I think Latham is a stud guard. I don't want them to draft him if they don't think he will be a stud OT though. Not saying he can't be, I don't know. I want as little drop off as possible when Lane retires. Keeping the OL elite, specifically at the OT spots is vital.

Say they draft Latham with the plan to play him at RG until Lane retires and then move him over to RT. That's their plan when they draft him. So that means, given they have drafted him to be Lane's eventual replacement, they will consider that future RT need "taken care of." They could conceivably add bodies here or there like they did with Mailata, but by and large, that is going to be their significant investment in that future need for the immediate future.

So say Latham is a great guard. And then Lane retires and they move him over to OT and he's not very good there. For whatever reason. Yes, you could move him back to RG, but then you will have no RT. You'd be completely screwed. And you aren't going to have a backup plan there, at least not a good one, because he is the backup plan.

Now, it goes without saying that any OT you draft you could say this about. If they suck, you're in trouble. But I'm saying if the Eagles take an OT, whoever they take, I hope he's the guy they evaluate as the best OT available. Because of the above scenario. Because if they draft him to replace Lane and they're counting on that player to do so, and they don't work out, this team is going to be in deep trouble. And if they misevaluate, then they do. But if they take a guy they don't think will be as good at OT, because they want someone to play RG now, then they're doing the future Eagles teams a major injustice. If you simply want a new RG then just take someone in rounds 2-4. Lots of really good iOL prospects in this draft.

29 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Meh.   Once you get to that point... if you want him at 15... then you want him at 12.  It's just a matter of whether or not you can make the move to grab him by trading up with another team.    What's the difference in cost for moving from 22 to 12, compared to 22 to 15?    According to the 'chart'... that's a late 3rd round pick value difference.  BUT, it really comes down to which teams are motivated to move back and which are motivated to stay put.

 

Picks 12 - 15 are:  Denver, Las Vegas, New Orleans, Indy.

Of those, I think Denver and New Orleans would be more interested in moving back versus LV or Indy.  So, I think 12 and 14 are the prime targets for a move up, if one is possible.

I have never claimed to be an expert on the draft. Quite the contrary. What you say here makes perfect sense to me.

1 minute ago, just relax said:

I have never claimed to be an expert on the draft. Quite the contrary. What you say here makes perfect sense to me.

Even the experts on the draft have proven that they are not experts on the draft.   

32 minutes ago, just relax said:

You put your five best guys out there and figure out where to put them after that. Latham played RG as an 18-year-old freshman, RT as a 19-year-old (when Steen played LT and Steen had already played LT for two years at Vanderbilt), and LT as a 20-year-old. He ran a 40 at 4.85 weighing 342, which is ridiculous. He's just 21. Steen was and is almost three years older than Latham. It is so bogus to make that claim that Steen beat him out. 

Whatever a "bog standard" is, I'll take him. 12-13 may be a little too high to go, but if he gets to 15, I absolutely want him. 

This.

So much this.

Latham is one of the most unique tackle prospects in recent years with his mass, length and movement skills. There just aren’t many men that size who can move. Combine that with being a really good football player and being extremely young, and I think the sky is the limit for this kid. 

I haven’t spent much time talking about Latham because I think he’ll be the second OL taken and we have no realistic chance at getting him, but if he’s within striking distance of a trade I would pull that trigger all day.

In a dream universe we could somehow come away with Latham and Suamataia as the right side of the OL for the next 10 years.

42 minutes ago, just relax said:

You put your five best guys out there and figure out where to put them after that. Latham played RG as an 18-year-old freshman, RT as a 19-year-old (when Steen played LT and Steen had already played LT for two years at Vanderbilt), and LT as a 20-year-old. He ran a 40 at 4.85 weighing 342, which is ridiculous. He's just 21. Steen was and is almost three years older than Latham. It is so bogus to make that claim that Steen beat him out. 

Whatever a "bog standard" is, I'll take him. 12-13 may be a little too high to go, but if he gets to 15, I absolutely want him. 

Link to great Latham numbers.  Ras has only height and weight.

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Even the experts on the draft have proven that they are not experts on the draft.   

There is only 1 true draft expert, and I think it may be me.

9 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

I think Latham is a stud guard. I don't want them to draft him if they don't think he will be a stud OT though. Not saying he can't be, I don't know. I want as little drop off as possible when Lane retires. Keeping the OL elite, specifically at the OT spots is vital.

Say they draft Latham with the plan to play him at RG until Lane retires and then move him over to RT. That's their plan when they draft him. So that means, given they have drafted him to be Lane's eventual replacement, they will consider that future RT need "taken care of." They could conceivably add bodies here or there like they did with Mailata, but by and large, that is going to be their significant investment in that future need for the immediate future.

So say Latham is a great guard. And then Lane retires and they move him over to OT and he's not very good there. For whatever reason. Yes, you could move him back to RG, but then you will have no RT. You'd be completely screwed. And you aren't going to have a backup plan there, at least not a good one, because he is the backup plan.

Now, it goes without saying that any OT you draft you could say this about. If they suck, you're in trouble. But I'm saying if the Eagles take an OT, whoever they take, I hope he's the guy they evaluate as the best OT available. Because of the above scenario. Because if they draft him to replace Lane and they're counting on that player to do so, and they don't work out, this team is going to be in deep trouble. And if they misevaluate, then they do. But if they take a guy they don't think will be as good at OT, because they want someone to play RG now, then they're doing the future Eagles teams a major injustice. If you simply want a new RG then just take someone in rounds 2-4. Lots of really good iOL prospects in this draft.

If Latham becomes a great guard, they're not moving him to OT.  You'll have Mailata, Dickerson, and Latham all playing at a Pro Bowl or All Pro level.  Jurgens presumably will be a very good center, hopefully better. 

Drafting another RT becomes a first-world problem.   

7 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Even the experts on the draft have proven that they are not experts on the draft.   

 

16 minutes ago, TEW said:

We brought in quite a few college guards this offseason, from what I recall. The kid from TCU Brandon Coleman and Boston’s Mahogany, along with Cooper Beebe.

I can’t remember the eagles using this many visits on guards.

The Eagles need to replace what they lost,  they lost Kelce, Opeta, Driscoll.   they added Hennessy.

A day 3 Right Guard - probably backup - makes sense.   Replacing Opeta.
A day 3 Swing Tackle makes sense.  Replacing Driscoll.

In the future,  any of Steen or day 3 swing tackle or someone else could be RT of the future.  or Steen or day 3 Right Guard or someone else could be RG of the future. 

8 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

If Latham becomes a great guard, they're not moving him to OT.  You'll have Mailata, Dickerson, and Latham all playing at a Pro Bowl or All Pro level.  Jurgens presumably will be a very good center, hopefully better. 

Drafting another RT becomes a first-world problem.   

I don't know about that. I think it depends on if they have the opportunity to somehow get another OT they like. If they aren't able to by the time Lane retires I absolutely do think they would. They may not have a choice.

I think people are really underestimating just how difficult it is to find stud OTs. There's a dearth of them in the NFL. It's practically an epidemic. And the best place to get them is typically only the first round. Studs are rarely traded and rarely hit free agency. It's not impossible, but it's rare. Studs are rarely drafted outside of the first round. Not impossible, but rare. But as luck would have it, the Eagles over the years are the outlier in both cases. Got Mailata in the 7th, and traded for Peters. I think how the Eagles have been able to find them over the years has people kind of overlooking just how difficult they are to find. Can't count on that kind of fortune forever.

If they draft Latham to be Lane's replacement and he's great at guard and they decide to keep him there, them having one fewer year to find Lane's replacement just makes it all the more difficult. You really don't want to put yourself in a bind as an organization where Lane retires, you have no surefire replacement and you're scrambling to find one. If you've reached that point you've already failed.

Whether it's drafting a guy this year or next year, they need to have a plan to replace him and it's too difficult a position to find to be just altering plans on the fly. If anything you stick to the plan and find another RG, which is far easier to find.

29 minutes ago, TEW said:

This.

So much this.

Latham is one of the most unique tackle prospects in recent years with his mass, length and movement skills. There just aren’t many men that size who can move. Combine that with being a really good football player and being extremely young, and I think the sky is the limit for this kid. 

I haven’t spent much time talking about Latham because I think he’ll be the second OL taken and we have no realistic chance at getting him, but if he’s within striking distance of a trade I would pull that trigger all day.

In a dream universe we could somehow come away with Latham and Suamataia as the right side of the OL for the next 10 years.

Mental orgasm.

45 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

I think Latham is a stud guard. I don't want them to draft him if they don't think he will be a stud OT though. Not saying he can't be, I don't know. I want as little drop off as possible when Lane retires. Keeping the OL elite, specifically at the OT spots is vital.

Say they draft Latham with the plan to play him at RG until Lane retires and then move him over to RT. That's their plan when they draft him. So that means, given they have drafted him to be Lane's eventual replacement, they will consider that future RT need "taken care of." They could conceivably add bodies here or there like they did with Mailata, but by and large, that is going to be their significant investment in that future need for the immediate future.

So say Latham is a great guard. And then Lane retires and they move him over to OT and he's not very good there. For whatever reason. Yes, you could move him back to RG, but then you will have no RT. You'd be completely screwed. And you aren't going to have a backup plan there, at least not a good one, because he is the backup plan.

Now, it goes without saying that any OT you draft you could say this about. If they suck, you're in trouble. But I'm saying if the Eagles take an OT, whoever they take, I hope he's the guy they evaluate as the best OT available. Because of the above scenario. Because if they draft him to replace Lane and they're counting on that player to do so, and they don't work out, this team is going to be in deep trouble. And if they misevaluate, then they do. But if they take a guy they don't think will be as good at OT, because they want someone to play RG now, then they're doing the future Eagles teams a major injustice. If you simply want a new RG then just take someone in rounds 2-4. Lots of really good iOL prospects in this draft.

Well, suppose he is. 😲 What you have then is a great guard next to a great tackle while Lane still plays and a great tackle once he retires.

39 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

There is only 1 true draft expert, and I think it may be me.

Uhhh...  rest assured it is most definitely not you

40 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

There is only 1 true draft expert, and I think it may be me.

Weren’t you one of the people pounding the table for JJAW? Maybe I have you mixed up

They're trading up for Fuaga when he falls to 12 or 13. I can feel it.

52 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

There is only 1 true draft expert, and I think it may be me.

Nah. You're too humble to think that.

14 minutes ago, just relax said:

Well, suppose he is. 😲 What you have then is a great guard next to a great tackle while Lane still plays and a great tackle once he retires.

If he does, then great. Seems that there's more success with moving tackles to guards than moving guards to tackles though. The former seems like the easier transition.

12 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

If he does, then great. Seems that there's more success with moving tackles to guards than moving guards to tackles though. The former seems like the easier transition.

It is rarely done, because most teams don't have the luxury of a great tackle to block another great tackle from getting on the field at tackle.   It's a rare event, because most teams don't have the luxury of OTs that the Eagles have enjoyed going back to 1999/2000 when they drafted Tra Thomas, and then signed Runyan as a free agent.   Since that time we've had almost without interruption: Thomas/Peters/Mailata at LT... and Runyan/Johnson (with the brief interruption at RT of Justice and then Herremanns).  That's highly unusual in its own right.

 

Meanwhile, an example does exist of it... Larry Allen was Dallas' All-World RG... whom they moved out to LT, where he went All-Pro in his only year there, before moving back inside to LG.   And they decided to ride with Flozell Adams at LT instead.

 

In other words... there are those that can do it.  But, most teams don't have the luxury of playing a great OT at OG, because they need them at OT instead.

34 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

Weren’t you one of the people pounding the table for JJAW? Maybe I have you mixed up

As I recall it, I was not thrilled with the pick. Definitely did not want in that area of the draft. I was focused on a speedier option as that was what I felt the team needed. 

I would have been ok with him a round or 2 later. I fell for the contested catch metrics and thought he would pan out alright.

For one particular poster who is jealous of my skills, JJAW is a favorite to bring up repeatedly. Its one of few misses I have had and its the only thing associated with my draft posts now. 

7 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

As I recall it, I was not thrilled with the pick. Definitely did not want in that area of the draft. I was focused on a speedier option as that was what I felt the team needed. 

I would have been ok with him a round or 2 later. I fell for the contested catch metrics and thought he would pan out alright.

For one particular poster who is jealous of my skills, JJAW is a favorite to bring up repeatedly. Its one of few misses I have had and its the only thing associated with my draft posts now. 

I try to be transparent with my draft gaffes and misses.  I remember when Carson Wentz reportedly worked out with a few draft-eligible WRs; one of which was Cooper Kupp.  I wanted no part of Kupp.  The Eagles ended up drafting Mack Hollins, who was another guy Wentz had apparently thrown to.

Talk about drafting the wrong WR.  I don't think the Eagles really had a shot at Kupp, though.  He was drafted at #68 and the Eagles 3rd round pick was originally #74 -- but traded all the way back to #99 from the Jernigan trade with BAL.   

16 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

If he does, then great. Seems that there's more success with moving tackles to guards than moving guards to tackles though. The former seems like the easier transition.

There are reasons for that. In college tackles are, in general, better athletes than guards. In college, guards often graduate to tackle. Latham is one of those. When you get to the pros, the speed and power of edge rushers demands greater athleticism from tackles, whereas guards can get away with more power and less finesse. Not the good ones, of course, but a lot of lesser ones.

However,

The best guards, and here I include Larry Allen and Zach Martin as examples, are tackles who switched to guard. Allen, in fact, played RT, then RG, the LT for the Turds before settling in at LG in his sixth year. He was great at all four positions but at LG he was a monster. Martin too went from tackle to guard and has been a perennial all-pro. Shawn Andrews and Todd Herremans were both drafted to play tackle but we had two tackles who were really good as tackles but, because of stature, were ill-suited to play guard, so Shawn and Todd played guard. They remained plenty good enough to play tackle but, as I say over and over, you put your best five guys out there and then sort them out.

Latham is probably as close to Shawn Andrews as any OL I've seen in a while. 

5 minutes ago, Alphagrand said:

I try to be transparent with my draft gaffes and misses.  I remember when Carson Wentz reportedly worked out with a few draft-eligible WRs; one of which was Cooper Kupp.  I wanted no part of Kupp.  The Eagles ended up drafting Mack Hollins, who was another guy Wentz had apparently thrown to.

Talk about drafting the wrong WR.  I don't think the Eagles really had a shot at Kupp, though.  He was drafted at #68 and the Eagles 3rd round pick was originally #74 -- but traded all the way back to #99 from the Jernigan trade with BAL.   

same. Im always transparent about everything. It doesnt hurt to point out the draft misses when the record is so good. and Its kinda fun to think back about what you said about a guy who turned out to suck. 

I posted a ton of JJAW advanced stats from PFF, and I was convinced that despite having so little separation he was SO good at the contested catches he was going to translate it to the NFL. 

I do remember, so many of his werent just 50/50 balls but he was actually being badly interfered with and it just didnt matter. I took it a step beyond contested catches and began calling his "combat catches". And he made them all.  PFF had stats that showed what a ridiculous percentage he would come down with.

 

Ill also not forget how mad people were that I was so down on the draft class in the Barnett, Sydney Jones, and Pumphrey year to the point of being called a troll by a few people because I just wouldnt submit to the group think that was being forced on me. Like I was being negative just to be negative or something... I hated all of those picks. That was unacceptable in here.

 

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.   Why should he be in a rush?   If another WR signs ahead of him, all it does is push his price up... and he's not in a risky situation until about August rolls around.  He's got time to be patient... and doesn't even need to worry about 'betting on himself' for a few more months.  

It's a strange call, but maybe?  Who's gonna sign a big $$ deal between now & August?  

This is all pretty typical moves for Howie.  Reward players who perform.  Sign them before it's necessary. 

It's a double edged sword - if you have a Carson Wentz situation, you end up with a ton of dead $$ (Carson benefitted financially by signing when he did...)  but we get to get used to the idea that we're building around DeVonta for the forseeable future.  The only question in my mind is would a move like this upset AJ Brown, who's really been the team's #1 receiver the last few years.  If DeVonta gets paid more (or similar) money, AJ Brown is gonna want a raise and an extensioj.

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Yup.   Why should he be in a rush?   If another WR signs ahead of him, all it does is push his price up... and he's not in a risky situation until about August rolls around.  He's got time to be patient... and doesn't even need to worry about 'betting on himself' for a few more months.  

Well, he's small and doesn't rely on athleticism so one major injury could cost him a big payday. He can't afford to lose a step.

Interesting the Eagles seem to be showing interest in OLB sized edges. Only some 260ish DEs. I think the lineup for the base D is shaping up to be DE, DT/NT, DT, OLB that can drop, MIKE, WIL, either an OLB or S depending on O, two CBs and two deep Ss.  Really could see DeJean as one of the wildcards.   Looking for athleticism at LBs, both OLBs and ILBs.  The CBs seem to be late rounders but ones that can tackle.