2024 NFL Draft: G/C Rankings
G Rankings:
1
Christian Haynes
School: Connecticut
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 317 lbs
Strengths:
Haynes is a physical guard that is loaded up with strength. You see him working hard each snap, not for a stalemate, but to generate a lot of push and to inflict some punishment on the opponent. He anchors extremely well, almost always holding firm once he is set. The power he generates in his hand strikes is enough to sometimes knock his opponent back. Haynes is a very good run blocker, and can be used in different ways. He is effective in a phone booth, sometimes pushing his opponent back several steps. Haynes is also solid on the move. I wouldn’t say he is an elite athlete, but his awareness on the field is good, and he has, for the most part, been able to execute his assignments.
Weaknesses:
Small arms and inconsistent leverage are a couple of things that might hurt his stock. He generally did a good job of mitigating these issues, but they did show up from time to time. Being too aggressive is something that would happen sometimes. Savvy rushers will, once in a while, bait him into lunging, which opens up a wider path for them to get core. Haynes will be entering the NFL after 6 years of college. As an overaged prospect, has he reached his peak?
Summary:
Haynes has the makings of a starting G, thanks largely to his size. He is a mauler that will pave big running lanes for the ball carrier. Athleticism is good, but maybe not great. Still, he is able to hold his own out in space. Haynes moves people as both a pass rusher and run blocker. He possesses the strength to plough them right out of the way in the run game, and to move people forward, even as a pass protector. His limited length and older age may cause teams to have second thoughts about him, but overall, I think Haynes can be a quality starter in the NFL.
| Grade: 82.3 | Round Grade: 2nd |
2
Cooper Beebe
School: Kansas State
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 322 lbs
Strengths:
Beebe is a mauler in the interior of the offensive line. He has the strength and demeanor to bully people on almost every play and never get tired of it. Anchoring is a strong suit of his. He is able to plant his feet and hold firm, making it tough for his opponent to generate any movement. More often than not, it is Beebe generating forward movement. As a run blocker he is certainly able to generate a lot of forward movement. He is at his best blocking in a phone booth, but has enough agility to execute shorter pulls, as well. Their offence actually had them doing that quite often during my exposures. Beebe is one of those guys who will look for work if he has a free second. His head is always on a swivel, and he’ll deliver a blow when he can to help a teammate out.
Weaknesses:
Beebe can execute basic pulls, but he does not have the athleticism to do things that are a bit more complicated. As a mover, he just looks a bit stiff, and the longer stuff would risk some missed blocks on his end. Beebe could stand to improve his hand technique and placement, as well as his pad level. This wasn’t a constant issue, but there were times where he put himself in recovery situations because he lost leverage earlier in the rep, which put him in a bad spot. Poor arm length is something that contributes to some of the leverage struggles, and could cause some problems for him at the next level too.In pass protection, these limitations would also contribute to some trouble containing his rush edges.
Summary:
Beebe projects as a starting G at the next level. He may not be for everyone due to relatively average athleticism and short arms. However, he can do some basic move stuff, which will be enough for some teams. His strength and demeanor are what will attract teams the most. His strength shows in both the run and pass game, and he’s got that attitude that coaches love. Beebe will still need to refine his technique, but he should still be able to start right away, even if a few growing pains are present.
| Grade: 80.1 | Round Grade: 2nd |
3
Brandon Coleman
School: TCU
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
Coleman is a big bodied offensive lineman with the traits to play effectively at multiple OL spots. He might not necessarily be overpowering, but his frame is able to absorb a lot of power, which still makes it tough for bullrushes to beat him. And his hand strikes are forceful when he lands them, often proving to be a significant disruption to his opponent’s rush plan. His testing numbers were elite, but I don’t see that kind of athleticism on tape. Still, he has good athleticism for his size and is able to do some stuff in space. Coleman plays aggressively in the run game and is able to create some movement. He has great length, which helps him in battles for leverage.
Weaknesses:
Coleman is a fine athlete for his size, but his reactive athleticism looks like it could be a question mark. He’s got a naturally big frame, and quick movements can be a bit tougher for him at times, despite what the combine testing shows. This isn’t to say that athleticism is a weakness of his, but he isn’t elite in this category. Technique is the biggest issue for Coleman, especially when it comes to lunging. His tape is littered with lunges, both in the pass game and run game. He is really eager to make contact, which is good at times. But when his positioning isn’t there to make it happen, he can’t lean in anyways. This allows defenders to use a push/pull to throw him off balance completely, and it can completely kill a play.
Summary:
Coleman has the frame, length, strength, and enough athleticism to become a quality starter. He matches up well against power, and can quietly make some nice blocks on the move, even if they are a bit shallower. Technique will be the big thing that determines his success in the NFL. And I wouldn’t say so much that it is a matter of learning the correct technique, but rather eliminating bad habits, like lunging, and doing the right things more consistently. With NFL coaching, this should be fixable. Coleman projects as a starter at the next level, and his versatility could earn him an earlier selection, come draft day.
| Grade: 79.7 | Round Grade: 3rd |
4
Zak Zinter
School: Michigan
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 309 lbs
Strengths:
Zinter is a smart player who plays with good technique. He was coached up well at Michigan and it shows. Could almost pass off as a veteran. His footwork is very smooth and controlled. Zinter does well to stay square to his opponent and keep a low centre of gravity, which helps his chances of winning the leverage battle. I wouldn’t say he has elite strength, but it is good. He anchors well and generally can matchup against power. As a run blocker, Zinter is able to create forward push to open up lanes. He is capable of executing shorter pulls when asked.
Weaknesses:
Zinter isn’t the most athletic player, which is one of the bigger weaknesses of his game. There are instances where quicker players threaten to leak through his rush edge, and he has a harder time redirecting to contain them. In some instances, they might get through, and in others, he might be forced to take a holding penalty. Beyond the quicker stuff, Zinter’s best use would not be executing pulls or blocking in space. He seems to be a big deficient when it comes to lateral agility. Length is also a bit of an issue. It is closer to average, and will make the leverage battles tougher, even if he does play with good technique. Zinter is entering the NFL off a broken tibia and fibula. Medicals will be the biggest question that he has to answer in the pre draft process.
Summary:
Zinter projects as a starting guard in the NFL thanks to his strength and efficient technique. He can move people as a pass and run blocker, and he has the football IQ to consistently remain in good position. His average length will limit his overall upside, and average athleticism will make him more of a scheme specific prospect. Nevertheless, he does a lot of the fundamental things well, and has the makings of a starting G.
| Grade: 79.6 | Round Grade: 3rd |
5
Sataoa Laumea
School: Utah
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 319 lbs
Strengths:
Laumea has a good blend of size, strength, and athleticism for the interior. He holds up well against bull rushes, refusing to give up ground, even against powerful rushers. His athleticism, meanwhile, is also an asset to his game. From the inside, his kickslide is smooth, and he has good enough agility and reactive athleticism to not get beat by twitchy rushers or rushers with an abundance of rush moves. He can create push as a run blocker in a phone booth, or get out into space and land his blocks on moving targets.
Weaknesses:
Laumea has the measurables, but is missing a lot when it comes to technique. He plays at a high pad level, which sometimes negates any strength advantage he might have over an opponent. There are a lot of oversets in his game, which is begging opponents to use counter moves on him. And they have used them, with success. Laumea will need to improve his timing and placement of his hand strikes in order for them to be more effective. He doesn’t have the longest arms, so finding other ways to maximize his leverage will be important.
Summary:
Laumea has the tools to be a quality starter in the NFL. He has plus strength and is a good athlete, meaning not only does he have upside, he can also be scheme versatile. You see the flashes of him anchoring in pass protection, moving people in the run game, and blocking in space. However, inconsistencies exist in his game due to poor technique in various areas. He will have to make these improvements, and will likely be a backup early on. If he can fix the issues, there is a good chance he’ll be starting in the future.
| Grade: 74.4 | Round Grade: 4th |
6
Christian Mahogany
School: Boston College
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 314 lbs
Strengths:
Mahogany brings a nice combination of size, strength, and athleticism, giving him a pretty high ceiling as an NFL player. He blocks with intensity, and can deliver a mean hand strike which knocks his opponent back. I don’t see elite athleticism, but it is sufficient. He can pull across the line and also stack blocks vertically. His success as a move blocker actually might depend on this intensity that he has. His motor was running higher on some of these plays than others, and it made a big difference in his success level. A good amount of movement is created when he is blocking in a more condensed area. He has the strength and traits to be effective in a variety of ways. Mahogany has some versatility, having played both guard spots in the past.
Weaknesses:
Technique is an area where Mahogany will have to improve at the next level. There are a lot of oversets on tape that allow his opponent to counter to the other side and get by him. Rush moves in general were an area of weakness in his game. Stopping them, that is. He struggled a lot with pass rushers that combined quickness and savviness. He needs to be more patient and calculated in his approach, and avoid lunging in and falling out of position.
Summary:
Mahogany has the strength to bully opponents and enough athleticism to be scheme versatile. However, he is still a work in progress when it comes to technique. His hand placement and patience as a run blocker will need to improve. Also, he will need to find a way to better deal with savvy pass rushers. There is work to be done, but the developmental upside is there to be a starter, possibly within the next year or two.
| Grade: 72.5 | Round Grade: 4th |
7
Isaiah Adams
School: Illinois
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 315 lbs
Strengths:
Adams plays a tough brand of football, looking to punish any player that he comes into contact with. His anchor strength is good, and his wide frame absorbs contact really well. He is not someone that is easy to get around. Adams generates a good amount of drive from his legs as a run blocker, and is able to move defensive linemen off to the side, which opens up a lane for the runner. His game is better suited for the inside, but Adams does have experience playing tackle as well, including most of this past season. The versatility is a good thing for his draft stock.
Weaknesses:
Adams isn’t the quickest player on tape, and this has opened up opportunities for defensive players to take advantage. He isn’t super smooth in his slide, and defenders are able to win via his rush edge. Defenders with good hand technique are able to have some success against him, and there are times where he struggles to play with leverage, further opening up opportunities to technically savvy players. As a run blocker, he displays strength and power. However, instances of whiffs and lunges are also mixed in with the good plays. While he can execute shallower pulls, he can look a bit sluggish getting into space, and he has a tougher time landing blocks on moving targets.
Summary:
Adams has the size and strength to be a good interior player, and his experience on the outside could allow him to be an emergency fill in there as a depth player. He can neutralize bull rushes and create movement in the run game. However, his poor technique and inconsistencies playing with leverage have led to quick wins for opponents. He is also a more limited athlete, which caps his upside in both phases. Adams will need to figure out how to better protect his rush edges. Improving his technique could help with that. At the next level, he projects as a good depth player, who may be able to earn a starting job at some point if he can show enough improvement.
| Grade: 70.2 | Round Grade: 4th |
8
Dominick Puni
School: Kansas
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
Puni is a versatile player, having made starts at LG, LT, and RT. He projects as a G at the next level, but the versatility is something that coaches like a lot. His athleticism is an asset on the field. You see the quickness he has to redirect, when needed, and also to go out and block in the open field. He has a big frame and a solid reach for an interior player. Overall, there is a nice amount of upside here for offensive line coaches to develop.
Weaknesses:
Puni has size and athleticism, but looks very raw on tape. His strength is a bit lacking, and he can get pushed around a bit. Adding to it will be important. Puni’s biggest issues come as a result of poor technique. His footwork is extremely sloppy, and athletic rushers seem to get him all crossed up. Puni generally plays with good hand placement, but his strikes leave a lot to be desired. They don’t stun his opponents like they should, and they are able to counter with strikes of their own, which usually are more effective. His anchor isn’t great, and he has trouble sustaining blocks. Opponents are able to quickly win a hands battle and just slip right off of it. In the run game, Puni shows potential thanks to his athleticism. However, he takes bad angles and lunges quite a bit.
Summary:
Puni enters the NFL with developmental upside. He has size and athleticism, plus a reach that is good for an interior lineman. His inside/outside versatility will also appeal to teams looking for depth. However, he is a project at this point. Puni will need to get stronger to better handle power. The biggest thing he’ll need to fix is his technique. There are big flaws in several areas, which will have to be corrected in order for him to be trusted in game action. The upside is there, though.
| Grade: 65.8 | Round Grade: 5th |
9
Trevor Keegan
School: Michigan
Ht//Wt: 6’5”, 310 lbs
Strengths:
Keegan is a player who wins with pure strength at the point of attack. He can stand up power rushers like a brick ball, rarely conceding any ground at all. As a run blocker, he is excellent in a phone booth, like a bulldozer, pushing away anything in its path. He has a good understanding of leverage in the in game, and is able to use his oppoentns’ momentum against them, and angle them away from the ball carrier. As a move blocker, when he is able to make contact, it can be devastating for his opponent.
Weaknesses:
Keegan is lacking when it comes to athletic traits. As a result, he is a scheme specific player, who will be at his best on a unit that runs primarily power concepts. In pass protection, there are times where he can fail to secure his rush edge. Rushers with quickness can win with inside counters, as he has a hard time recovering when his opponent gains an advantage at some point in the rep. The reactive athleticism isn’t there. In the run game, Keegan is best starting close to home, where he can serve as a mauler. He can be sluggish getting out into space, and has inconsistencies landing his blocks. From a technique perspective, there are inconsistencies with his hand placement. This is especially noticeable in the run game. Something he’ll have to tweak. Keegan’s arm length is well below average for his position, which could make it difficult for him to win leverage battles at the next level.
Summary:
Keegan might not have the super high ceiling that teams would want earlier on in the draft, as he is lacking the athleticism to be relied on to perform with consistency in all situations. That being said, you often see mid round offensive lineman with strength and nastiness outperform their draft stock. Keegan seems no different. If he doesn’t end up as a serviceable starter, he should be a good depth option.
| Grade: 65.3 | Round Grade: 5th |
10
Gottlieb Ayedze
School: Maryland
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 308 lbs
Strengths:
Ayedze is a great athlete as an offensive lineman. He is quick into his pass sets, and they are pretty smooth throughout the duration of the rep. He can handle quickness, and also has the reactive athleticism to get to stunts or blitzes before they can do any damage. Ayedze is relatively new to the sport, but has made strides over the last few years, and figures to continue. Given his level of experience, I was impressed with his technique. He stays square to his opponent, and rarely overreacts to get himself out of position. Ayedze is an asset in the run game when asked to block on the move. He pulls quickly, and on vertical assignments, he takes good angles to maximize his chances of success.
Weaknesses:
Ayedze does not play with much power, and getting stronger will be crucial for him to make it at the next level. There are a lot of times where he can lose ground, or end up in stalemates. It is similar in the run game, where he is much better suited blocking in space. Definitely isn’t someone who will create push on a consistent basis. Overall, his technique is pretty good, but one bad thing I noticed was that he often got his pad level up too high. This was also something that got him pushed back at times, and will need to be corrected.
Summary:
Ayedze has the upside to be a good player, but still needs time to put all the pieces together. His technique is pretty solid, but still has some things to iron out. He will need to get a lot stronger in order to handle the power he’ll face at the NFL level. As well, a transition from tackle to guard seems likely for him at the next level, which will provide an additional adjustment period. It will take some time and patience, but he could be a quality depth player or even a starter at some point in the future, if he can make the necessary improvements.
| Grade: 62.6 | Round Grade: 6th |
11
Trente Jones
School: Michigan
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 305 lbs
Strengths:
Jones is a great athlete who glides around the field. He pulls across the line effortlessly and can quickly get upfield to stack blocks. Is an asset on screen passes. The quickness to redirect in pass protection is there, even when matched up against twitchy opponents. When lined up at OT, he has the athletic talent to mirror pass rushers around the bend. Jones has a pretty strong punch that can disrupt the rush plan of his opponent.
Weaknesses:
Jones has limited starting experience after primarily serving as a depth player/6th OL. He entered the starting lineup later in the year when Zak Zinter got hurt. While he played OT when he entered the starting lineup, poor arm length will likely force him to transition to the inside. As well, Jones is lacking ideal strength and mass for the position. He gets pushed back too often and isn’t consistently able to anchor down against power. Further, Jones doesn’t help himself by playing with bad technique. He abandons his footwork when he gets flustered, and will often whiff on his blocks in space after lunging to make contact.
Summary:
Jones has athleticism that will appeal to teams looking for a developmental offensive lineman. However, beyond that, he is a project. Jones will need to add strength and improve his technique in several areas in order to reach his ceiling. That ceiling is a starting spot, but most likely, he will end up as a depth player at some point. Early on, the practice squad might be where he ends up while he continues to develop.
| Grade: 58.0 | Round Grade: 7th |
12
Mason McCormick
School: South Dakota State
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 309 lbs
Strengths:
When watching his tape, there are two boxes that McCormick checks off right away – tough as nails and extremely athletic. With those two traits, it is easy to see the high ceiling that he has. He is always looking to put people to the ground. Force is a mainstay in his game from start to finish. The definition of a glass eater. With his outstanding quickness, McCormick is capable of mirroring any opponent side to side. As well, he can get up the field in a hurry, and deliver a punishing blow at the end.
Weaknesses:
As high as the highs are to his game, the lows are just as low. From a technical perspective, McCormick is very, very raw. His footwork can be all over the place at times, and his tape is full of lunges, oversets, poor hand placement etc. Despite being a strong player, sustaining blocks is something he hasn;t been as consistent at. As good as the traits are, he allows way too many opportunities for penetration. And something to remember is that he played at a lower level of college football. So needless to say, it will be a pretty big jump for him, and he’ll need a lot of time and patience to work out all the problems.
Summary:
McCormick is a late round developmental project who will need a lot of patience and time to reach his full potential. He oozes potential, with outstanding athleticism, good strength, and a finisher’s mentality. His technique is where most of the problems are, and there is a lot to clean up. He is a high ceiling, low floor prospect. Under the right guidance, he can one day be a quality starter.
| Grade: 57.9 | Round Grade: 7th |
13
KT Leveston
School: Kansas State
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 326 lbs
Strengths:
Leveston is a quick player who displays the necessary agility to redirect in pass protection. He’s got this sort of springiness to him when he is pulling or blocking vertically up field. He moves with efficiency and is able to get to his target and make his block. Leveston’s quick feet allow him to react to stunts and late blitzes in time to neutralize the attack.
Weaknesses:
During his time as a starter, he was at tackle, but likely moves inside at the next level. Leveston doesn’t do a good job of playing with leverage. His pad level is too high too often, and he allows his opponent to get under him. He also struggles to contain opponents who are scrappy with their hands. Opponents are able to swipe his hands away and then get multiple strikes in to knock him off balance. His footwork is also very sloppy, and he abandons it when in trouble. These technical issues sometimes cause him to get beat around his rush edge, despite having the quickness to protect it. His technique will need a lot of work, and Leveston will also need to get stronger, as he transitions to the next level.
Summary:
Leveston brings some athletic upside as a pass protector and run blocker, and he has a big frame that can still support more muscle mass. The tools are there to develop, but it could be quite the project. In addition to needing to get stronger, Leveston will have to significantly improve his technique, even to become a reliable backup. He is a back-end of the roster guy or potential practice squander early on, but he could begin to rise up the depth chart later on if he can make the necessary improvements.
| Grade: 55.5 | Round Grade: 7th |
C Rankings:
1
Jackson Powers-Johnson
School: Oregon
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 328 lbs
Strengths:
Powers-Johnson is a high IQ player who also possesses the physical tools to be a quality starter at C. His strength is in the upper tier. On tape, you see him consistently handle power, rarely looking overmatched. In the run game, he can create some movement and redirect people away from the ball carrier. His feet are pretty quick. Reactionary athleticism doesn’t look like an issue to me, and handling a variety of rush moves should not be a problem for him. Powers-Johnson has a smooth kickslide, which allows him to mirror the rush of his opponent. In space, he looks like a good mover. Lateral agility isn’t elite but is good, and he has the speed to play in the open field. He can stack blocks vertically, and really get some power into them. His impressive Senior Bowl performance should boost his stock.
Weaknesses:
Powers-Johnson has most of the physical tools, but the one he is missing is arm length. For a high end prospect, ideally they would be a bit longer. I wouldn’t say he has any issues that pop up too frequently, but there are instances of him losing the leverage battle against longer opponents. As well, there are times where he’ll fail to get his hands on a gap shooting DT, and give up pressure via his rush edge. Another thing is that there are occasions where he gets his pad level up a little too high, and can get driven back from his chest.
Summary:
Powers-Johnson has the strength, athleticism, and IQ to be a high level starter in the NFL. His play on the field has been consistent, and his tools project favourably to the next level. Ideall, he’d have longer arms, but the issues have been relatively infrequent. He’ll have a few technical things to clean up, but Powers-Johnson should be able to start on day 1.
| Grade: 86.2 | Round Grade: 1st |
2
Sedrick Van Pran-Granger
School: Georgia
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 298 lbs
Strengths:
Van Pran-Granger is a solid all around C who can operate in a variety of schemes. He isn’t the biggest guy, but I was pleasantly surprised with the amount of strength he showed. His ability to create more movement may vary depending on the matchup, but there were times where he had his opponent on the ground, which I was not expecting. He generally handles power well, even against bigger opponents, and he seems to block well in a phone booth in the run game too. Van Pran-Granger is also a solid athlete. He is capable of pulling and also fairly good at getting vertically up the field to stack up blocks and take people out of the play. There is some noticeable pop in his punches, which can stunt the attack of his opponent. Van Pran-granger reads the play well and is quick to see things that he needs to address, like stunts or blitzes that are meant to cause confusion.
Weaknesses:
For the most part, he doesn’t let him affect him, but I think size will still be a question mark for him heading into the NFL. Van Pran-Granger is battle tested against tough college competition, but it still will be a step up after he is drafted, so the question at least has to be asked. As a player, he plays extremely aggressively, which has its pros and cons. On the bad side, there are times where he will fail to latch on and instead end up off balance and out of position. The overaggressiveness shows up in the pass and run game. In the run game especially when blocking in space. Playing with more control is a necessary adjustment that he’ll have to make to his game. As well, Van Pran-Granger has extremely short arms, even for an interior position. Defenders are able to keep the gap between them large, which prevents him from engaging fully. This allows the defender to push him aside and penetrate into the backfield. His quick feet somewhat mitigate this at times, but there will be issues at times that are unavoidable.
Summary:
Van Pran-Granger is a solid all around C who possesses the strength and athleticism to be a solid starter in the league. He is undersized, but with the strength he shows on tape, his size, more than likely, will be out of sight and out of mind when you watch it. His short arms is a legitimate issue that will be unavoidable at the next level. However, he does his best to mitigate it. As he transitions to the next level, Van Pran-Granger will need to work on playing a more controlled game. But he has the tools to be a solid starter.
| Grade: 78.6 | Round Grade: 3rd |
3
Hunter Nourzad
School: Penn State
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 317 lbs
Strengths:
Nourad is a solid athlete with the ability to make blocks on the move. He has quick enough feet to find and hit moving targets. On tape, you see enough quickness to slide smoothly and match any moves made by his opponent. His frame is wide enough that he is able to absorb quite a bit of power, even if he might not be the stronger player in the matchup. Nourad has a powerful strike that can daze his opponent for a second. As well, he plays at a centred pad level which helps him in his battle for leverage. While not perfect in either phase, I didn’t really see any quick losses. Nourad is a competitive player who makes opponents work for their pay.
Weaknesses:
Nourad has solid strength, but beefy NT’s are still able to push him back into the pocket. In a general sense, I wouldn’t say his strength is so much of an issue, as much as it is his grip strength. There are times where he has a hard time sustaining his anchor, before eventually conceding ground. Nourad’s hand placement is something that will need work. At times it seems like he kind of leans into his blocks, leading with his shoulder and forearm, rather than squaring up his frame. This allows defenders to penetrate through the gap and leak through his rush edge. As well, he can be slow to detect stunts/blitzes. In the run game, there are times where he could take better angles, which would limit missed targets, and lessen the need to make split second reactions when he is too far out of position.
Summary:
Overall, Nourad is a solid C prospect who can be a quality backup, or potentially a starter, with some development. I think he matches up better against twitchy pass rushers, where his quickness will shine and his strength is good enough to match theirs. But the bigger, more powerful interior linemen could give him trouble. Nourad will have to work on his technique and awareness as a blocker, and also look to take better angles as a pass blocker. There is work to be done, but he can be a solid player, if unspectacular. Having experience at multiple positions also helps his case as a depth player.
| Grade: 74.4 | Round Grade: 4th |
4
Beaux Limmer
School: Arkansas
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 302 lbs
Strengths:
Limmer is athletic and nimble for his 6’5” size. His kickslide is pretty smooth, and he has the ability to mirror twitchy rushers and protect his rush edges from gap shooters. The IQ and quickness is there not only to identify stunts and blitzes, but also to effectively pick them up. He does a good job of blocking in space, when asked to. Limmer is able to bounce out of his stance, quickly locating his target and landing his block. And he doesn’t just stop at one. He’ll stack them up. He is a C primarily, but has experience at G too. Having versatility never hurts.
Weaknesses:
Limmer is tall for a C and has some problems when it comes to keeping his pad level down. Defenders are able to get under him and push him back into the pocket in these instances. As well, Limmer has some trouble winning hand battles at the line of scrimmage. Heis is prone to having his hands swiped away, before being knocked off balance and allowing his opponent to leak through. Opponents have also been able to beat him with the push/pull technique. I wouldn’t say he is a weak player, but he could stand to add some muscle mass to his frame. As well, these technical issues have made it hard at times for him to sustain his blocks.
Summary:
Limmer is a tall, athletic C with the ability to smoothly mirror rushers and redirect to newly developing threats. He gets into space well, and has decent strength, but adding more mass to his frame would help. The biggest thing he’ll need to work on is playing at a lower pad level and being more effective with his hands, in order to improve his leverage. Limmer has future starting potential, but probably isn’t a plug and play guy.
| Grade: 73.2 | Round Grade: 4th |
5
Jacob Monk
School: Duke
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 308 lbs
Strengths:
Monk is a highly athletic player, with a visible jump in his step on nearly every rep. He glides into his kickslide and can effortlessly get himself into good position as a move blocker. Not only does he get out there quickly, but he puts some juice into his blocks, really looking to lay down the hammer. His strength is decent enough to handle mid-sized DT’s who go at him with power. I wouldn’t say Monk is super physically imposing, but he can anchor against most opponents. Monk is a versatile player, making starts at both C and G at various points in his college career.
Weaknesses:
Too often, Monk gets caught leaning or lunging, and will find defenders taking advantage of him being out of position. As well, he needs to do a better job keeping his pad level down, so as to not let defenders get under him. A high pad level and poor hand placement has given defenders an advantage in some instances. I’d like to see him get stronger, as he transitions to the next level. He doesn’t often get dominated by power, but beefier interior linemen can give him some trouble. As well, being able to create more push would provide a nice boost to his game.
Summary:
Monk is a worthwhile mid-late round developmental option at C or G. I love not only his athleticism, but the demeanor that he plays the game with. He will need to get stronger in order to back up the forceful style that he likes to play, and matchup better against some of the bigger players he’ll face on the inside. Technical improvements will also have to be made. But overall, he offers the potential to be a good depth player that can play multiple positions, with a shot at starting if things go right.
| Grade: 66.1 | Round Grade: 5th |
6
Zach Frazier
School: West Virginia
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
Frazier plays the game with good technique, sitting at a good pad level and also doing his best to square up to his opponent. He’s got some pop in his punch, and you can sense a bit of nastiness in his game. Frazier will sometimes give multiple strikes consecutively, knocking his opponent off balance. His strength is an asset to his game. For the most part, he is effective in neutralizing power rushers, and creating movement in a phone booth as a run blocker.
Weaknesses:
Frazier is a below average athlete for the position, which causes some notable issues. He was used as a blocker in space quite a bit in my exposures. However, he seemed to have consistent trouble reaching his target. He lacks both the speed and quickness to be effective in this area. Frazier is also lacking the arm length necessary to play with leverage against certain players. And this issue combined with his athleticism makes a bad recipe. There will be times where he’ll be prone to some quick losses, without possessing the ability to recover.
Summary:
Frazier has the strength and demeanor to set a decent anchor and create some push in the run game. However, there are limitations to his game that might prove too much to overcome, if the goal is to become a starter. He plays with below average athleticism and his poor arm length, both of which will lead to issues. His best shot at starting will be in a power scheme, but even if he isn’t starting, he has the IQ and toughness to catch on as a depth player.
| Grade: 64.1 | Round Grade: 6th |
7
Tanor Bortolini
School: Wisconsin
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 303 lbs
Strengths:
Bortolini is a scrappy player who possesses the athleticism to have success in certain schemes. His athletic ability is the highlight of his tape. He is an easy mover, showing the ability to pull across the line and seal up blocks, as well as the ability to navigate his way into the open field. Bortolini is a technically clean player, keeping his pad level down, frame squared up to his opponent, and hands to the chest, while also playing with good footwork. His quickness allows him to redirect and adjust to different tricks that are thrown at him by pass rushers and defensive coordinators. Bortolini has C/G versatility, which is valuable for a depth player.
Weaknesses:
Bortolini has below average grip strength and trouble sustaining his blocks. He can play with some pop at times, but does get overpowered in some instances, as well. You won’t see him creating forward movement very often. INstead, he looks to use his athleticism to mirror and stay in the way of his opponent. Stalemates are generally the best that you’ll get when it comes to matching power with power. His arm length is also below average, which has, and will continue to cause problems for him. Bortolini has trouble fully engaging with the defender because he is unable to lend his hands and drive.
Weaknesses:
Bortolini has good movement skills, giving him some ability to make blocks on the move in the run game. His reactive athleticism is good in the pass game, and he isn’t someone that will be confused easily. All that being said, his strength is average at best. Further, he lacks ideal arm length, which should cause the same issues he has of engaging and sustaining blocks to continue. Nevertheless, he has enough skills and a high enough football IQ to potentially be a good depth player.
| Grade: 63.8 | Round Grade: 6th |
8
Nick Gargiulo
School: South Carolina
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 318 lbs
Strengths:
Gargiulo possesses solid athleticism, showing the ability to smoothly slide from side to side in order to match his opponent’s rush attack. He gets across the line quickly for pulls, and is an asset as a vertical blocker, whether in the run game or the screen game. His arm length is good for the C position, and he is able to use his reach to out leverage opponents on a lot of his blocks. Gargiulo brings tremendous versatility, making starts at C, G, and OT.
Weaknesses:
Gargiulo leaves some to be desired when it comes to strength. There were a lot of occasions where his opponent was able to create forward push, and get back towards the QB. He doesn’t get overpowered terribly, but even without getting blown up, a lot of his reps weren’t good. Gargiulo also doesn’t generate much push himself, even on reps where he won the matchup. As well, there are instances of lunging, which see him end up out of position.
Summary:
Gargiulo didn’t have many terrible losses, but didn’t generate much on the good side either. His tape consisted of a lot of stalemates and modest losses, with some modest wins mixed in too. But he currently lacks the strength that would make me feel comfortable with him seeing game action early on at the next level. He will need to get stronger in the weight room, and fix up technique. Gargiulo projects as a depth player at the next level, but has enough athletic ability to potentially outperform that.
| Grade: 59.8 | Round Grade: 7th |
9
Drake Nugent
School: Michigan
Ht/Wt: 6’2”, 298 lbs
Strengths:
Nugent is a smart player who rarely finds himself out of position. He is instinctive when it comes to picking up blitzes and stunts that are thrown at the line. Although he is a bit light for an interior offensive lineman, his strength is sufficient. He is able to handle power with relative effectiveness. As well, Nugent is able to create some run game push from a phone booth.
Weaknesses:
Nugent, outside of having solid strength, is lacking the traits that would project him into a future starter. His athleticism is underwhelming on tape, and he can have trouble redirecting in pass protection, and hitting moving targets as a run blocker. His lack of length creates further issues, where he is unable to play with leverage, and rushers are able to work their way around his rush edge with good hand technique.
Summary:
Nugent has the strength and football IQ to make it as a depth player in the league, and possibly outperform his eventual draft slot. However, he lacks athleticism and length, which likely caps his ceiling. He is unlikely to be a starter at the next level, but his experience on a National Championship winning team should not be discounted. With some development, he could end up as a backup that makes spot starts.
| Grade: 54.1 | Round Grade: UDFA |
G Rankings:
- Christian Haynes (82.3, Rd 2)
- Cooper Beebe (80.1, Rd 2)
- Brandon Coleman (79.7, Rd 3)
- Zak Zinter (79.6, Rd 3)
- Sataoa Laumea (74.4, Rd 4)
- Christian Mahogany (72.5, Rd 4)
- Isaiah Adams (70.2, Rd 4)
- Dominick Puni (65.8, Rd 5)
- Trevor Keegan (65.3, Rd 5)
- Gottlieb Ayedze (62.6, Rd 6)
- Trente Jones (58.0, Rd 7)
- Mason McCormick (57.9, Rd 7)
- KT Leveston (55.5, Rd 7)
C Rankings:
- Jackson Powers-Johnson (86.2, Rd 1)
- Sedrick Van Pran-Granger (78.6, Rd 3)
- Hunter Nourzad (74.4, Rd 4)
- Beaux Limmer (73.2, Rd 4)
- Jacob Monk (66.1, Rd 5)
- Zach Frazier (64.1, Rd 6)
- Tanor Bortolini (63.8, Rd 6)
- Nick Gargiulo (59.8, Rd 7)
- Drake Nugent (54.1, UDFA)
