19 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

The way I look at it, when you already have starters that are unlikely to be unseated anytime soon, you don't need to draft an OT in round 1. If your plan is to groom a player to eventually replace him, you might as well attempt to develop an unpolished player with potential. Either way, you're not getting much production during the rookie contract phase. So if your plan is to use a 1st on a tackle, just wait until there's a need and work out a trade for a proven good one you like. 

It doesn't bother me at all to draft a pure OG in round 1 since we currently have an opening. Dickerson was a 1st round talent that fell to round 2  because of his injury. I'd have no problem drafting a guy with that talent (and no injury concern) at #22.

BPA is an alright strategy when your team has no needs. But it's better to trade down than load up at a position where your starters are locks. Even trading for a future (a later season) draft pick is better than creating a positional logjam through BPA. 

We’ve been spoiled by having Kelce playing every game for almost 10 years, though.  Injuries happen on the OL and you just can’t have enough guys who can step right in

46 minutes ago, McMVP said:

Eagles have the capital to move up to 15. That would not be the issue… The issue would be a willing trade partner.

I think he goes pretty high… maybe to the bears at #9. I’m not giving up what would be needed for that. If he drops to 14 or 15, maybe, but again, do you really want to give up #50 or #53?

I don’t know… I think we need quantity of quality and not pure quality.

Another thought regarding Lane, he will be 34 entering this season. When Lane goes down, it’s clear our offense takes a big step back. The difference in our record with Lane & without Lane is massive. We don’t have Kelce to soften that blow anymore, we already have a ? At center regarding how Jurgens will perform + a big unknown at RG. If Lane goes down it could be even worse for our offense than it was before. You want to rely on a day 3 or UDFA guy blocking Micah Parsons with the division title on the line when you already have an uncertainty at the C & RG spot? A 1st or 2nd rd pick used on OL provides much more impactful + immediate depth + insurance on the right side of the OL while giving the Eagles long term roster flexibility with RG/RT.  
 

Honestly the more I think about it the more I actually want them to take OL in the first two rounds. 

5 minutes ago, TEW said:

I think he goes pretty high… maybe to the bears at #9. I’m not giving up what would be needed for that. If he drops to 14 or 15, maybe, but again, do you really want to give up #50 or #53?

I don’t know… I think we need quantity of quality and not pure quality.

Historically we've been infinitely better picking in the top half of the 1st round than the bottom. I like having two 2nds but I also like not whiffing on what should be a guaranteed starter. Either way I'll be okay but I'm wary about them picking at 22 until they can prove otherwise.

17 minutes ago, TEW said:

I think he goes pretty high… maybe to the bears at #9. I’m not giving up what would be needed for that. If he drops to 14 or 15, maybe, but again, do you really want to give up #50 or #53?

I don’t know… I think we need quantity of quality and not pure quality.

I personally have no issue with giving up 50 or 53 (not both obviously) to move up for the right OT.  I may even say the same for the right CB.  Can see them doing it for OT, but not CB personally 

12 minutes ago, McMVP said:

I personally have no issue with giving up 50 or 53 (not both obviously) to move up for the right OT.  I may even say the same for the right CB.  Can see them doing it for OT, but not CB personally 

If they think someone is a sure fire multi time pro bowler, I guess, but I keep coming back to how deep this OT class is.

And I’m pretty infatuated with Suamataia, who we should be able to get at 22. I think in 3 years he could be one of the top 2 or 3 tackles from this class.

42 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

The way I look at it, when you already have starters that are unlikely to be unseated anytime soon, you don't need to draft an OT in round 1. If your plan is to groom a player to eventually replace him, you might as well attempt to develop an unpolished player with potential. Either way, you're not getting much production during the rookie contract phase. So if your plan is to use a 1st on a tackle, just wait until there's a need and work out a trade for a proven good one you like. 

It doesn't bother me at all to draft a pure OG in round 1 since we currently have an opening. Dickerson was a 1st round talent that fell to round 2  because of his injury. I'd have no problem drafting a guy with that talent (and no injury concern) at #22.

BPA is an alright strategy when your team has no needs. But it's better to trade down than load up at a position where your starters are locks. Even trading for a future (a later season) draft pick is better than creating a positional logjam through BPA. 

I generally agree with this.

I'm not sure OG is what the pick should be, and I'd probably say no,  but it wouldn't bother me, for the same reason.  However,  the Eagles do have 2 reasonable choices at the moment for RG - Steen and Hennessy.   Steen can also do swing tackle,  Hennessy also swing IOL.   As I see it,  the Eagles should draft 2 players on day 3.  One is a right guard,  the other is a swing tackle.   The right guard has played well at right guard in college, and he might or might not be the top athlete.  The swing tackle can be raw and should be a top athlete.

"creating a positional logjam" seems to be what people here want to do, intentionally.

The general consensus is that the Eagles must spend maximum resources for the smallest payoff,  apparently in order to complain bitterly that the player who was drafted to replace a great, beloved player is not playing instead of the beloved player,  and to do that relentlessly, in order for conflict to ensue.

If the Eagles have a RG in mind, who they think would be a great RG for 5 years, maybe it's worth a first.   Star RG would be the RG starting week 1, and would stay there for 4 years.  Steen would be swing tackle,   another day 3 pick for developing hi ras swing tackle.   The Eagles could get that RG guy for a 2nd or 3rd or day 3.  All American Right Guards,   Zak Zinter,  the guy from U Conn - Christian Haynes.

Mims is the OT I want, but has no positional versatility at G at all. He'll be the best successor for Lane but can't have a guy ride the pine for at least 2 years.

If they can get him and they think he can be a lockdown OT for 10 years, they aren't going to care if he rides the pine for 2 years.

PFR’s Hall of Fame Monitor

 

As the league evolves and multipurpose backs become more and more appreciated, I believe Shady eventually gets in

30 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

PFR’s Hall of Fame Monitor

 

As the league evolves and multipurpose backs become more and more appreciated, I believe Shady eventually gets in

Idk he has very similar stats to Ricky Watters and he probably isn't getting in and he has a legit ring. 

16 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Idk he has very similar stats to Ricky Watters and he probably isn't getting in and he has a legit ring. 

No, he doesn’t.

Avoiding current needs to draft someone to sit for 2 years is what is going to keep us as a very good team with depth on the lines, but not one that wins the super bowl.

They desperately need a legitimate LB and a reliable safety. Currently they're banking on White and Dean doing a 180 and filling those roles. Relying on Dean failed due to his injuries (again), and their hopes that lottery tickets (morrow and cunningham) would hit big failed miserably. They have to also hope CJGJ plays a full season for the first time in his career and Blankenship to stay healthy.  The defense is set up to fail exactly the way it did last year.

If they use a second to trade up for a backup OL, I wouldn't bet on a deep playoff run. You obviously can't draft solely for need, but there has to be balance. You can't use every top 100 pick you have on OL/DL/WR and pray that mid-late round picks at LB/CB/S turn into gold 

Instantly recognized Lane’s arms, and figured Kelce was the guy with him

Lane is damn giant. Sheesh.

He looks so enormous in the ring.

4 minutes ago, D-Shiznit said:

Lane is damn giant. Sheesh.

He looks so enormous in the ring.

 

 

Jason would probably be a better announcer than Pat McAfee too. 

1 hour ago, D-Shiznit said:

Mims is the OT I want, but has no positional versatility at G at all. He'll be the best successor for Lane but can't have a guy ride the pine for at least 2 years.

I’m not sure why most people are assuming we have ‘at least’ 2 years with Lane.  I think it’s much more accurate to say ‘at best’ 2 years.  Guy has had some surgeries.  He is not a spring chicken

12 minutes ago, McMVP said:

I’m not sure why most people are assuming we have ‘at least’ 2 years with Lane.  I think it’s much more accurate to say ‘at best’ 2 years.  Guy has had some surgeries.  He is not a spring chicken

He seems like he loves playing, but he’s also had both physical and mental issues. He was ready to retire at one point and had to be talked out of it.

So, yeah, I could see him retiring in 2 years.

Fine with Mims, rich get richer 

3 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

We’ve been spoiled by having Kelce playing every game for almost 10 years, though.  Injuries happen on the OL and you just can’t have enough guys who can step right in

We've had plenty of injuries to key offensive linemen (Peters, Brooks, Johnson, Seumalo) in recent years and the plan isn't to have their future replacement, but to have an adequate reserve. In 2020 we saw what happened when multiple injuries happened at the same time and it got ugly at times. But when it's just one guy, we have managed for the most part including Super Bowl LII. 

I understand that some fans expect a prospect drafted as high as Steen to come right in and begin challenging for a starting job or somehow he's a disappointment. But the reality is, he had virtually no OG experience and is really a project at that position while also providing depth as a swing tackle if needed. We also have Fred Johnson who really impressed the team in camp last year. When something happens to a player as good as Lane Johnson, it's not likely a team will have another Lane Johnson to replace him with. No matter how you look at it, there will be a lesser player coming in. It doesn't have to be a 1st round draft pick

5 hours ago, Dwide Schrude said:

Dillard was a sensible move at the time, it just didn’t work out. We knew Peters career was coming to an end, dealing with nagging injuries, and OT depth became a legit problem for us that season. It was clear we needed to grab a OT high that draft. 
 

a lot of those things with Peters are becoming similar with Lane, and could start to become more apparent. Sure Maybe it’s a year too soon to grab the OT high, but if Stoutland sees a guy in that bunch in 1st rd he feels he can mold into being a long term starter at OT, who am I to say no to that? We’ve enjoyed sustained success because of our strong OL, I’m all for keeping that continuity going. 
 

Can’t stress it enough, Mailata is a big time exception here. Him panning out the way he has is nothing short of amazing & almost a miracle. That normally doesn’t work. You can’t bank on a late round or UDFA being the next OT of the future, but it’s way easier to do that on a top 50 draft pick. 

In a vacuum, Dillard made sense... but they didn't do their homework on him pre-draft, because they expected him to be gone.  So they didn't know why he was falling.  In retrospect, it makes more sense now why he fell... and hopefully the Eagles learned their lesson on not skipping over guys when doing the evals.  They shouldn't have selected him when they didn't do their homework ahead of time.

3 hours ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

PFR’s Hall of Fame Monitor

 

As the league evolves and multipurpose backs become more and more appreciated, I believe Shady eventually gets in

 

 

Adrian Peterson is first ballot Hall of Fame. Would be cool to see McCoy get in but I'm not sure.  Having multiple legendary games in blizzard conditions only adds to his legends and eligibly I believe though.  He's led the league in rushing, he's led the league in scoring with a 20 TD season, he was great for two different franchises and at the end of the day he was a two time Super Bowl champion.  

2 hours ago, just relax said:

No, he doesn’t.

The ring he got with SF before joining the Eagles is not legit?