We could have drafted a LT who might have started in 2025

[mgteich]

Yup. We could have drafted a LT instead of Polk who might have started next year, or not.

We might have drafted an OT at 68 who might have been a solid backup in 2025.

Instead, we drafted our choice of WR (Polk) and Wallace who is likely to be an OT starter THIS YEAR, and who might compete to start at LT in 2025.
==========
SHAME ON WOLF!

 

[archstanton543]

As a wise man once said, it is what it is.

I mean, if they didn't draft Harry and drafted any number of the other guys behind him that turned out to be really good Brady would have more than likely finished his career here.

But, again, it is what it is. They have who they have. They'll likely have a high draft pick next draft and get their cornerstone LT then.

 

[jmt57]

It sucks that the roster this group inherited was so bereft of talent at so many positions. Inexcusable.

The consequences are that the team is in a multi-year rebuild. A multi-year rebuild means that some positions get neglected with nothing more than a band aid for twelve months.

The only way to address all the positions of need would have been to trade down, which would mean you are punting on the most important position, QB - while also knowing you are not going to get that early of a draft pick for a QB again anytime soon.

Go ahead and take your QB at #3 and then trade back into the first round in order to get your LT, and you are screwing yourself out of 2024 and/or 2025 Day One/Two draft picks. That also means you are not doing anything about a separate glaring need: WR.


This front office didn't just get left with an empty cupboard; there were no cupboards or cabinets left in the building whatsoever. That type of a remodel is going to take a long time to finish.

 

[Family]

It sucks that the roster this group inherited was so bereft of talent at so many positions. Inexcusable.

The consequences are that the team is in a multi-year rebuild. A multi-year rebuild means that some positions get neglected with nothing more than a band aid for twelve months.

The only way to address all the positions of need would have been to trade down, which would mean you are punting on the most important position, QB - while also knowing you are not going to get that early of a draft pick for a QB again anytime soon.

Go ahead and take your QB at #3 and then trade back into the first round in order to get your LT, and you are screwing yourself out of 2024 and/or 2025 Day One/Two draft picks. That also means you are not doing anything about a separate glaring need: WR.


This front office didn't just get left with an empty cupboard; there were no cupboards or cabinets left in the building whatsoever. That type of a remodel is going to take a long time to finish.

It was supposed to be a good year for WR's, so I can't get bent up over this. And this is an important need.

It's not like they took a linebacker or kicker.

 

[Wozzy]

While I agree and hated the decision to draft a WR instead of an OT in the second round, that was ages ago and that ship has sailed.

Now they have to make it work, even with lesser talent at the OT position. No point in complaining about it now... Wolf's plan might work.

If they start losing games because of the tackle position, we'll have a reason to complain then.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Wolf's plan might work.

What plan are you referring to?

 

[PatsFan2]

Yup. We could have drafted a LT instead of Polk who might have started next year, or not.

We might have drafted an OT at 68 who might have been a solid backup in 2025.

Instead, we drafted our choice of WR (Polk) and Wallace who is likely to be an OT starter THIS YEAR, and who might compete to start at LT in 2025.
==========
SHAME ON WOLF!

 

[PatsFan2]

Yup. We could have drafted a LT instead of Polk who might have started next year, or not.

We might have drafted an OT at 68 who might have been a solid backup in 2025.

Instead, we drafted our choice of WR (Polk) and Wallace who is likely to be an OT starter THIS YEAR, and who might compete to start at LT in 2025.
==========
SHAME ON WOLF!

And when Polk racks up 800yds his Rookie Year baring injuries I can't wait for your recant Post. I mean they have Chukwuma Okorafor - C Wallace and Calvin Anderson let's see how it shakes out. You are acting like this team was so set at WR we needed some. Give the new regime a chance.

 

[Wozzy]

What plan are you referring to?

Prioritizing WR over offensive tackle.

 

[PatsFan2]

What plan are you referring to?

I am getting some Wolf crow soup ready for you Mmmmmm eat up.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

We could have had polk AND one of those 2nd round tier OT. They didnt start going until paul at 55 so we could have easily traded up from 68 to the high 60s for rosengarten or suamataia. My thinking is we weren’t in love with that group of OT’s and were ok settling for wallace. So if one of those guys end up being considerably better than wallace the issue to me wasn’t necessarily the drafting of polk but the lack of being proactive /aggressive and misjudging suamataia who i think fell very far. Kc as usual made the smart call to trade up for him.

 

[KCSVEN]

KC had two of the worst rated tackles in football per PFF.
Taylor was atrocious in all statistics. 45 Pressures by Taylor and 39 for Smith YIKES! Onwenu had 17 BTW.
They must have really sucked as a team!

QB and receivers mean way more than a tackle.
We know top playoff offenses throw 85-90 % of passes to receivers with open windows (at least a yard separation). 78% of passes are completed in those open windows vs 25% of passes to tight windows. 1: Get a QB 2: Get guys that can get open in your scheme. Those are clearly the most important things in an offense.

If you have a choice between good wr and a similarly rated good tackle and you NEED BOTH you go wide receiver, not even a question. The only caveat is if your QB stinks and you need to give him ridiculous time to process (aka Justin Fields).

"Give me Moss and Ochocinco and I'll put up 35 points a game": Tom Brady. Never mentioned Offensive lineman!

 

[TheRainMaker]

I'm less concerned with the draft than I am with the free agent signings/extensions of current players.

 

[mgteich]

We could have had polk AND one of those 2nd round tier OT. They didnt start going until paul at 55 so we could have easily traded up from 68 to the high 60s for rosengarten or suamataia. My thinking is we weren’t in love with that group of OT’s and were ok settling for wallace. So if one of those guys end up being considerably better than wallace the issue to me wasn’t necessarily the drafting of polk but the lack of being proactive /aggressive and misjudging suamataia who i think fell very far. Kc as usual made the smart call to trade up for him.

trading up is always easy?

Didn't we try to trade into the first to get one of the top 8 OT's?

But, sure it is fair to compare Wallace to those a bit ahead and behind him in the draft. Wallace will likely be starter at OT, perhaps even this year. We'll check out all the OT's after the 2025 season.

For me, I'm fine with getting a probable starter at RT, understanding that he is a longshot to start at LT. Of course, whether we took Wallace or one of the others, we would still be in the market for a LT in the next off-season.

 

[Steve102]

Can we wait for them to suck before we *****?

 

[Family]

Prioritizing WR over offensive tackle.

Is it prioritizing if they liked Polk vs the available offensive tackles?

 

[Wozzy]

Is it prioritizing if they liked Polk vs the available offensive tackles?

They wanted another WR first but Buffalo took him, then they traded back and took Pollk. Clearly they were taking a WR second no matter what.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

Prioritizing WR over while ignoring offensive tackle.

I fixed it for you.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

I am getting some Wolf crow soup ready for you Mmmmmm eat up.

Okorafor at LT is going to make me eat crow? OK dude. Good point. Great indepth analysis.

 

[mgteich]

Okorafor at LT is going to make me eat crow? OK dude. Good point. Great indepth analysis.

Posters here believe that the LT's available were much better than Okorafor, so much better than the team should have passed on a WR they very much wanted.

Maybe your choice would have been a solid starter this year, pushing Okorafor to swing or to RT. Or maybe your choice would be the swing. Instead, we drafted a likely starting RT AND the team's choice at WR.
===============
I prefer what we did.
==============