I was listening to Doug and Wolf yesterday and they were talking about the Draft. Doug is infatuated with Chance Warmack. That's his guy. He thinks Fisher and Joeckel are gone and likes Warmack, the best Guard prospect, over Johnson the 3rd best Tackle.
Wolf, as usual, responded with knowledge that he picked up playing in the league for years.
He said GMs don't take Guards that early in the draft. More and more Tackles are being drafted and converted to Guards and its been that way since he was in the league. He said potentially finding a guy that can lockdown the edge for the next decade is much more valuable then a potential Guard. Look no further then what the Cardinals
did last year. They selected a college Tackle and changed his position to Guard. The reason?
Tackles are more often then not taller, longer, leaner, quicker, and more athletic. If they cant quite cut it at Tackle, you can move them inside and you know they at least have the ability to play the position. Where as with a Guard, if they fail, you cant just kick them outside to Tackle and expect better results.
Drafting Guards in the first rd is outdated. This is a passing league now and pass protection is at a premium. Since teams don't line their best rushers up inside, the value of guard is starting to fade.
Remember Decastro? The "Once in a decade Guard prospect," the "Next Steve Hutchinson."
Well he was a prime example of how Guards are viewed right now. If they are considered special talent, they will likely go in the mid-to-late first rd.
The reality is that the best Guard is still less valuable then his counterpart at a more premium position such as CB, LB, RB, WR, QB, OT, DE.
All I gotta say is don't be disappointed when Warmack is not our pick even if he is there and the top tackles are gone. My gut tells me we go Defense with our first pick, barring a trade.
<em>This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Revenge of the Birds' (ROTB) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of ROTB's editors.</em>