Offensive line building theory

[AU-panther]

 

Let me preface this by saying I'm all for drafting a LT early this year, if we don't go QB, both need and value seem to be lining up well this year.   

Interesting exchange on twitter I saw between Daniel Jeremiah and one of the PFF guys regarding what makes a productive offensive line.  We are all caught up on this idea of an LT, which is understandable considering some of our history at that position, but even upgrading some of the other positions could have a tangible benefit.  

Here is a follow up tweet by Steve explaining what he means by "creep back toward average"

 

Having an elite LT by itself doesn't put points on the scoreboard, they do make it easier, but what is most important is having an overall offensive line that is good enough not to be a weakness.

I'm not convinced, even if we spend pick 8 on a LT, that our line is going to automatically become one of the best in the league.  Wouldn't bother me in the least if we spent multiple picks on the offensive line this year.

On a side note, fans always like to measure offensive lines by sacks given up.  Easy metric to notice when causally watching your team, but PFF loves to point out that sacks aren't just a offensive line stat.  Often. so much more goes into a sack than just how your offensive lineman does.  Your play caller, QB and receivers all factor in.

Play caller:  Good play calling can slow up pressure, certain systems don't need as much time.  Think Brady with the Pats.

QB:  Recognizing pressure, calling the correct protections, throwing to correct the read, getting the ball out quick.  How much easier is it to play OT for Brady?

Receivers:  Having a first read receiver that can consistently get open for your QB is huge.  How many sacks happen after the 1st and/or 2nd read of the QB?  What percentage of sacks that Cam took over his career were after his 1st read was covered?  People would be surprised.  

Speaking of receivers, this is one reason it wouldn't shock me if Cincy did pass on Sewell and took Chase.  I get the theory behind it, but I would still lean towards the OT.  I'm not saying OTs are more important, that is an entirely different discussion, but they do seem a lot harder to find both in the draft and free agency.  Some years you can't even buy one in free agency even if you are willing to spend the money. 

 

 

 

 

[bigpoppa]

"Defenses attack your worst guy every week"

Also known as the "Kalil Theory"

[musicman]

A great O-line can make an average QB look good. So if you have a good QB, a solid O-line can make him look great.

Time is key. Time to let receivers get open. Time to let big plays develop. Time to improvise until a receiver breaks open. Time to see the field. I hope we draft a LT, OG/C and a CB in the 1st 3 picks (not necessarily in that order).  With the guys we signed in FA, 1 or 2 have to have decent year. 

[ncstatekwi]

If Sewell is not there at 8 then We don’t go O-Line until later rounds.  The drop off even after Slater is minimal..I can see us addressing it sometime after 1st round!

Edited April 18, 2021 by ncstatekwi

[Tbe]

I’d almost rather trade down and pick up one or two more solid OL guys than take one really good OL guy.

Cheaper and better for the team in the long run.

[bababoey]

19 minutes ago, musicman said:

A great O-line can make an average QB look good. So if you have a good QB, a solid O-line can make him look great.

Time is key. Time to let receivers get open. Time to let big plays develop. Time to improvise until a receiver breaks open. Time to see the field. I hope we draft a LT, OG/C and a CB in the 1st 3 picks (not necessarily in that order).  With the guys we signed in FA, 1 or 2 have to have decent year. 

Great O lines don't always require great players.  They require great communication between players.  You can have good to average players on your o line and if they know how to hand off stunts and twists and who is responsible for blitz pick ups from different levels they can look great.  That's why if you get a o line that works together well you don't want to let anyone leave.

The 2 places on the field where communication matters more than actual ability is O line and secondary.  That is why it is so hard to keep them together because when you get a good one everyone is willing to overpay in free agency to get one of the guys because they think they will be just as good in a new system with new people around him as he was in the system he was in before 

 

[mrcompletely11]

50 minutes ago, ncstatekwi said:

If Sewell is not there at 8 then We don’t go O-Line until later rounds.  The drop off even after Slater is minimal..I can see us addressing it sometime after 1st round!

IMO the drop from Sewell/slater is substantial.  Granted there are a lot of guys in that 2nd tier but they to me have major issues.  Whether it’s durability, motivation etc.  they all have a knock on them.  I am not seeing any knocks on Sewell slater.  Pick one at 8.  Another lineman in the 2nd.  Hopefully a starter at safety in the 3rd and be done with it.   For once I would love for my football team to have an aggressive mean talented oline.  I have no clue what that feels like to not worry about your qb being decapitated each week.  

[bigthama]

2 hours ago, AU-panther said:

Speaking of receivers, this is one reason it wouldn't shock me if Cincy did pass on Sewell and took Chase.  I get the theory behind it, but I would still lean towards the OT.  I'm not saying OTs are more important, that is an entirely different discussion, but they do seem a lot harder to find both in the draft and free agency.  Some years you can't even buy one in free agency even if you are willing to spend the money.

This is the key to everything in draft position. "More important" is generally meaningless when it comes to drafting (except maybe the difference between QB and punter) - it's all about supply of people that can do the job "well enough". You have to have a starting lineup (and preferably a depth chart) made up entirely of players that can do that job well enough to win or you have a major exploitable weakness and you lose unless the opposing coach is Adam Gase.

RBs don't get drafted high not because they aren't an important position, but because there are far more people out there that can do the job well enough to win than there are spots on NFL rosters. The difference between an elite and an adequate RB is substantial, but not enough to make up for the difference between an adequate and an inadequate OT. That's why only stupid teams pick elite RBs when sure-thing (even if just adequate) OTs are on the board if both are a roster need. WRs don't have quite the glut of talent to roster position that RBs do (likely because you need more WRs on a roster), but the supply to demand ratio is still favorable enough that taking a WR when you also need an available OT is basically a giant neon sign pointing out which franchises are still run by people that could not possibly have achieved their current position on pure merit.

[@bonafidebanter]

I've been crying for this organization to draft OL since the fat @ss Gettlemagic days. IF I were GM, I would draft an OL every year, not in the 1st round of course. Hell, a DL too. You have 5 OL and in most cases 4 DL that start, per team. The games are won here, in the trenches. Do you guys remember how big San Fran and Seattle were when this team was on the come up to the Super Bowl? Building an OL, and DL for that matter, is important to winning in the NFL. You can't ignore them and get away with it. Super Bowl 50 and this past year's Super Bowl are proof of it.

[Michael G]

We need a LT Period. We draft Sewell if he falls to us (i think its a no-brainer!) Slater is the next best option but what if Pitts or Fields are available at 8 too. Who do you think is higher on our board Slater, Pitts, or Fields?

[OldhamA]

2 hours ago, musicman said:

A great O-line can make an average QB look good. So if you have a good QB, a solid O-line can make him look great.

Time is key. Time to let receivers get open. Time to let big plays develop. Time to improvise until a receiver breaks open. Time to see the field. I hope we draft a LT, OG/C and a CB in the 1st 3 picks (not necessarily in that order).  With the guys we signed in FA, 1 or 2 have to have decent year. 

Allen looks better than he is in Buffalo because they've put a great Oline infront of him.

I hope we do the same - imagine McCaffrey behind a great Oline. It'd be a bloodbath. 

[@bonafidebanter]

2 hours ago, Michael G said:

We need a LT Period. We draft Sewell if he falls to us (i think its a no-brainer!) Slater is the next best option but what if Pitts or Fields are available at 8 too. Who do you think is higher on our board Slater, Pitts, or Fields?

It better be Pitts. He'd be the 2nd or 3rd rated player over all. 

[rayzor]

acceptable draft strategy for this year: NBOL

(Nothing but OL)

[Moo Daeng]

4 hours ago, Tbe said:

I’d almost rather trade down and pick up one or two more solid OL guys than take one really good OL guy.

Cheaper and better for the team in the long run.

The difference between 8 and say 15 is only about 5 million over 4 years. That is insignificant.