So, I saw a segment on the NFL network a few weeks ago, and the coaches were talking about offensive line and teams that were currently successful as it pertains to the O-line. One coach said you first have to have a cerebral center and two really good guards to have a successful line. I wish I saw the whole program, but from what I saw, the coach implied that he would much rather have an above average center and two studs at both guard positions and average tackles, than an above center and two studs at tackle and two average guards.
What is better?
Option A: above average center, two studs at guard and two average tackles?
Option B: above average center, two average guards, two studs at tackle?
That's a tough question and I'm not sure there is a "right" answer.
I think the preferred combination might depend on what kind of offense you run.
Guards are undervalued, especially in the Draft and how they are paid. Instrumental is pass and run blocking and allowing the QB to step up in the pocket. If they are agile and can pull to block at the next level, they are a huge asset. The Coughlin Oline had two excellent Guards and a very good Center and Tackles. Snee got a lot of credit but Richie Seubert never got the credit he deserved except from me.
Guards have probably been undervalued, but the league seems to be figuring this out, and they are getting more expensive. Case in point, we're paying $10mm per for a guard who appears to be decent but nothing special. Two years ago, $10mm would have gotten you one of the best guards in the league. The inflation of the guard market in very recent seasons seems to have exceeded that of the cap inflation.
Guards are definitely undervalued, but if you mention a guard being chosen somewhere in the top 5-10 in the draft everyone thinks you're crazy.
So go figure....
They are indeed grotesquely undervalued. As a franchise we would have been far better off if Gettleman drafted Quinton Nelson over Saquon Barkley, and IMHO that's not even a Luke warm take.
Average Salary by position.
Spotrac
Quote from: madbadger on April 05, 2024, 08:41:06 AMThey are indeed grotesquely undervalued. As a franchise we would have been far better off if Gettleman drafted Quinton Nelson over Saquon Barkley, and IMHO that's not even a Luke warm take.
I think the take is a bit off. Assuming the rest of the picks after Nelson were the same do you think this team would be better off now? Would DeAndre Baker have been better with Nelson on the team? Or Toney?
Not sure who we are talking about in terms of doing the undervaluing. The aforementioned Quinton Nelson has a higher cap hit than Andrew Thomas, so if we are talking about Indy, they are not undervaluing a guard.
The Rams signed two guards this offseason, one with an avg salary of 16 million/year and another with an average of 17 million/year.
Panthers signed a guard for 20 million/year and another for 17 million/year
I think at the high end they are not being undervalued. What I think happens with guards is that if you are nothing special and just average/adequate, there are plenty of guys to replace you.
Here is list of guard signings this offseason:
GUARD
Kevin Dotson: Re-signed with Los Angeles Rams (three years, $48M)
Robert Hunt: Signed with Carolina Panthers (five years, $100M)
Kevin Zeitler: Signed with Detroit Lions (one year, TBD)
Dalton Risner
Ezra Cleveland: Re-signed with Jacksonville Jaguars (three years, $28.5M)
Damien Lewis: Signed with Carolina Panthers (four years, $53M)
Jon Runyan: Signed with New York Giants (three years, $30M)
Jonah Jackson: Signed with Los Angeles Rams (three years, $51M)
John Simpson: Signed with New York Jets (two years, TBD)
Graham Glasgow: Re-signed with Detroit Lions (three years, $20M)
Greg Van Roten
Jon Feliciano: Re-signed with San Francisco 49ers (one year, TBD)
Isaiah Wynn: Re-signed with Miami Dolphins (one year, TBD)
Sua Opeta: Signed with Tampa Bay Buccaneers (one year, TBD)
Saahdiq Charles: Signed with Tennessee Titans (one year, TBD)
Trystan Colon: Re-signed with Arizona Cardinals (one year, $1.75M)
I think any tomato cans on your line are detrimental, with more being worse. That said:
I think you need quality OTs or at least one quality OT. If you have two poor offensive tackles your offense is going to dead in the water. If you have two quality OTs you can maximize the number of receivers you send out into routes (making it tougher on the defense).
In the interior, you can cover up (to a degree) one weak player double times with help from his fellow offensive linemen. If you have two (or worse, three) bad interior players, then your offense will be severely challenged as there will not be a secure pocket for your QB to step up into.
The thing is, the line is made up of five guys, and you can't afford too much weakness. In terms of value, I think it's more an issue that guards and centers are easier to find than OTs.
With the signing of Jermaine Eluemunor I feel confident that the Right Tackle position has been addressed for this upcoming season and perhaps the following year as well. The Giants can now keep Neal at RT and see how he does, if he struggles, then Jermaine Eluemunor can take over. We need to get a guard if one falls to us in this draft IMO
Guards are undervalued. They play ALL offensive downs, 1st & 10, 2nd & 3rd & long & short. Inside the 10, goal line and they don't get any plays off. Most RB's and WR's get plays off and sit in many situations. QB's and the 5 linemen play all offensive plays and are responsible for the skill players success. What good is a left tackle if the QB is sacked from up the middle or there's no hole or crack for the RB?
I am a believer that in a unit everyone has to be at least average otherwise the need to help someone else rises which makes a unit less effective. It's one thing to help a little but if the focus shifts toward more the unit breaks down.
Generalizations are bootless especially when fans who have never played or coached a down in their adult lives are asked to value a position in terms of price and performance value. That's a matter best left to the player's representatives, individually, and in Association and, of course, to the player himself.
However, that is not meant to suggest that a serious fan or "student-of-the-game" is incapable of assessing a player's performance based on observation and result over a reasonable period in the particular Offense. While the role of Offensive Linemen is to support the so called, "skill position" players- how condescending is that?- they are absolutely critical to a team's success both Offensively and Defensively.
Indeed, the roles of the Interior Olinemen: Guards and Center can be more varied and system and scheme-dependent than that of the Tackles. Thus, the performance skills/ ability of an IOL, especially an OG, needs to be broader, more flexible and less Offensive scheme related.
Quite clearly that has not been evident where the Giants have been concerned. I blame that not just on the players- some of whom have done well elsewhere, but very much also on the frequent changes and lack of continuity of the Coaching staff: HC, OC, Oline Coaches and staff. That has to stop if they are to finally begin to add and develop the talent needed to field something better than a Division 2 Oline.
Cheers!
Quote from: uconnjack8 on April 05, 2024, 09:44:02 AMI think the take is a bit off. Assuming the rest of the picks after Nelson were the same do you think this team would be better off now? Would DeAndre Baker have been better with Nelson on the team? Or Toney?
What does Toney or Baker have to do with the fact that our team would have been better offensively if it had a future hall of famer at guard than an injury prone running back who never had holes to hit. Not to mention it would have been more helpful to Jones development to have two stud offensive lineman as opposed to one.
Quote from: madbadger on April 05, 2024, 03:50:13 PMWhat does Toney or Baker have to do with the fact that our team would have been better offensively if it had a future hall of famer at guard than an injury prone running back who never had holes to hit. Not to mention it would have been more helpful to Jones development to have two stud offensive lineman as opposed to one.
How would the team have been better with him? You would have zero skill position guys that were any threat with one good OL until Thomas arrived A guard wouldnt have transformed the team. They would still have been an awful offense.
Toney and Baker are examples of why the team has stunk. Draft picks who do nothing. You want to replace the one successful skill position player with a guard and expect me to believe that the team would have been better?
Replace Toney with Darrisaw and maybe we might have something.
There's misses then there's MISSES. A player who becomes an average NFL player is much easier to swallow than a complete bust like Toney and Baker. For those, I want to line up everyone who evaluated him and ask how they missed his flawed intangible qualities.
Quote from: uconnjack8 on April 05, 2024, 04:49:25 PMHow would the team have been better with him? You would have zero skill position guys that were any threat with one good OL until Thomas arrived
Why zero skill position guys? If they took Nelson, they wouldn't have taken Hernandez in the second round that year. Nick Chubb was on the board when they made that pick. There is no way to say that if they hadn't taken Barkley they would have not had any quality skill position players. The draft could have and would have played out completely differently.
Also Beckham was on the team at the time and was still pretty good at that point. So I don't know about "zero skill position guys that were any threat" even if they don't take Chubb or some other good RB.