Is OT a "need"?

Looking at all the mock drafts I find it interesting that some have us taking Sewell if he’s there, but not taking an OT at all if he isn’t. OT isn’t hi on my “needs” list either. The argument has been to take a generational talent and I absolutely get it. It doesn’t mean I would be against taking a trade but it also would depend on the compensation. Could we use an upgrade at RT? Absolutely. Could we use an upgrade at 14 or 15 other positions? Absolutely. The OL “unit” is in pretty good shape, and we have some guys on the roster already that may be more than just depth. What have we got in Logan Stenberg? Was Matt Nelson simply “lucky” when he stoned Bears DL Akiem Hicks? If we are to take a RT in the draft then let’s draft a RT but later, like Adrian Ealy.

Pro Football Focus wasn’t as impressed in Nelson’s play, ranking him last of all 29 tackles with enough snaps to qualify in Week 13. The analytics site was hardest on Nelson in the run-blocking department.

Nelson has only been playing OL for 2-3 years… so has room for improvement.

Crosby is just okay.

Yes, we do not have a starting caliber RT on the roster right now. It is a need.

Hope we don’t draft for “needs”!

1 Like

Sure it’s a need, but is it a higher rated need than the other 14?

What your suggesting is exactly while we don’t do well season after season winning games.
The player you use as example might an is big might become a starter Ealy an others like him. I know he was just example of a later rd OT.
We have one of the best OLs in NFL right now that is lacking a quality ROT. If an I hope we do draft a OT early rd 1 or 2 he would complete the OL for years.
If you look back it has been the history of Lions to do the Almost good routine an fail to put the group together.
Finish the OL this draft one player will give us a really good OL an for years we can improve depth an maintain that group.

Just hopping around with roster has not worked .
We tried UFA signings for OL an it didn’t work .

We will have good depth with Nelson an Crosby for this season but Crosby will be UFA next season an may want to much.

Complete the OL is what I al looking at they are high $ positions also an good ones in UFA are very costly when you get a good one keep him Rag needs to be kept so other 3 should be draft picks an we did not tier 3 picks .

Yeah right, my plan of passing until the 3rd and taking players where we have higher needs is why the Lions have sucked. Coaching, poor decisions in FA, they don’t count and drafting players higher than their actual worth…nothing to see here it’s ALL about how I have suggested that we wait on an OL. And all the draft prognosticators that don’t have us taking one at all, they should all be fired?

Yes. You want 8 starting caliber OL on your roster to ensure you can get through the season. Dallas and a few other teams were down to their 10th guy.

OT looks like #1 need to me. Especially early in the draft. You can get plenty of WRs and DBs later.


OK, so a team that right now likely calls their OL their #1 strength, and isn’t going anywhere next season, should make OT a priority? Again, WHY isn’t anyone that does mock drafts looking at OT as a draft choice period? The latest 3 round Kiper and McShay has us trading down and still not taking one. I believe that’s pretty much the case for all mocks.

1 Like

I would say that it should be addressed early, be it round 1 or round 2. Surely there are other needs (WR1, OG, DT, LB, CB, S) but several of them don’t have the premium that OT does.

I think media favors skill players because fans prefer them because they are exciting.

I believe that OL/DL are less heralded (unless great edge rusher) and so they are ignored more by typical media and fans unless there is a glaring need.


So RT is a premium over only having 3-4 starters in our back 7 on D? And not having a #1 WR? And only having 2 starters on the DL, (forgive me but I refuse to include Flowers not only until he plays but until he plays well). And our #2 and #3 WR’s are HUGE question marks. Our secondary, DL, WR’s, all 3 of those units have bigger needs than the OL but OT is a premium because…

Not saying you’re wrong and that could absolutely explain why you don’t see an OT taken in the first 2 rounds, but why don’t they have us taking one at all?

BPA is the need

Star power is the need

Sewell is a potential top 5 lineman

That’s why he’s our pick if he’s there


In the top ten you draft talent over need, and to me Sewell is a generational prospect, whereas Slater is not. That’s the difference. I have many times taken an OT in the 2nd of the mocks I do. It is a need, absolutely.

A team can’t have too much O line talent. TALENT. Not just OK or fill in players, but top rated, beast like, bad ass talent. The Lions have a long and dedicated history of so-so, mediocre O line players. Also, these guys are in for almost every play so the possibility of injury is pretty high. I have NO problem with them drafting offensive help high in the draft. I also love tight ends, running backs and fullbacks that can put a defensive player on his back.

I absolutely get the argument for Sewell, Two things, what if he’s not there and does that mean you’re not willing to look at any trade offer?

Then still, you take BPA. It’s probably not going to be Slater, so that’s why he’s not as common.

I would rather get a star than a couple of average players and some draft picks. That’s not debatable in my opinion. You can’t pull an '04 Pistons and win with a bunch of average players.

It’s a problem where you’re only as good as your weakest link. OT impacts every offensive play, whether run or pass.

It’s pretty well understood what the premium positions are, beginning with QB and working down.

I would plan to use all 6 of my picks. When I advocate for filling that need early, it’s because it matches up with the talent this year. Give me Sewell in the 1st, and beginning in the 2nd through 4th find me a 3t DT, CB and 2 WRs. 5 and 6 we take a flyer on a S and LB.

OK you take BPA, no trade, then when is your pick for OT?