thread that still hasn't been answered. What RT would you trade the 9th overall pick for?

Maybe Eric Fisher or Lane Johnson?  Both second year players with potential to play both OT positions.  Oh wait, Buffalo could just take Robinson, Matthews or Lewan.

#15 Nanker

Nanker

    Blls Nation Unite!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,852 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:59 AM

How's Hairston doing these days? Anybody ever think about what might happen if Glenn pops a ganube like Hairston did? Who do we swing over there then? Pears?
Yeah, OT isn't a need at all. Neither is Guard. Or a swing man either. Come to think of it, the OLine is set. Time to pick a CB at 9. Better yet - trade up and get Ha-Ha at 5.

#16 Johnny Hammersticks

Johnny Hammersticks

    You want a beer? How about some ether?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 08:02 AM

View Post1billsfan, on 20 April 2014 - 07:29 AM, said:



Has a center ever been picked at #9 overall? I kid since I know you're not considering him as a center, but the mere suggestion that an OT prospect may be at his best at center hopefully voids the possibility that the Bills pick him.

Well, if the guy is considered one of the top OT's in the draft, the fact that he could play ANY position on the offensive line well could only improve his value.  How's that for logic?

#17 Kirby Jackson

Kirby Jackson

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,290 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 08:08 AM

View PostJohnny Hammersticks, on 20 April 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:



Maybe Eric Fisher or Lane Johnson?  Both second year players with potential to play both OT positions.  Oh wait, Buffalo could just take Robinson, Matthews or Lewan.
That's kind of the point. You wouldn't trade the 9th pick for the best RT in football but you might for a couple of 2nd year guys that would hope to become that. That's why I wouldn't take one at 9. Fisher almost got benched (& is moving to LT) and Lane Johnson was solid.

#18 26CornerBlitz

26CornerBlitz

    Read The FN Manuel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,738 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 08:09 AM

View PostKirby Jackson, on 20 April 2014 - 08:08 AM, said:

That's kind of the point. You wouldn't trade the 9th pick for the best RT in football but you might for a couple of 2nd year guys that would hope to become that. That's why I wouldn't take one at 9. Fisher almost got benched (& is moving to LT) and Lane Johnson was solid.
Anthony Davis RT 49ers

#19 1billsfan

1billsfan

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 08:09 AM

View PostJohnny Hammersticks, on 20 April 2014 - 08:02 AM, said:

Well, if the guy is considered one of the top OT's in the draft, the fact that he could play ANY position on the offensive line well could only improve his value.  How's that for logic?

We already have our star LT, so IMO it would be a very bad decision to burn the #9 overall pick on a OT even if he can play all the positions. They may as well trade back, add another 2nd round pick, and pick Zach Martin with their 1st.

#20 Bills Fan of Maryland

Bills Fan of Maryland

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 110 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 08:16 AM

Glad to see a lot more tolerance for an OT at 9.  Remember, we are talking a premier OT, not another shlub.  Huge and athletic OL are not going to be available in the 3/4 rounds.  Bookend OTs and Wood in the middle is a very solid base for the OL which could if contracts are handled right, be in place for the next decade. Find the right OGs to complement and we have a winner.  EJ has the arm strength to keep Ds honest provided he has time to throw.  RBs will gain yardage in chunks.  Keep the D off the field a bit more and they are top 5 worthy.  Kind of gets exciting, but first they need a dominating OL.

If we can trade back and still get a Zack Martin or Lewan, I think that would be great.  I just don't see that happening.  Mathews would be my hope, but even that is probably not likely.  I see an unpopular pick of Lewan at 9 headed our way and though it sounds less than ideal, I'd be fine with it as worst case scenario.  Just my opinion.

View PostNanker, on 20 April 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

How's Hairston doing these days? Anybody ever think about what might happen if Glenn pops a ganube like Hairston did? Who do we swing over there then? Pears?
Yeah, OT isn't a need at all. Neither is Guard. Or a swing man either. Come to think of it, the OLine is set. Time to pick a CB at 9. Better yet - trade up and get Ha-Ha at 5.
And here I thought sarcasm was dead!  +1

Edited by Bills Fan of Maryland, 20 April 2014 - 12:00 PM.