does flaccos injury change our draft strategy?

[GrimCoconut]

What part of Stanley's game makes you see him as a better LG than Tunsil? I see how he sometimes physically matches up and think he'd struggle more in the tighter spaces than Tunsil would, so I'm genuinely wondering what I'm missing here. I guess with our scheme favouring speed I could see the argument for Stanley though.

I see what you're saying but there's no real difference in terms of his strength at guard compared to tackle. If he is weak at one he'll be weak at the other. As a guard, you can mask his deficiencies there better than at tackle since you can have people on both sides help him with blocks. Furthermore, I really think it's irrelevant because I don't think either of them stay at LG for long.

[JoeyFlex5]

I get what you're saying, but it would be foolish to just bench Monroe imo, especially since he has been pretty good when healthy. Problem is he can't stay healthy. Is it realalistic to think either of those rookies would beat him out in TC when he's fully healthy for the LT spot? It doesn't hurt to have a quality back up, but when we're talking about a top 5 pick...

i think both tunsil and stanley would beat out a healthy monroe with ease

[Inqui]

I see what you're saying but there's no real difference in terms of his strength at guard compared to tackle. If he is weak at one he'll be weak at the other. As a guard, you can mask his deficiencies there better than at tackle since you can have people on both sides help him with blocks. Furthermore, I really think it's irrelevant because I don't think either of them stay at LG for long.

I agree that if we took either they'd spend half their rookie season at LG (and the other half at LT when Monroe goes down) before kicking out to LT in their second season or their third season at the latest. Just that from what I've seen of both I thought Tunsil would make a better LG in the pros because he looks like he's more likely to be strong enough to cope with the bigger guys inside (and less likely to need help), so I was a bit surprised when you said you saw Stanley as the better LG. I'm not even disagreeing necessarily, I'm just wondering what makes Stanley the better LG in your view.

 

I agree it would be short-sighted if we took one of the two over the other just because they looked better at LG so it's all academic really. But with all the discussion between now and April it doesn't hurt to discuss the odd point that isn't hugely relevant to their careers, haha.

[Inqui]

i think both tunsil and stanley would beat out a healthy monroe with ease

I reckon Monroe would have the edge in their rookie seasons. He's not a bad player imo (when healthy), it's just that longer-term I wouldn't be surprised if either player became better than what Monroe is now.

[allblackraven]

I agree it would be short-sighted if we took one of the two over the other just because they looked better at LG so it's all academic really. But with all the discussion between now and April it doesn't hurt to discuss the odd point that isn't hugely relevant to their careers, haha.

I already made my Christmas wishes - let Ravens make it to at least divisional round, so we can leave draft threads alone until Feb/March

 

We're working harder than NFL scouts, I feel...

Edited November 24, 2015 by allblackraven

[GrimCoconut]

I agree that if we took either they'd spend half their rookie season at LG (and the other half at LT when Monroe goes down) before kicking out to LT in their second season or their third season at the latest. Just that from what I've seen of both I thought Tunsil would make a better LG in the pros because he looks like he's more likely to be strong enough to cope with the bigger guys inside (and less likely to need help), so I was a bit surprised when you said you saw Stanley as the better LG. I'm not even disagreeing necessarily, I'm just wondering what makes Stanley the better LG in your view.

 

I agree it would be short-sighted if we took one of the two over the other just because they looked better at LG so it's all academic really. But with all the discussion between now and April it doesn't hurt to discuss the odd point that isn't hugely relevant to their careers, haha.

Yeah, I think Tunsil could be a great guard. I guess I find the difference nominal at best. I just like how Stanley plays in pass protection and I think he could do just as well as a guard since it would potentially minimize his greatest weakness in terms of his strength since he could potentially get help from both sides. Then again, he is just as effective as a LT so it's nominal. 

 

Tunsil has that mean streak and he bends so well for a man his size. He's also built really well. I said it before but Tunsil looks like an Ozzie Newsome pick all day long.

[JoeyFlex5]

I reckon Monroe would have the edge in their rookie seasons. He's not a bad player imo (when healthy), it's just that longer-term I wouldn't be surprised if either player became better than what Monroe is now.

that wasnt a shot at monroe, but a compliment to these LT's. i just think theyre gonna be really good, i see both, specifically stanley, as a high caliber starting LT the day they enter camp. monroe to me, is solid, not great, hes above middle of the pack, but nothing special, and his inability to stay on the field makes him a better depth guy than a starter, if an injury occurred then we have a starting caliber LT in a pinch for the next 2 years