LG Quenton Nelson - Notre Dame - Jr

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by frankieuc68:

Originally posted by jcs:
His physical talent reeks all pro potential at Guard why would you move him?

No I don't want to move him. I'm just asking as the poster don't want a OG picked that high and argued that it's not worth paying them on their second contract. If he can play a solid LT but not all pro level once Staley leaves, would that justify paying him big money then? Will he transition to LT is what I'm asking? I guess my impression from what he's saying if he gets that big contract, we still have to spend a high pick or big money on a LT FA. We all know Staley is on his way out soon. I don't watch CFB that much and all I see are highlights and reviews. That's why I'm here is to read and ask knowledgeable posters like Phoenix, MD and yourself. Just because I ask doesn't mean that's what I want.

And this I think is the problem. To justify that pick AND then that second salary we will need him to have an even bigger impact on the game than being a top 5 guard, which could involve a move like that. Cowboys look great now because they have their elite QB and RB on rookie contracts but when it comes time to pay Dak, Martin may be one of the first casualties. You can't have Elliot, Dak, Tyron Smith, and Bryant paid fair market and the luxury of paying Martin what his contract will command.

Larry Allen at guard in today's NFL isn't worth a Top 5 pick. No matter how good an OG you have, your run and passing game will still suck if you don't have 4 other starting caliber OL around him. An OL is as strong as it's weakest link and paying $10M+ to the easiest to draft and least impactful of the OL positions defies logic. You would need him to hit his maximum possible potential to even come close to justifying it. Also look at how first round OG have performed lately? (we have 2 examples on our team). There are almost as many success stories in rounds 3/4 than round 1.

You should go over what Olinemen, especially Guards are making these days, the cost that it is taking to sign one in F/A. The good ones are getting paid as well as OT's because the supply of NFL ready and skilled players in that position is incredibly limited.

Guards are getting left tackle money now. Times are changing. With the epidemic of poor OL coming out of college, the belief that you can't take a guard early is an antiquated notion.

Originally posted by Heroism:
Guards are getting left tackle money now. Times are changing. With the epidemic of poor OL coming out of college, the belief that you can't take a guard early is an antiquated notion.

That doesn't mean they're worth left tackle money and the reason why they are is precisely my point. Top echelon guards are hitting FA, there are no top echelon QB, OT, Edge, or WR hitting FA (if they did it would dwarf that OG money). It's not an apples to apples comparison. You can buy elite guards, you can't buy elite players at impact positions, those you can only draft.

Originally posted by Heroism:
Guards are getting left tackle money now. Times are changing. With the epidemic of poor OL coming out of college, the belief that you can't take a guard early is an antiquated notion.

LTs are still the highest paid linemen. Of the top 20 offensive linemen by average $ per year, 13 are LTs, 4 are guards, 2 are centers, and 1 is a RT. The best LTs in the league (Tyron Smith and Joe Thomas) would be getting paid $15-20 million/year if they hadn't signed long term deals years ago when the salary cap was much lower (Cowboys signed Smith to an 8 year extension in 2014 and the Browns signed Thomas to a 7 year extension in 2011). The #13 LT (Nate Solder) is getting paid $10 million a year. The 25th and 26 guards (26 because we're talking about 2 positions) are getting paid $5.2 million/year and $4.8 million a year.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/offensive-line/

I agree that top free agent guards (and centers) are getting paid a higher share of the overall cap, so they should be getting drafted earlier, but an elite LT will always trump an elite guard and an average starting LT is currently getting paid twice what an average guard gets paid.

QB > LT = WR > G = C = TE > RB (RB isn't far behind though and Bell could get paid more than the top guard).

I'd probably put RB equal to the value of G, C, and TE, but the contracts are lower because veterans only really have one shot at a big deal (after their rookie deal and before they hit 30) so we're comparing the top contracts for RBs aged 27-31 versus linemen aged 27-35. Most of the best RBs in the league are still on their rookie deals, but some of those guys will get paid >$12 million/year once their rookie deals are up.

It's a shame there isn't an Andrew Luck, a Calvin Johnson, or a Joe Thomas in this draft (or a top edge rusher like Garrett). Barkley is good, but drafting a RB at #2 isn't a great value compared to what you'd get in most draft classes.

Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:

It's a shame there isn't an Andrew Luck, a Calvin Johnson, or a Joe Thomas in this draft (or a top edge rusher like Garrett). Barkley is good, but drafting a RB at #2 isn't a great value compared to what you'd get in most draft classes.

Agreed.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

https://twitter.com/PFF_Mike/status/906733278522200064

Just ridiculous awareness.

That's amazing.

Yeah you don't see many Gs in the NFL pick up a blitz coming from the other side he plays on never mind in college, very impressive..

Kids a beast no doubt about it but in no way should we draft a OG in the top 5...you don't tank to the point we are for a OG.

If we move down outside of the top 10 I'm all for it.

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by 49oz2superbowl:
I don't care who, if we take a guard in the top 10 I will be pissed. We already have a first round pick OG coming off IR (another first round OG we acquired) and starting caliber OG can easily be had in rounds 2-4 and FA.

Reason I'm so anti-guard is rarely are guards ever worth their second contract whereas we could use a top 10 pick on a great player at a position you don't let great players hit FA (notably pass rush or a guy like Barkley).

Spending a top 5 pick on OG is such an overreaction when we could've easily spent a 3rd rounder on a few of the falling OG/OC in years past who have all become far superior to Fusco and Kilgore.

Tell that to the Cowboys who used a Top 16 pick on Zack Martin who has been worth every bit of that. Or the Redskins who drafted Brandon Scherff even earlier who is the best pure zone blocking guard in football. Quenton Nelson is a better prospect than Martin and could also be better than Scherff. Not sure how you could complain if the 49ers went that way considering the current state of the OL. You'd be bringing in a top end prospect who would start at LG from Day 1. Suddenly your new franchise QB has more time to throw and there's a lot more room for your RBs to run. Add a center in free agency and this OL becomes a night and day difference.

Top 16 and top 5 are two different stories. I will still maintain Scherff was not worth that selection and pick should've been Leonard Williams. Teams can't sustain success paying OG's what Scherff will command when his rookie contract is up. If your top 5 paid players includes a guard you're going to be in trouble because guards are so much easier to find and have such a smaller impact on the game than a pass rusher, impact WR or FQB. Top 5 picks are so rare to attain you simply can't waste that pick on one of the least important positions on the football field. If we trade down to the 15 range and he's there then sign me up, but we already have 3 first round picks on our OL and Trent Brown. The problem isn't needing a top 5 pick caliber OG, it's needing a starting caliber one (and Fusco is not). We also quickly forget that Garnett who should be the left guard is on IR. Seems like a major waste to burn that high of a pick when we have a 1st round OG slotted for that position.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't one of the reasons Scherff went so high that some teams thought he might be able to handle OT, and even possibly LT? I know that a lot of reports mentioned he may be better suited to guard, but at the time of the draft I believe he was still seen by some as someone who may develop into a starting OT.

As much as I love Saquon Barkley, I keep thinking that a slight trade back to possibly get back a 2nd in this draft at least, picking Nelson and then possible trading back into the back end for OC Price and/or staying put and hoping he falls to the 2nd may be the best option. Of course, as many have mentioned, FA will shape what they do.

Isn't Spencer Long, the OC for Washington, a FA this year? Does anyone that knows more about line play think he would be a decent upgrade over Kilgore?
http://www.nbcsports.com/washington/washington-redskins/redskins-offseason-questions-spencer-long-long-term-answer-center

A downside people don't mention enough about picking a guard in the top 10 picks is that you're basically only getting them on a 4 year deal, because the 5th year option is set at the transition tender for the player's position in his 4th year and all offensive linemen are treated the same. For offensive linemen drafted in 2013, that cost was $11.9 million. Very few guards are going to be worth the transition tender for offensive linemen (which is primarily determined by LTs) 4 years from now, so you're forced to negotiate after 4 years without the leverage of being able to exercise the option.

This isn't a problem for picking other positions (like RB) early, because the transition tag for RBs isn't influenced by other positional players.

I'm still on board with picking guards early, but #2 seems too high considering the positional value and the unfavorable 5th year option. Hopefully teams fall in love with a couple QBs so we have the option to trade back, because there's not much else that seems attractive at 2 (no premier edge rushers, LTs, or receivers).

Now with trading down as a very likely possibility, I'm hoping we pull the trigger on this guy. Get a vet center and let Garrnett, Nelson, Tomlinson, and Kilgore fight for the 2 guard spots. The biggest concern is Kyle's willingness to put rookies upfront early.

Originally posted by TheNef77:

Now with trading down as a very likely possibility, I'm hoping we pull the trigger on this guy. Get a vet center and let Garrnett, Nelson, Tomlinson, and Kilgore fight for the 2 guard spots. The biggest concern is Kyle's willingness to put rookies upfront early.

If we somehow landed Weston Richburg, then traded down a few picks and got Nelson, would be so much better off with out protection. Draft Tyrell Crosby as the back-up swing tackle and another guard, and the o-line becomes a strength.

merge?

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/189618-quenton-nelson-og-notre-dame/

Originally posted by Jcool:
merge?

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nfl-draft/189618-quenton-nelson-og-notre-dame/

Go ahead

Thread merge activated!

Originally posted by saniner:

Originally posted by TheNef77:
Now with trading down as a very likely possibility, I'm hoping we pull the trigger on this guy. Get a vet center and let Garrnett, Nelson, Tomlinson, and Kilgore fight for the 2 guard spots. The biggest concern is Kyle's willingness to put rookies upfront early.

If we somehow landed Weston Richburg, then traded down a few picks and got Nelson, would be so much better off with out protection. Draft Tyrell Crosby as the back-up swing tackle and another guard, and the o-line becomes a strength.