Some homers' opinions of the OTs that we may realistically be able to get at 19

[TD alt]

15 minutes ago, csx said:

OL or DL is my preference. Its a proven approach that doesn't involve racking your brain with analysis . Keep the trenches stocked. Especially over another WR. We are over due to invest draft capital there.

 

21 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

I definitely see your point, but the issue to me is this:  Do we have the immediate urgency right now to draft a T in round 1 when there are other positions that could use starters from the draft?   Secondly, I find this draft to be weak this year, with about 14 players with first round grades (arguably).  I do not think the OTs in this draft are average, but there are more of them considered to be first round candidates based on the weakness of this draft.  Since we have 2 proven starters, maybe we should draft a project later and if we have the need next year, draft the OT then?  Your facts are indisputable, but we have to take our situation and the availability of talent at OT in 2026.  This is a very debatable topic--so I definitely see your view.

Is it really proven though? First, it's a five-year window. For as much as we want to laud Detroit and Tampa Bay, they've had their issues, and to be honest, we can't say with surety that either will even be in the dance this year. I guess what I'm saying is that, at the end of the day, team building is way more complex than saying just draft lineman on day one or day two every year, and you'll be in contention every year. It still comes down to actual team building, putting puzzle pieces together each season, and with an eye for the longer term (cap implications, talent, potential, chemistry, and all across all positions). It's highly complex. Lately, Howie Roseman has been a master of it all really. 

Secondly, PFF is really making a distinction between drafting tackles in rounds one through three versus four through seven (and UDFA).  I'm all for keeping OTs in the pipeline, but you still can't say that you have to draft them on day one when a lot of damage can be done on day two as well. 

Lastly, like it or not, it's indisputable that some classes are just better than others at certain positions. We made it a priority to draft Bryce in 2023--traded a king's ransom for him, when all we had to do was wait until 2024 when the draft was better stocked at QB. It's not necessarily a good thing to have a tunnel-minded view at the expense of the big-picture view, which comes back to the fact that team building is more complex and individualistic than trying to force a general formulaic approach to a specific situation.

[RumHam]

We aren't drafting a OT, LB, DT, RB, WR in the first round.

[strato]

6 minutes ago, RumHam said:

We aren't drafting a OT, LB, DT, RB, WR in the first round.

DE would be good. Agree on LB, want to agree on WR.

Okay…just a general thought…  our GM was a high level MLB. Our offensive coaches have WR roots merged with QB coaching. 
 

I think we should be expecting each of them to help us identify talent in their wheelhouse a round early. Even two rounds. Morgan ought to be able to look for a linebacker - in particular - and sometimes find, guys who have less hype but actually could sub for the hyped guys and not miss a beat. And you take them later and cheaper. 
Canales and Idzik, ditto with the WRs. We shouldn’t have to spend crazy assets to have quality on these rookie and lower interest FA deals.