Ted will definitely snatch a guy or two.
Ted's philosophy is that you can get by on the Oline with "just guys." Stick them in there and then get superstars at the "skill" positions.
Originally Posted by: nerdmann
Well, I think Ted learned the "'just guys' aren't enough" principle after his first year. Since the Klemm/O'Dwyer experiment when nowhere, he has spent lots of draft choices on the line (as others in the thread have pointed out). He hasn't made OL an exception to his draft-not-FA approach (for which I have been quite critial over the years), but he has pretty much gone away from the "just guy" approach other than that first year.
I think the real problem isn't a lack of attention, but something in the scouting/personnel identification department. Maybe whoever it is that is involved in identifying and ranking and deciding about OL prospects on the team just isn't as good at it as whoever identifies WRs, DBs, positions where TT's team has been more productive draft-wise.
For a draft-heavy strategic approach like Ted Thompson follows, you need to be above the league average in your drafting quality. Not just in drafting "starters", but it drafting "high quality" starters. Everyone drafts a lot of starters. But a lot of those starters are, well, average or worse.
Ted and his team are above average at finding college WRs that will transition to above average in the pros. Unfortunately, they are below average at finding college OL who will do the same.
And if you can't be above average at finding college OL, and you are going to eschew major free agency spending at the positions, then you are going to have to not just draft OL regularly, you have to draft lots of them. (Which is why I always go "OL OL OL" to everyone's annoyance at draft time -- if Ted Thompson wants to get more or better hits with a department that is below average in one respect he either has to change the personnel team or he has to win with numbers.
Ted's been GM now for 9 drafts. On the OL he has drafted how many multi-year quality starters? Sitton everyone agrees on. That's one. Most fans add Bulaga. More than half I imagine would add Lang. Some would include Colledge. Many are still high on Sherrod's "potential." That's somewhere between three and five.
On the other hand, in most years he's tried two OL via the draft, sometimes three. I haven't the time to check all nine drafts, so lets assume an average over the nine years of 2.33 OL draft choices per year, or about 21 over the nine years of his GB drafting. In other words, his success rate lies between 1 in 7 and 1 in 4+. Let's make it 1 in five.
Hitting one in five when you draft two OL a year means that you're adding less than 1/2 a quality starter each year. To get 5 quality starters through the draft is going to take you 13 drafts. On the other hand, if you average draft three OL a year, it takes you 9; drafting 4 a year would still take seven.
To get the five at a rate of 2.33 draftees a year, just for chuckles? It's going to take 11 drafts. In other words, we shouldn't expect TT's draft strategy to get that starting line we want until...2015.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)