PDA

View Full Version : Could David DeCastro be the 2nd OL Taken?


fenikz
12-02-2011, 12:49 AM
After Kalil who is a top 5 lock the other offensive tackles in this class have failed to impress. While I was a big fan of Jonathan Martin last year his play has truly fallen off in his Senior year. Mike Adams on the other hand had been terrible up until his Senior year and Riley Reiff is his constant lukewarm self.

Which brings me to David DeCastro, he has constantly played at an elite level for the past two seasons and with the new CBA and the massive decrease in rookie contracts do you think it's possible that he ends up as a top 10/15 pick going ahead of the other offensive tackles in this class?

And one more thought would you rather have an average to above average OT or an elite OG?

holt_bruce81
12-02-2011, 02:08 AM
He can and he will.

niel89
12-02-2011, 03:00 AM
DeCastro is well worth a top pick. The guy is an animal and he is such does such a good job pulling. He really pops at guard which isn't easy to do.

However, I just don't see how a team will pull the trigger on him if they also need a tackle. Tackle is just more of a premium position and people will be more willing to take a risk on a tackle with potential than just to take a safe guard, as wrong as that may be in this case.

Too many teams need top tackles to handle those big time pass rushers on the outside, and teams think that they can get some solid mid rounders to fill in at guard who can be good solid players. I don't think there are enough dominant interior pass rushers that teams need to be clamoring to snap up elite guards to counter them.

Mike Pouncey went at 15 and I think that DeCastro is clearly a better prospect than him, although Mike was a center. I think top 15 hopeful. He is as "can't miss" as a guard can be, but what guard has ever been taken early? How many top guards even bust?

I hope this is semi legible, I'm exhausted right now and I'm a little hazy.

fenikz
12-02-2011, 03:07 AM
Around 15 is generally their peak but since teams wouldn't be paying a guard 40 million now as they would have prior to the new CBA it seems much more reasonable in my eyes

Sloopy
12-02-2011, 06:56 AM
I see him in that 10-15 area, I think Mike Adams ends up being the second off Tackle off the board and could go top 10.

Then again, other the if your cards lose out on Kalil, I could see some of the other teams needing a LT taking a different need with Kalil off the board and he Adams might slip down into the same range as DeCastro.

So yea I can see a scenario where DeCastro is the second OL off the board

phlysac
12-02-2011, 08:30 AM
An offensive guard has only been drafted in the top-20 nine times the past twenty drafts. You have to go back to 1988 to see one go in the top-10, where both the Jets (Dave Cadigan - 8th overall) and Giants (Eric Moore - 10th overall) made the plunge.


17th - Mike Iupati - 2010
15th - Branden Albert - 2008
16th - Shawn Andrews - 2004
17th - Steve Hutchinson - 2001
18th - Matt Stichcomb - 1999
10th - Chris Naeole - 1997
14th - Ruben Brown - 1995
16th - Aaron Taylor - 1994
19th - Lester Holmes - 1993
13th - Eugene Chung - 1991

BeerBaron
12-02-2011, 09:32 AM
An offensive guard has only been drafted in the top-20 nine times the past twenty drafts. You have to go back to 1988 to see one go in the top-10, where both the Jets (Dave Cadigan - 8th overall) and Giants (Eric Moore - 10th overall) made the plunge.


17th - Mike Iupati - 2010
15th - Branden Albert - 2008
16th - Shawn Andrews - 2004
17th - Steve Hutchinson - 2001
18th - Matt Stichcomb - 1999
10th - Chris Naeole - 1997
14th - Ruben Brown - 1995
16th - Aaron Taylor - 1994
19th - Lester Holmes - 1993
13th - Eugene Chung - 1991

Poor argument because the amounts paid to high draft picks made it prohibitive to take an interior lineman high.

Now, all bets are off.

I think DeCastro could absolutely be a top 10 pick.

keylime_5
12-02-2011, 09:45 AM
After Kalil who is a top 5 lock the other offensive tackles in this class have failed to impress. While I was a big fan of Jonathan Martin last year his play has truly fallen off in his Senior year. Mike Adams on the other hand had been terrible up until his Senior year and Riley Reiff is his constant lukewarm self.


Adams had a breakout junior year. That makes 2 years (minus the five games he missed this year) of good play from him.

phlysac
12-02-2011, 09:49 AM
Poor argument because the amounts paid to high draft picks made it prohibitive to take an interior lineman high.

Now, all bets are off.

I think DeCastro could absolutely be a top 10 pick.

You're right, but it wasn't an argument. Just a factual listing of who and where guards were drafted the last 20 years.

ElectricEye
12-02-2011, 10:21 AM
And one more thought would you rather have an average to above average OT or an elite OG?

This is the really what it comes down to, isn't it? I agree with your point about the relative individual value of the tackles in this class after Kalil, but I'm still not sure I would take the elite guard over an average to above average tackle. Especially if I'm picking for a team that passes a lot. You can get by with filler and junk inside if you absolutely have to and still do pretty well. That's not as easy to pull off with a tackle. I like DeCastro a ton, but if I have a need at both tackle and guard and Kalil is off the board, I'm still taking someone from those next three.

Cardinal96
12-02-2011, 10:24 AM
I think DeCastro has a good chance at being an All-Pro LG or RG for years to come. More than any other player in this draft (yes, even Luck), I have confidence that David DeCastro will be a stud at his position in the NFL. I would definitely take him if my team needed a good guard and I was drafting around 10-15 in the 1st round.

Saints-Tigers
12-02-2011, 10:35 AM
I'd absolutely take an elite guard over so-so tackles. If your QB is good, he's going to be stepping into the massive pocket made by your guards.

Look at the Saints, it's a combo of elite interior blocking and Brees ability to step up that keeps our sacks so low.

It's a cheaper alternative as well. You don't need a dominant tackle if you have a great QB, and if you don't have a great QB, you should be looking for that anyway.

CashmoneyDrew
12-02-2011, 10:35 AM
As long as he ends up a Titan, I don't care.

RufusMcDaniel
12-02-2011, 10:37 AM
Decastro has stated he wants to be a Titan and other teams should stay away....

Wait, or was that a dream?

DraftSavant
12-02-2011, 10:46 AM
Around 15 is generally their peak but since teams wouldn't be paying a guard 40 million now as they would have prior to the new CBA it seems much more reasonable in my eyes

I don't think you'll just see it with guard, either. I think you'll see 1st round RBs get a little more value again, too. Safety, too. It was already a fast rising position in terms of draft value, this should just put it over the top.

I think you'll see a lot more pure BAP in the 1st round of this draft (and going forward).

BeerBaron
12-02-2011, 10:47 AM
I don't think you'll just see it with guard, either. I think you'll see 1st round RBs get a little more value again, too. Safety, too. It was already a fast rising position in terms of draft value, this should just put it over the top.

I think you'll see a lot more pure BAP in the 1st round of this draft (and going forward).

In that case, DeCastro should absolutely be a top 10 pick. He's a top 10 talent regardless of position this draft.

vidae
12-02-2011, 10:47 AM
I didn't like the "OT is the most valuable position" argument before, but now with the new CBA it is all but moot. If you want to build the line and a player of DeCastros talent is there, you take him. You're trying to make the best line possible, and I don't think that we should be stuck in the same thought process of "positional value" that we used to have. It just doesn't matter as much anymore.

He should go top 10. He could be a true difference maker at the next level and that is all that should matter.

DraftSavant
12-02-2011, 10:50 AM
I didn't like the "OT is the most valuable position" argument before, but now with the new CBA it is all but moot. If you want to build the line and a player of DeCastros talent is there, you take him. You're trying to make the best line possible, and I don't think that we should be stuck in the same thought process of "positional value" that we used to have. It just doesn't matter as much anymore.

Bingo.

Also, teams that have taken top LTs haven't recently really haven't seen any return on investment at all in terms of wins and losses. The last generation of HOF LTs really spoiled both fans and teams. There are no Ogdens/Paces/Roafs/Jonses in the league anymore.

BeerBaron
12-02-2011, 10:52 AM
People wouldn't know what to do if another Orlando Pace did come along. The guy got Heisman votes as an offensive lineman. And he was so damn well rounded. Elitely well rounded. He was as big of part of the "Greatest Show on Turf" as any of Warner, Holt, Faulk, Bruce, Az, etc.

I would seriously love to see another guy like that come along.

DraftSavant
12-02-2011, 11:01 AM
People wouldn't know what to do if another Orlando Pace did come along. The guy got Heisman votes as an offensive lineman. And he was so damn well rounded. Elitely well rounded. He was as big of part of the "Greatest Show on Turf" as any of Warner, Holt, Faulk, Bruce, Az, etc.

I would seriously love to see another guy like that come along.

They were all so ridiculously good. I remember Walter Jones getting beat off the edge, and he just spun around and ran the guy upfield. Unreal athleticism. Crazy how good all of those guys were, all playing at the same time. Made me take it for granted.

vidae
12-02-2011, 11:07 AM
The Chiefs OL in the 2000s was one of the best I've ever seen and I seriously took it for granted. When Roaf retired I couldn't fathom how our then starting LT gave up a sack. Man, I'm not sure we'll see a line that good again.

Roaf - Waters - Wiegmann - Shields - Tait

fapfapfap. :(

BeerBaron
12-02-2011, 11:08 AM
The Chiefs OL in the 2000s was one of the best I've ever seen and I seriously took it for granted. When Roaf retired I couldn't fathom how our then starting LT gave up a sack. Man, I'm not sure we'll see a line that good again.

Roaf - Waters - Wiegmann - Shields - Tait

fapfapfap. :(

If only you had a defense or WR worth a god damn. That puntless playoff game against the Colts was ridiculous.

DraftSavant
12-02-2011, 11:11 AM
The Chiefs OL in the 2000s was one of the best I've ever seen and I seriously took it for granted. When Roaf retired I couldn't fathom how our then starting LT gave up a sack. Man, I'm not sure we'll see a line that good again.

Roaf - Waters - Wiegmann - Shields - Tait

fapfapfap. :(

So ridiculously good. God, that was a fun offense to watch if you loved power football.

Also, Tony Boselli could have gone down as the best in that group of tackles if Jacksonville doctors hadn't of completely botched his ******* shoulders.

vidae
12-02-2011, 11:19 AM
If only you had a defense or WR worth a god damn. That puntless playoff game against the Colts was ridiculous.

Yeah, neither team needed to field a D that game. I wonder how far we could have gone had we been matched up against anyone else. Blah.

So ridiculously good. God, that was a fun offense to watch if you loved power football.

Also, Tony Boselli could have gone down as the best in that group of tackles if Jacksonville doctors hadn't of completely botched his ******* shoulders.

I'm not sure that he isn't the best tackle from that group as it stands right now. His career was much shorter but the guy was flat out dominant in every aspect.

Iamcanadian
12-02-2011, 11:22 AM
Around 15 is generally their peak but since teams wouldn't be paying a guard 40 million now as they would have prior to the new CBA it seems much more reasonable in my eyes

The draft process didn't change priorities when the rookie salaries skyrocketed, primary position players were in great demand prior to the huge rookie salary era and they will be in great demand now that a rookie salary cap is in place. People are under the impression that huge rookie salaries changed how the draft functioned but the truth is, the priorities before the huge rookie salaries really didn't change once rookies started making huge amounts of money, for the simple reason that the model to build a winning team never changed a whole lot from era to era.
Can a player like DeCastros go higher than say 15, I'd say yes, if he is rated that high as a prospect, for talent rankings will always come into play after the talented guys who play primary positions have been chosen, so it will depend on just how many top 15 types are in this year's draft. I do agree that the rookie salary cap at least makes it possible to draft an OG higher without destroying your team's cap structure.
Is DeCastros that type of prospect, I'm not completely sure, we'll have to see him perform at the combine to establish just how good a prospect he is. Too much can be hidden in a college system to be sure at this stage that he actually rates that high. This of course, holds for most OL prospects not just DeCastros.

Saints-Tigers
12-02-2011, 12:55 PM
Yea, i don't see the draft having this big shift where other positions fill up the top 10. The reason those other positions get paid that money is because they ARE more highly valued. I think people are using reverse logic here.

vidae
12-02-2011, 01:05 PM
The way that the draft is set up now with the new CBA it'd be hard to pass on a big talent, regardless of position, because money ISN'T a huge factor. Missing on a top 10 pick isn't the financial burden it once was, and that means that maybe a team with a big need a G could look his way in the top 10.

K Train
12-02-2011, 01:27 PM
An offensive guard has only been drafted in the top-20 nine times the past twenty drafts. You have to go back to 1988 to see one go in the top-10, where both the Jets (Dave Cadigan - 8th overall) and Giants (Eric Moore - 10th overall) made the plunge.


17th - Mike Iupati - 2010
15th - Branden Albert - 2008
16th - Shawn Andrews - 2004
17th - Steve Hutchinson - 2001
18th - Matt Stichcomb - 1999
10th - Chris Naeole - 1997
14th - Ruben Brown - 1995
16th - Aaron Taylor - 1994
19th - Lester Holmes - 1993
13th - Eugene Chung - 1991

only 9 times? that seems pretty solid for interior lineman in the top 20

also you count branden albert even though he was drafted as a LT day but you dont count leonard davis and or robert gallery even though they ended up being monster guards.

Prowler
12-02-2011, 01:39 PM
I thought Reiff was flying up draft boards and was pretty much #2 guy. I like DeCastro but there's no way he beats out Reiff and Martin. Maybe just Martin.

SolidGold
12-02-2011, 01:44 PM
Don't the Browns have two first rounders? I wouldn't be surprised if they drafted him with one of them.

Babylon
12-02-2011, 02:25 PM
Don't the Browns have two first rounders? I wouldn't be surprised if they drafted him with one of them.

Unless they do some jockeying then i would say no. The Browns first is too high to take him and he'll be gone by the time the Atlanta first comes around.

keylime_5
12-02-2011, 02:29 PM
it's not about money that guards won't go that high. it's about positional value. the higher picks are used on players that are harder to find. it's easier to find a great guard in the middle of the draft than it is to find a quality tackle or cornerback or quarterback, etc.

i think decastro is the 2nd best OL in this draft (assuming Kalil declares) but he won't be hte 2nd one taken IMO. I think at least one or two of Reiff, Adams, and Martin get taken before him b/c franchise left tackles are a lot tougher to find outside of the first round than pro bowl OGs.

Abaddon
12-02-2011, 02:38 PM
An offensive guard has only been drafted in the top-20 nine times the past twenty drafts. You have to go back to 1988 to see one go in the top-10, where both the Jets (Dave Cadigan - 8th overall) and Giants (Eric Moore - 10th overall) made the plunge.


17th - Mike Iupati - 2010
15th - Branden Albert - 2008
16th - Shawn Andrews - 2004
17th - Steve Hutchinson - 2001
18th - Matt Stichcomb - 1999
10th - Chris Naeole - 1997
14th - Ruben Brown - 1995
16th - Aaron Taylor - 1994
19th - Lester Holmes - 1993
13th - Eugene Chung - 1991

Half of those guys were tackles, or were drafted to play tackle.

The Chiefs OL in the 2000s was one of the best I've ever seen and I seriously took it for granted. When Roaf retired I couldn't fathom how our then starting LT gave up a sack. Man, I'm not sure we'll see a line that good again.

Roaf - Waters - Wiegmann - Shields - Tait

fapfapfap. :(

So glad that unit is gone. Holy crap, were they good.

phlysac
12-02-2011, 02:42 PM
only 9 times? that seems pretty solid for interior lineman in the top 20

also you count branden albert even though he was drafted as a LT day but you dont count leonard davis and or robert gallery even though they ended up being monster guards.Half of those guys were tackles, or were drafted to play tackle.


I only listed the players that played GUARD in college. If you consider that Albert and others were given more value because they were drafted to play OT it lessens the number of college Guards drafted in the top-20.

College OT's like Gallery and Davis, who failed at OT in the NFL and were kicked inside, are irrelevent to the discussion of drafting college guards.

DraftSavant
12-02-2011, 02:45 PM
I thought Reiff was flying up draft boards and was pretty much #2 guy. I like DeCastro but there's no way he beats out Reiff and Martin. Maybe just Martin.

I'd feel safer with DeCastro at LT than Martin. Maybe he was playing with some undisclosed injury this year, but he's been really poor in pass protection. Slow heavy feet.

Sloopy
12-02-2011, 02:51 PM
I thought Reiff was flying up draft boards and was pretty much #2 guy. I like DeCastro but there's no way he beats out Reiff and Martin. Maybe just Martin.

Reiff is up because Martin is down, he hasn't done anything of note or had a break out season, he is just consistent.

Mike Adams has been on fire and is shooting up draft boards. I think I said it earlier, I have them 2a and 2b neck and neck with each other but I do give Adams the edge as he is both worthy of a top pick and a LT while Reiff is a RT given two good talents, positional value will still play a slight role

The way that the draft is set up now with the new CBA it'd be hard to pass on a big talent, regardless of position, because money ISN'T a huge factor. Missing on a top 10 pick isn't the financial burden it once was, and that means that maybe a team with a big need a G could look his way in the top 10.

Exactly, BPA is more likely to factor in if it fills a need as well. I could still see positions like RB falling because top RB can still be found in later rounds but for the most part a top 10 talent that isn't a position of "value" will not fall.

K Train
12-02-2011, 02:55 PM
I only listed the players that played GUARD in college. If you consider that Albert and others were given more value because they were drafted to play OT it lessens the number of college Guards drafted in the top-20.

College OT's like Gallery and Davis, who failed at OT in the NFL and were kicked inside, are irrelevent to the discussion of drafting college guards.

thats all well and good but what does that have to do with anything? just because historically guards arent premium picks doesnt mean you dont take one when you find one

a lot of guards in the NFL played tackle in college, and a lot of tackles that cant cut it at tackle in the NFL play guard but a great player on the offensive line is a great player on the offensive line and imo thats where decastro falls. He'll help out any interior oline

SenorGato
12-03-2011, 02:02 AM
The Chiefs OL in the 2000s was one of the best I've ever seen and I seriously took it for granted. When Roaf retired I couldn't fathom how our then starting LT gave up a sack. Man, I'm not sure we'll see a line that good again.

Roaf - Waters - Wiegmann - Shields - Tait

fapfapfap. :(

Love that OL....Roaf was probably my favorite of those LT's after Pace too...I don't know well enough, but isn't Albert a pretty worthy replacement? Not HOF good, but pretty damn good.

ellsy82
12-03-2011, 03:55 AM
Take DeCastro in the first...and I'll be happy to take a better guard in Zeitler in the second. See who has the better careers.

Sloopy
12-03-2011, 08:41 AM
Take DeCastro in the first...and I'll be happy to take a better guard in Zeitler in the second. See who has the better careers.

Like how you think that Zebrie Sanders is better than Mike Adams?

A Perfect Score
12-03-2011, 08:50 AM
I'm just waiting for the first report from a team thinking they can play him at RT. Happens every year.

GaMeTiMe
12-03-2011, 12:01 PM
The draft process didn't change priorities when the rookie salaries skyrocketed, primary position players were in great demand prior to the huge rookie salary era and they will be in great demand now that a rookie salary cap is in place. People are under the impression that huge rookie salaries changed how the draft functioned but the truth is, the priorities before the huge rookie salaries really didn't change once rookies started making huge amounts of money, for the simple reason that the model to build a winning team never changed a whole lot from era to era.
Can a player like DeCastros go higher than say 15, I'd say yes, if he is rated that high as a prospect, for talent rankings will always come into play after the talented guys who play primary positions have been chosen, so it will depend on just how many top 15 types are in this year's draft. I do agree that the rookie salary cap at least makes it possible to draft an OG higher without destroying your team's cap structure.

You speak like an insider that talks to people making these decisions. Tyson Jackson is a pure example of a team not wanting to pay a player at another position a ton of money, yes of course "look how that went" but that's the point, they basically ignored the fact that he was hardly the BPA.

That's also the reason we haven't seen many trades in the top-10, recent ones that come to mind are the Jets moving up for Sanchez which made plenty of sense considering what they gave up, the Pats/Saints swapping 7th/10th picks for Ellis/Mayo which wasn't a huge financial difference for either, and Jacksonville moving up for Derrick Harvey which was and still is a horrible move.

ellsy82
12-03-2011, 12:18 PM
Like how you think that Zebrie Sanders is better than Mike Adams?

Yep. That's exactly what I think. :p

Babylon
12-03-2011, 12:49 PM
I'm just waiting for the first report from a team thinking they can play him at RT. Happens every year.

I think he can have a major impact at Guard. If he were just a straight up blocker i'd say no but the guy is as good a pulling guard as i've seen going back to the John Hannah days.

I think after you get by the blue chippers like Luck, Barkely, Kalil, Claiborne and Blackmon then it shouldnt shock anyone to see DeCastro's name called.

Abaddon
12-03-2011, 11:08 PM
I only listed the players that played GUARD in college. If you consider that Albert and others were given more value because they were drafted to play OT it lessens the number of college Guards drafted in the top-20.

College OT's like Gallery and Davis, who failed at OT in the NFL and were kicked inside, are irrelevent to the discussion of drafting college guards.

I don't recall Stinchcomb playing guard until the pros, and that wasn't until he had flopped at tackle. So...

Iamcanadian
12-04-2011, 12:32 PM
You speak like an insider that talks to people making these decisions. Tyson Jackson is a pure example of a team not wanting to pay a player at another position a ton of money, yes of course "look how that went" but that's the point, they basically ignored the fact that he was hardly the BPA.

I have over 55 years of being a draftnik and that experience has given me some insights into how the draft and money interrelate.
Nobody outside of team officals, knows why Tyson Jackson was picked, I assume it was because the team thought he was a very solid prospect and have never seen anywhere that money played any part in the decision.

That's also the reason we haven't seen many trades in the top-10, recent ones that come to mind are the Jets moving up for Sanchez which made plenty of sense considering what they gave up, the Pats/Saints swapping 7th/10th picks for Ellis/Mayo which wasn't a huge financial difference for either, and Jacksonville moving up for Derrick Harvey which was and still is a horrible move.


If you go back over the decade prior to the high priced rookie salaries, you will find that there were between 2 and 3 trades a decade out of the top 10 picks which is right in line with the number of trades we saw during the high priced rookie salaries, confirming that money had little to do with how teams traded or drafted then or now.

PossibleCabbage
12-05-2011, 12:20 AM
I think possibly the fact that this draft could potentially contain three elite guards (DeCastro, Osemele, and Glenn) probably hurts the odds of any one of them going particularly high.

Iamcanadian
12-05-2011, 01:13 AM
I think he can have a major impact at Guard. If he were just a straight up blocker i'd say no but the guy is as good a pulling guard as i've seen going back to the John Hannah days.

I think after you get by the blue chippers like Luck, Barkely, Kalil, Claiborne and Blackmon then it shouldnt shock anyone to see DeCastro's name called.

Just wondering if you ever saw John Hannah play, I did in college and as a pro and he was the most dominating inside player I ever saw. He consistently, in college, drove DT's back 5 or 6 steps and I never saw any college DT get the best of him. As a pro, most DT's were completely dominated by him although not quite as obvious as in college.
I closely watched DeCastro's play against Oregon and I must have missed his total dominance of the Oregon DT's, it looked more like he barely held his own.
I'm not saying he isn't a great prospect for an OG but I just don't see the Hannah comparison at all. I guess we'll know on draft day just how much the pro scouts and GM' think of him as a prospect, but I don't expect to hear his name called before the 11-20 group.

vidae
12-05-2011, 01:23 AM
We know why Tyson Jackson went 3rd overall.

Pioli started to scout players for the Patriots before he was hired as the Chiefs GM. He was hired late in the process and didn't trust any of the current scouts working for the Chiefs. He took the prospect he was the most familiar with and that was Tyson. The next day he fired the entire scouting department and hired his own team.

Was Tyson Jackson a reach? Abso-*******-lutely. Is the above excuse a good enough one to give Pioli a pass? No, it isn't. Do I understand WHY Tyson was picked where he was? Sure.. I don't agree with it but I get it.

Pioli tried to move back but was unable to. I would have preferred he drafted BJ Raji or something, but eh. Whatever. His last two drafts have been pretty damn good.

AntoinCD
12-05-2011, 09:31 AM
I think DeCastro is a better OG prospect than Kalil is an OT prospect. I see DeCastro as someone who could very well be the best OG in the league in a few years. Kalil has the potential to be a very good LT in the NFL. This is where positional value comes into play.

It is harder to find a serviceable LT than a serviceable OG. Playing LT requires so much more than OG. There is a reason why so many former OTs become OGs. Logan Mankins and Robert Gallery are two former OTs who have become very good OGs. Seldom, if ever, does it happen the other way round.

That is why Kalil will and should go higher than DeCastro. However I would not be shocked to see DeCastro go top 15, possibly top 10.

D-Unit
12-05-2011, 12:43 PM
I think DeCastro is overrated. ...and taking a Guard that early is ridiculous.

PossibleCabbage
12-05-2011, 12:55 PM
I think DeCastro is overrated. ...and taking a Guard that early is ridiculous.

In the 2010 draft Iupati was the 3rd OL taken (Pouncey was the 4th), they went a reasonably appropriate 17th (and 18th). Whether or not DeCastro is the second OL taken sort of depends on how people view the rest of the OL prospects other than Kalil, not on how high he's taken.

For all we know, DeCastro could be the 2nd OL taken... and he goes 25th overall.

D-Unit
12-05-2011, 01:00 PM
In the 2010 draft Iupati was the 3rd OL taken (Pouncey was the 4th), they went a reasonably appropriate 17th (and 18th). Whether or not DeCastro is the second OL taken sort of depends on how people view the rest of the OL prospects other than Kalil, not on how high he's taken.

For all we know, DeCastro could be the 2nd OL taken... and he goes 25th overall.
I'm talking about those putting him in the Top 10-15.

AntoinCD
12-05-2011, 01:06 PM
I think DeCastro is overrated. ...and taking a Guard that early is ridiculous.

With previous drafts having no rookie wage scale it would have been obvious that OGs wouldn't get chosen highly because no team would want to make a rookie OG the highest paid at his position without having played a game. However with that gone I definitely think more OGs will be drafted higher in the first few rounds. Sure, if there are legitimate prospects above them then they won't but this year is not a draft that I see multiple sure fire, elite type prospects.

As for DeCastro as a player;

He is unbelievable at blocking in space and on the second level. His ability to pull in the run game and hit people on the move is phenomenal. He also has the ability to stone DTs in the passing game. He absolutely handled Ta'amu of Washington one on one multiple times.

PossibleCabbage
12-05-2011, 01:09 PM
I'm talking about those putting him in the Top 10-15.

Oh, I definitely agree that he shouldn't go that high, but as to the premise of the thread (will DeCastro be the 2nd OL taken?) it's entirely possible. You never know who's going to fail a drug test at the combine, test poorly, interview poorly, suffer a significant injury in a bowl game (inc. Senior), have the combine physical reveal a degenerative joint condition/cancer, etc.

This isn't an especially strong OL class as far as high firsts are concerned, IMO, and I wouldn't be surprised if guys like Adams and Martin fall behind DeCastro in the pre-draft process.

princefielder28
12-05-2011, 01:12 PM
I'm talking about those putting him in the Top 10-15.

when it comes to ranking the prospects without factoring "positional value" DeCastro is easily one of the top 10 players in this draft

PossibleCabbage
12-05-2011, 01:14 PM
when it comes to ranking the prospects without factoring "positional value" DeCastro is easily one of the top 10 players in this draft

I'm not sure how you entirely divorce "prospect quality" from "positional value."

Shouldn't you view prospects from the position of "how much can they improve your football team, in terms of concrete metrics (like wins, points)" and in light of that more valuable positions should be ranked higher?

princefielder28
12-05-2011, 01:22 PM
I'm not sure how you entirely divorce "prospect quality" from "positional value."

Shouldn't you view prospects from the position of "how much can they improve your football team, in terms of concrete metrics (like wins, points)" and in light of that more valuable positions should be ranked higher?

I agree that positions like quarterback and pass rusher hold more weight and that should be taken into consideration but after those two positions I view them moreso on talent because of the variety of schemes/fits.

AntoinCD
12-05-2011, 01:24 PM
I'm not sure how you entirely divorce "prospect quality" from "positional value."

Shouldn't you view prospects from the position of "how much can they improve your football team, in terms of concrete metrics (like wins, points)" and in light of that more valuable positions should be ranked higher?

Say though you're a team picking in the 8-12 range and you have needs at WR and CB. In the top 7 you have Luck, Barkley, Kalil, Claiborne, Kirkpatrick, Blackmon, Floyd and Griffin in no particular order.

You explored trade up possibilities but none suited.

If your next need is at OG do you not take DeCastro because of positional value?

Going by my own board the next best would include DeCastro, Richardson, Burfict, Keuchly, Te'o etc but LB offers a similar positional value to OG and if anything RB offers less.

You could of course opt for someone like Janoris Jenkins or Alshon Jeffrey to fill your biggest need. However both players come with far more risk in the top ten than DeCastro.

Otherwise you are left with players like Martin, Reiff etc. But if you are set at LT is RT more valuable than OG?

The X Factor I suppose would be Trent Richardson as he would be clearly BPA. But if I had no need at RB then I would probably take DeCastro that high but that's just my opinion

DraftSavant
12-05-2011, 01:25 PM
I'm not sure how you entirely divorce "prospect quality" from "positional value."

Shouldn't you view prospects from the position of "how much can they improve your football team, in terms of concrete metrics (like wins, points)" and in light of that more valuable positions should be ranked higher?

When you can figure this metric out, let me know. Like princfielder said, after you get past QB and pass rusher have a clear-cut higher value than other positions. But after that?

If I have Steve Hutchinson or Alan Faneca on my team, I'm pretty sure it makes my team a lot better. And I don't really care where I got him at.

Babylon
12-05-2011, 01:54 PM
Just wondering if you ever saw John Hannah play, I did in college and as a pro and he was the most dominating inside player I ever saw. He consistently, in college, drove DT's back 5 or 6 steps and I never saw any college DT get the best of him. As a pro, most DT's were completely dominated by him although not quite as obvious as in college.
I closely watched DeCastro's play against Oregon and I must have missed his total dominance of the Oregon DT's, it looked more like he barely held his own.
I'm not saying he isn't a great prospect for an OG but I just don't see the Hannah comparison at all. I guess we'll know on draft day just how much the pro scouts and GM' think of him as a prospect, but I don't expect to hear his name called before the 11-20 group.

I guess we have to compare our AARP cards because my guess is i'm older than you are. I was a season ticket holder from 1970-1977 for the Pats so i guess that would answer the initial question.

I think DeCastro's strength besides great leadership and work ethic would be his ability to pull for the run game, probably a throwback to the Fuzzy Thurston days. (while we're tripping down memory lane)

I think what made Hannah unique is he was coming out of college at around 270 when tackles in the NFL were weighing 260. DeCastro isnt going to have that physical advantage at the next level but i like him as well as anyone since Steve Hutchinson.

D-Unit
12-05-2011, 01:55 PM
when it comes to ranking the prospects without factoring "positional value" DeCastro is easily one of the top 10 players in this draft
If you're picking in the Top 10 your team sucks for a reason... and has no business drafting a Guard.

PossibleCabbage
12-05-2011, 01:56 PM
When you can figure this metric out, let me know. Like princfielder said, after you get past QB and pass rusher have a clear-cut higher value than other positions. But after that?

If I have Steve Hutchinson or Alan Faneca on my team, I'm pretty sure it makes my team a lot better. And I don't really care where I got him at.

Drafting is always a matter of guesswork, but I'm pretty sure that teams think more in terms of "we want to improve our passing offense, so we need to protect better" rather than "I want to acquire one of the best guards in the league."

D-Unit
12-05-2011, 01:58 PM
I guess we have to compare our AARP cards because my guess is i'm older than you are. I was a season ticket holder from 1970-1977 for the Pats so i guess that would answer the initial question.

I think DeCastro's strength besides great leadership and work ethic would be his ability to pull for the run game, probably a throwback to the Fuzzy Thurston days. (while we're tripping down memory lane)

I think what made Hannah unique is he was coming out of college at around 270 when tackles in the NFL were weighing 260. DeCastro isnt going to have that physical advantage at the next level but i like him as well as anyone since Steve Hutchinson.
I had NO CLUE. Wow. I always liked you, but now, I think I respect you more.