View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently December 20th, 2014, 8:31 pm



Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Offensive Tackles 
Author Message
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3396
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Genn will never play OT in the NFL, period. He is a pure OG, which is why I would rather draft Kontz, and you have to remember, when you're drafting Kontz you're not drafting an OG, you're drafting an OC, and great ones usually come at a premium. In addition, you're drafting an excellent solution to replacing Raiola. This move allows us to play Kontz next to Raiola this year, learn the offense, bulk up, mature, and learn the speed of the game) and then cut Raiola next year and save something like $3.0 million dollars of much needed cap space. That's huge. Drafting Kontz is also getting a $3 million dollar bonus of cap space next year.

Again, no-brainer.



Exactly. Drafting his would be in the intention of drafting a Center, just not playing him at center right away.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


February 23rd, 2012, 4:35 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7550
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
Someone will probably totally disprove me with stuff like facts and examples, but I feel it's easier to get a quality guard later in the draft than it is to get a quality LT. I don't like some of what I'm hearing about Adams, but one guy I've been somewhat intrigued by is Jon Martin. I just don't know what to think of the guy overall though, plus he'll likely be gone in the teens.


Image


Player profile: Stanford OT Jonathan Martin

By Tim Twentyman

Posted 13 hours ago

Martin claims he's better than consensus top tackle in the draft, Matt Kalil

Stanford's Jonathan Martin is considered one of the top three offensive tackles available in April's NFL Draft, but that isn't good enough for him.

"As a competitor you have to think you're the best," Martin told reporters at the NFL Scouting Combine on Thursday.

Martin claimed he was a better prospect that USC's Matt Kalil, the consensus top tackle in the draft.

"Matt's a tremendous player, but I think I'm better than he is," Martin said. "It's nothing cocky. It's just how I approach my game when I'm preparing for an event like this. I'm an athletic tackle, I'm smart, I don't make many mistakes, and that's helped me a lot the last couple years."

Player Profile

Who is Jonathan Martin?

Martin and guard David DeCastro formed the best tackle/guard combo in the nation this past season. Martin is extremely athletic at the tackle position and very sound in his technique. He's also durable, missing just two games over the course of his college career.

What he had to say:

"I'm not doing lifting or field drills (at the combine). I was sick the last couple days, just a little food poisoning, I don't remember what it was. Something I ate in Arizona."

What experts are saying:

"Jonathan Martin, to me, is a prototypical left tackle," said NFL Network analyst Mike Mayock "He's gifted athletically and a lot of things I said about Kalil, you can say about (Martin). He needs to get a little bit stronger, but he can protect the quarterback."

Why he fits the Lions:

The biggest plus on Martin is that he's NFL ready. He ran a pro-style, West Coast system at Stanford that was 60 percent run and 40 percent pass.

He'll pick up a system quickly having a lot of the same terminology and play-calling at Stanford. Martin is very athletic and is one of the most polished tackles in the draft. He could come in and compete for a starting spot with the Lions right away.

Why the Lions may pass:

Martin isn't physically imposing. He measured 6-foot-5, 312 pounds with 34-inch arms and 9 7/8-inch hands. Martin is more athletic than imposing and has to be very sound with his technique because he isn't physically overpowering or a strong puncher. He needs to get stronger.


February 24th, 2012, 9:33 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9984
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
I'd take a guy that needs to get stronger, but has sound technique and is smart over a guy who is strong as a bull, but smart as one and has the blocking technique of a pylon (see Gosder Cherilus).

_________________
I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.


February 24th, 2012, 1:56 pm
Profile
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
m2karateman wrote:
I'd take a guy that needs to get stronger, but has sound technique and is smart over a guy who is strong as a bull, but smart as one and has the blocking technique of a pylon (see Gosder Cherilus).


I agree. I'd rather draft Martin than Adams, but I think Adams is going to be gone when we pick.


February 24th, 2012, 2:29 pm
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Adams repped out 19 on the bench, Glenn 31, DeCastro 34, Ben Jones 29

_________________
Forward down the field!


February 24th, 2012, 3:43 pm
Profile
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Wayne Fontes wrote:
Adams repped out 19 on the bench, Glenn 31, DeCastro 34, Ben Jones 29


It's not uncommon for an OT to be weaker than OGs, and I haven't ever put much stock into BP reps, or 40 times for Ots, other than, IMO, it shows the athletes ability to self-condition. If they're subpar by a wide margin then they probably don't work out in the offseason.

That said, that is an impressive # by DeCastro. Did Kontz lift (or is he going to)? I would like to see him put up something like 26 - not too weak to raise a red flag, but not off the charts strong to raise his stock!


February 24th, 2012, 3:52 pm
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Konz only did 18. David Molk on the other hand, did 41. I don't put a huge amount of stock in it for tackles, but it is nice to see some strength, ala Jake Long & Joe Thomas. This may show that either a) the kid is still growing and hasn't maxed out or b) that strength training hasn't been a part of his regular workouts in college (or taken seriously enough).

_________________
Forward down the field!


February 24th, 2012, 4:18 pm
Profile
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Wayne Fontes wrote:
Konz only did 18. David Molk on the other hand, did 41. I don't put a huge amount of stock in it for tackles, but it is nice to see some strength, ala Jake Long & Joe Thomas. This may show that either a) the kid is still growing and hasn't maxed out or b) that strength training hasn't been a part of his regular workouts in college (or taken seriously enough).



I'm kind of happy that Kontz only did 18, just increases the chances that he'll be there at 23.

I'm not a huge Molk fan, but that certainly is impressive. He gets good ratings, but I just don't see it on the field. Mike Brewster is actually rated higher as an offensive line prospect than Mike Adams, but I wouldn't want him either.


February 24th, 2012, 4:33 pm
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7550
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Hasn't Johnathan Martin lifted yet? They don't have his reps posted.


February 25th, 2012, 12:12 am
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3396
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
Konz only did 18. David Molk on the other hand, did 41. I don't put a huge amount of stock in it for tackles, but it is nice to see some strength, ala Jake Long & Joe Thomas. This may show that either a) the kid is still growing and hasn't maxed out or b) that strength training hasn't been a part of his regular workouts in college (or taken seriously enough).



I'm kind of happy that Kontz only did 18, just increases the chances that he'll be there at 23.

I'm not a huge Molk fan, but that certainly is impressive. He gets good ratings, but I just don't see it on the field. Mike Brewster is actually rated higher as an offensive line prospect than Mike Adams, but I wouldn't want him either.

I honestly don't think that'll hurt him one bit.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


February 25th, 2012, 2:43 am
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2329
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
BillySims wrote:
Hasn't Johnathan Martin lifted yet? They don't have his reps posted.


I don't think Martin is working out this week, he came down with something and had to tone down his training leading into the combine.


February 25th, 2012, 6:01 am
Profile
Team MVP

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3280
Location: Maryland
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
With the way Glenn measured out, people are reconsidering him at LT again. I think he'd work better as a guard but now this may raise his stock and he won't be there when we pick.


February 25th, 2012, 12:30 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9984
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
sweetd20 wrote:
BillySims wrote:
Hasn't Johnathan Martin lifted yet? They don't have his reps posted.


I don't think Martin is working out this week, he came down with something and had to tone down his training leading into the combine.


He claims he got food poisoning and if that is the case it would be foolish for him to work out. I've had food poisoning, and it affects you for days.

_________________
I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.


February 25th, 2012, 2:00 pm
Profile
Online
ST Coordinator – John Bonamego

Joined: February 11th, 2005, 3:01 pm
Posts: 3875
Location: WSU
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Quote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:



Wayne Fontes wrote:

Konz only did 18. David Molk on the other hand, did 41. I don't put a huge amount of stock in it for tackles, but it is nice to see some strength, ala Jake Long & Joe Thomas. This may show that either a) the kid is still growing and hasn't maxed out or b) that strength training hasn't been a part of his regular workouts in college (or taken seriously enough).



I'm kind of happy that Kontz only did 18, just increases the chances that he'll be there at 23.

I'm not a huge Molk fan, but that certainly is impressive. He gets good ratings, but I just don't see it on the field. Mike Brewster is actually rated higher as an offensive line prospect than Mike Adams, but I wouldn't want him either.
Quote:
I honestly don't think that'll hurt him one bit
.



im pretty uncomfortable with that number on konz. i havent thought of him as a power type blocker anyway but i find that a very concerning number of reps. he can use the height to some degree as an excuse but it makes you wonder how much the guy uses the weight room. a lot of people can rep 18 at 225.

as for adams - i saw part of his workout and thought he looked sloppy and out of shape. i dont think he helped himself much and i bet with the off the field issues he s had some teams move him down there draft board. im not sure that its justified or not but cordy glenn for example looked like a much better athlete and generally thats not good when comparing a guard to a tackle prospect.


February 25th, 2012, 9:00 pm
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 1086
Location: Wolverine, Mi.
Post Re: Offensive Tackles
Glenn's ability to play multiple positions just increases his value. As for Konz only lifting 18 could be a reflection of his lack of interest in weight training. I don't believe it's a program thing, as his teammate Kevin Zeitler lifted 32. From what Ive read Konz isn't a powerful center, and is more of a leaner, and has missed time each of the last 3 seasons to injuries. Wouldn't be surprised to see him fall on draft day.


February 25th, 2012, 11:34 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.