2022 NFL Draft: G/C Rankings
G Rankings:
1
Zion Johnson (Boston College) 6’3″, 312 lbs |
Stengths
Johnson is one of the most versatile players in this draft class. He projects as a guard at the next level, but can also play C, and has experience playing tackle. Strength is quite good. He is able to hold up against bull rushes without getting pushed back towards the QB. Johnson does well to create push in the run game. He operates well in a phone booth, as opponents have a tough time moving him off his spot. Showed some glimpses of good straight line speed, which was evident in some of his downfield blocks. Johnson is a smart player who keeps his head on a swivel. He is able to pass off his assignment and seamlessly move on to the next. When standing alone, he looks for work. Johnson also does well when double teaming.
Weaknesses
Johnson does have a few limitations that show up on tape. Lateral agility is a question mark, which will have an impact on his effectiveness as a pull blocker. Additionally, quicker pass rushers do expose this weakness from time to time. Johnson would benefit from playing with a bit more aggressiveness. There are times where he won’t immediately engage, and he gives his opponent a bit more room to operate. Quicker rushers have taken advantage of this. On occasion, his pad level can raise up a bit high as he gets out of his stance, which has caused him to get pushed back once or twice.
Summary
Johnson is a good OL prospect that should have no problem stepping into a starting lineup in his rookie year. The strength is there to succeed right away, and his versatility will certainly appeal to coaches. He does have a few technical things to clean up, but nothing major. Limited lateral agility is a weakness of his, but that can be worked around as well.
Grade: 85.3 | Round Grade: 1st |
2
Kenyon Green (Texas A&M) 6’4″, 323 lbs |
Stengths
Green has a solid blend of traits and is also a versatile player. He saw time at both guard spots and at tackle. I thought he didn’t get enough credit for what he did on the outside. His quickness was better than I anticipated, and his anchor ability was good as well. That said, he’ll play guard at the next level, and the traits are even better for the interior. He shows the ability to play with a road grader mentality, and has the strength to dominate near the line. Athleticism is solid and he can get out into space. As mentioned, you got a glimpse of his athletic capabilities when he played tackle. In pass protection, the anchoring strength is there, even against stronger interior linemen, and this natural ability should translate to the NFL right away.
Weaknesses
I love the traits and the peaks of his game, but sloppiness and mental lapses were a bit more common than I would have liked. Interior rushers that are scrappy and aggressive with their hands gave him some trouble. When he wasn’t able to engage and start pushing his man forward, he sometimes found himself getting pushed back. Green needs to improve his spatial awareness. There were times where he caught on to the rush plan too late, and wasn’t able to recover quick enough. In some of these situations, he would revert to holding. As well, Green could stand to take better angles in the run game.
Summary
Green is a powerful player that possesses an underrated athletic profile. He shows the ability to dominate even the strongest linemen and can plough guys out of the way in both phases of the game. He will need to clean up his hand technique in order to limit the losses to quicker, craftier pass rushers. As well, spatial awareness needs to be improved and the penalties need to be cut down.
Grade: 83.0 | Round Grade: 2nd |
3
Jamaree Salyer (Georgia) 6’3″, 321 lbs |
Stengths
Salyer is a big, beefy lineman with the traits to be a successful starter at various positions along the OL. He played tackle at Georgia but may end up inside at guard due to average length. Nevertheless, he should be a good starter at either one. Salyer is a very strong player and absorbs contact without getting pushed back. He showed solid agility in his pass sets as a tackle, and the solid label should improve to good with a move inside. He is someone that should be able to handle defensive tackles of all sorts.
Weaknesses
Salyer, despite having a lot of playing experience, is still a bit raw in terms of technique. He’ll need to be coached up. Lateral agility doesn’t look as good when he is in space as it does in his pass sets. He sometimes fails to reach his target. And when he did reach his target, there were times where he lunged and got very little into his block. He needs to do a better job of following through. Played tackle in college. May still end up there in the NFL, but he doesn’t have ideal length for the position.
Summary
Salyer brings good size, strength, and toughness to the position. He isn’t the most outstanding athlete, but he moves well enough to be able to handle himself relatively well against speed. As he makes the transition, he’ll need to improve his technique, and improve his finishing when he is blocking in space. Lunges and overextensions will need to be cut out. Salyer has the potential to be a good starter in the NFL. It wouldn’t shock me if he starts as a rookie, but there could be some growing pains.
Grade: 82.4 | Round Grade: 2nd |
4
Ed Ingram (LSU) 6’3″, 307 lbs |
Stengths
Ingram is a good all around player. He is reliable in just about every aspect. He possesses solid athleticism and is able to block in space and mirror interior pass rushers. Ingram plays with calm feet and he keeps his frame square to his opponent. Technique in general is really sound and balance is good. Strength is pretty solid and he has shown the ability to anchor down against power. Ingram is a smart player. He did have the odd mixup, but usually pickup stunts and blitzes with no problem.
Weaknesses
While Ingram is a good, well rounded player, I don’t think I see that one elite trait. Everything is good, but everything could also be better. This means that elite players, no matter what their forte is, will probably be able to beat him. Athleticism is good, but not top tier. His strength is in the same category, and much of the anchoring success came from good technique. He will need to get stronger in the NFL. As well, I’d like to see a bit more push in the run game.
Summary
Ingram possesses a well rounded skill set. He has anchoring ability but also enough athleticism to hold his own against quicker rushers, and to block in space. He doesn’t have that elite trait that would have been his calling card, and upper tier defensive linemen could give him trouble. That said, he is technically sound, and should be reliable enough to be a solid starter. If he is able to add strength and bulk to his frame without losing any quickness, he could take his game to another level.
Grade: 82.2 | Round Grade: 2nd |
5
Logan Bruss (Wisconsin) 6’5″, 309 lbs |
Stengths
Bruss has a good combination of strength and athleticism. Played a lot of tackle last year at Wisconsin, but will move back to guard in the NFL, which is where he spent time previously. On the outside, he handled himself relatively well against Michigan’s edge rushers, if you’re looking how his play translates back inside to the guard position. Bruss has the strength to neutralise bull rushes and create lanes for the ball carrier. He also has the athleticism to block on the move.
Weaknesses
Bruss has good physical traits but needs a lot of technical work. From the tackle position, he did not fare well against speed, despite being a good athlete himself. He would abandon his footwork and find himself chasing with his back facing the line of scrimmage. This weakness will be lessened by moving back inside, but it will still show up against athletic rushers if not corrected. He also loses the hands battle too often, allowing his opponent to engage first and gain the needed leverage to push him back.
Summary
Bruss is an intriguing player with his size, strength, and athleticism. He has the potential to be an upper tier starter at guard. That said, in order to reach his potential, he will need to show significant improvement in his footwork and hand technique/timing.
Grade: 77.6 | Round Grade: 3rd |
6
Dylan Parham (Memphis) 6’3″, 311 lbs |
Stengths
Parham is a smaller, athletic guard with surprisingly solid strength and anchor ability. Starting with the athleticism, he is able to mirror athletic rushers, and adjust his positioning on the fly as various moves are attempted. While he isn’t the strongest guy you’ll see, he is stronger than his size would indicate. He is able to end up in stalemates with bigger defensive tackles. Parham did well against another highly touted prospect in Logan Hall. As a run blocker, he is at his best on the move, where his good angles and quick feet help him get up field and keep running lanes open. His technique is good for the most part. His hand placement is generally good and he has good timing.
Weaknesses
The smaller size makes him a risky pickup. Even if Parham did better than expected in terms of anchor ability, he won’t earn bonus points in the NFL for being strong “for his size.” Strength will need to be added. Many of his best reps in both phases were only stalemates. On one hand, he did this against a good prospect in Hall. But the competition will be even stiffer in the NFL, as he goes against developed veterans. His technique is good for the most part, but there was a small thing with his footwork that bothered me a little. He’d either take a step back or stay in place as he absorbs contact. This limits the amount of push he is able to generate. I’d like to see him drive forward more often.
Summary
Parham is an interesting prospect. He definitely showed more strength than I expected given his smaller frame. However, even with that being said, stalemates aren’t exactly something to get super excited about. I’d like to see him get stronger and work on creating more forward push and initiating contact. The athleticism and good hand technique and both things that help him win. If coaches can help develop the rest, and if he can get stronger, there is definitely starting potential. I don’t know if he is plug and play, though.
Grade: 77.0 | Round Grade: 3rd |
7
Darian Kinnard (Kentucky) 6’5″, 322 lbs |
Stengths
Kinnard plays with that ever so coveted mean streak. He is a nasty player with the ability to routinely put guys on the ground. His strength is outstanding and the ability is there to anchor in pass protection against the strongest of linemen. He is a long time OT for Kentucky, but his traits should transition nicely to guard. Still, the tackle experience is good to have. He is a decent mover when blocking in space. His speed builds up and he can really deliver a punishing blow. Kinnard, needless to say at this point, blocks really well in a phone booth. This goes for the run and passing game. He can move guys right off their spot.
Weaknesses
Kinnard has a lot of technical issues to clean up. While they can be hidden at guard, to an extent, the issues will persist if not eliminated. He consistently plays at a high pad level, which combined with poor hand technique allows him to get pushed back more than you should see from someone with his strength. Kinnard finds himself losing to defensive linemen with good hands and a variety of pass rush moves. He is too uncontrolled in his pass set. As well, he looks like he is walking the line too often when it comes to potential holding calls. He needs to block more than he grabs. He is solid in space, but you see some lateral agility limitations in both his run blocking and pass sets.
Summary
Kinnard projects as a potential starter thanks to great strength and a nasty mean streak. His ability to move strong opponents off their spot will really appeal to coaches who feel they can coach up the rest. He needs to improve his hand technique, footwork, and play a more controlled game. He will play guard in the NFL, as opposed to his more familiar RT position. If he puts it all together, the ceiling is quite high.
Grade: 75.9 | Round Grade: 3rd |
8
Luke Goedeke (Central Michigan) 6’5″, 312 lbs |
Stengths
Goedeke has a solid blend of strength and athleticism. He did a relatively good job of handling power from the outside, and he has the grit to fight through each rep to the finish. Quickness is also solid and he shows ability to block on the move. While I wouldn’t say it is his calling card, it shouldn’t be a weakness at the NFL level. He played on the outside in college, but has the traits to successfully make the transition to guard. The added versatility would make him more useful if he is a depth player. His mentality makes him a useful player in the run game, and he has the ability to move bodies from their spot.
Weaknesses
Goedeke played tackle, but will likely be forced to play guard. His poor footwork on the outside did not match up well against speed. Moving to the inside will limit this weakness, but he still needs to correct the issue to get rid of it all together. Short arm length is also something that will force him inside. He struggled at times to win the leverage battle and at other times reverted to lunging in an attempt to hit his target. Goedeke showed a few mental lapses, looking to block defenders that were being double teamed to his left, while allowing pressure from the outside.
Summary
Goedeke has some potential thanks to good strength, a tough mentality, and solid athleticism. Short arms and poor technique probably makes him a better fit at guard. He will have to fix the technical and some of the mental issues before he ends up starting. But there is developmental upside.
Grade: 74.9 | Round Grade: 4th |
9
Cole Strange (Chattanooga) 6’5″, 307 lbs |
Stengths
Strange is a great athlete who also has a high running motor that nicely compliments this trait. He has light feet and is quick enough and instinctive enough to react to athletic interior pass rushers. Strange is a good blocker in space, with the ability to stack up blocks as he gets up the field. He takes good angles and his high motor and good effort helps him add a little bit extra into every block. Strange has the lateral agility to pull across the line and reach his target in time.
Weaknesses
While he is a great athlete, Strange has many of the weaknesses that you often see with these types of offensive linemen. His frame is on the smaller, leaner side, and he just doesn’t have the strength to consistently hold up against stronger pass rushers. This weakness was exposed a little bit at the Senior Bowl. He’ll find himself getting walked back by power rushers, and his ability to sustain blocks is inconsistent. As a run blocker, he doesn’t always generate enough push when operating from a phone booth. He needs to be on the move in order to hide his strength concerns.
Summary
Strange has upside thanks to his athletic profile. He does very well when blocking on the move, and his consistent effort will impress coaches. That said, he will need to add a lot more strength as he makes the jump to the NFL, and the step up in competition by itself will be steep. He’ll be at his best in a zone scheme where he can play more to his strengths. But strength will still need to be added, and he may need time to round out his game. Starter potential is there, but I don’t think he’s a lock to be a plug and play draft pick.
Grade: 74.8 | Round Grade: 4th |
10
Cordell Volson (North Dakota State) 6’6″, 315 lbs |
Stengths
Volson has a nice blend of traits, as size, strength, and athleticism all work in his favour. His strength is probably his best feature. Volson doesn’t just match power, but he can go beyond that of his opponent, creating a good amount of push. This goes for his pass and run blocking. You often see guys with great strength who don’t have the athleticism to go with it, but Volson isn’t one of those guys. He isn’t an elite athlete, but it is quite good nonetheless. He can match the movements of pass rushers, and can block in space in the run game. Volson also does well when pulling across the line. Versatility is good. Has experience playing guard and tackle.
Weaknesses
The traits are all there for Volson, it is just a matter of putting it all together. Technically speaking, that is. His hand technique looks uncontrolled at times, and defenders can win that battle. He also plays with a high pad level. This allows his opponents to push him back in some instances, negating the strength advantage that he usually has. There is alo the question mark of competition. He usually matched up well against the lower tier guys, but how will he fare against the next level. Against stronger, well developed veterans. He may need some time to acclimatise.
Summary
Volson has starter potential in the NFL. Strength and athleticism are both good, and he has the size needed to succeed at the position. His versatility and tough playing style will certainly appeal to OL coaches. As he transitions to the NFL, he will need to clean up his hand technique and lower his pad level. As well, he will have to adjust to the big step up in competition from what he faced at NDSU.
Grade: 73.9 | Round Grade: 4th |
11
Cade Mays (Tennessee) 6’5″, 311 lbs |
Stengths
Mays is extremely versatile, having starting experience at every OL position. He is athletic enough to handle speed around the edge and speedier inside rushers. As well, his strength is good enough to neutralise powerful pass rushers. Mays is capable in the run game. He can get into the open field and also hold his own closer to the line.
Weaknesses
Strength is good, but I don’t think it is at that elite level. It shows up better in pass protection than it does in the run game. In the run game, he is moreso someone that keeps his opponent from getting to the ball carrier, as opposed to actively opening up running lanes. As well, Mays can stand to make some improvements to his footwork and hand technique.
Summary
Mays will be popular among OL coaches because of his versatility. Being able to come off the bench and fill in at any position is something that teams will value. While I don’t think he has any elite traits, his athleticism is good, and his strength, while less obvious in the run game, is passable as well. There is some starting potential, but it might be on the lower end. That said, Mays is someone that can be the first guy off the bench at any position, which definitely curries a lot of value.
Grade: 68.7 | Round Grade: 5th |
12
Marcus McKethan (North Carolina) 6’6″, 340 lbs |
Stengths
McKethan is a bit tall for an interior prospect, but he does a good job of keeping his pad level low and using leverage to his advantage. He blocks well in a phone booth, stifling bull rushes and creating nice push in the run game. Upper and lower body strength are good. In the run game, he drives forward, keeping his legs moving in the process. He has good length, which helps him in both phases, and he makes it tough for opponents to disengage.
Weaknesses
McKethan is a bit limited athletically. He can be slow to react to blitzes and stunts and he lacks the quickness to recover. Quicker opponents are able to slip by him, taking advantage of his slower footspeed. Additionally, he doesn’t offer the same appeal in the run game when blocking up the field as he does closer to home. The speed isn’t there to routinely hit his target, and he often finds himself lunging in an attempt to make up the ground.
Summary
McKethan offers some ability thanks to good strength in both his upper and lower halves, and good length. When he is allowed to play to his strengths, his technique is sound. McKethan offers potential starting ability in the right system, but he is scheme dependent thanks to his limited athleticism. Further, regardless of scheme, quicker players will cause him some trouble.
Grade: 63.9 | Round Grade: 6th |
13
Andrew Stueber (Michigan) 6’7″, 325 lbs |
Stengths
Stueber is a big, strong player who can offer some versatility. He primarily played RT but has G experience, and he may end up playing inside. He has solid strength and has demonstrated the ability to match up against power. Sueber is a tough player. Finds himself engaged in plenty of hand battles and does not let his opponent easily swipe or gain leverage in this way. The ability is there to create push from a phone booth. He is someone who you can run behind.
Weaknesses
Stueber is lacking when it comes to athleticism. Speed gives him trouble, and for that reason, it is tough to project him as a tackle. But on the other hand, his tall frame isn’t as suited for a move inside. So an ultimate projection is tough, and his ceiling may end up being that of a top depth option. The quickness problems are mitigated on the inside, but not eliminated. As well, Stueber needs to be more consistent at playing at a lower pad level. He has a tendency to rise up and lose leverage. In the run game, he is much better blocking close to home than he is on the move.
Summary
Stueber is tough to project in terms of his position at the next level, as he has issues that would limit him at both RT and G. That said, his strength and toughness are both quality traits and give him something to work with and offer some hope that he may end up starting. Athleticism is a concern and his pad level needs to be fixed. If he doesn’t end up starting, I could see him becoming a quality backup that can play multiple spots.
Grade: 63.6 | Round Grade: 6th |
14
Justin Shaffer (Georgia) 6’4″, 314 lbs |
Stengths
Shaffer is a mauler on the football field. He has good strength, not only to stifle bull rushes, but to do some pushing of his own. He is capable of moving anyone off their spot. Shaffer has that mean streak that coaches like. He has a strong punch and can knock his opponent off balance when his strike is accurate and well timed. His frame is beefy and not easy to get around. The strength and size are good developmental traits to work with.
Weaknesses
Beyond the size and strength, Shaffer is extremely raw. Too often, his pad level is way too high and he is losing ground because he has no leverage. Hand technique is inconsistent. When it is on point, he has some nice reps. But he needs to cut out the bad placements and mistimed strikes. Shaffer isn’t a great athlete and quickness gives him trouble. Despite the big frame, he can’t always seal the edge, as his opponents are able to find a way around him. The athletic concerns also show up in his run blocking, especially down the field. He tends to miss his target and is slow getting up the field.
Summary
Shaffer has the size, strength, and mean streak that you want in an o-lineman. However, he is lacking the athletic ability to really be effective in all phases. Further, his technique is severely underdeveloped. With the strength, he does have potential to maybe become a good depth option or starter. It is a good trait to work with. But it will need to be in the right system, and he will need work on strengthening his weaknesses.
Grade: 58.7 | Round Grade: 7th |
15
Lecitus Smith (Virginia Tech) 6’3″, 314 lbs |
Stengths
Smith is a quick, athletic lineman who has potential in a scheme that requires movement from its line. He is light on his feet and can mirror pass rushers and adjust to quick counters. Smith gets into space quickly, eating up the grass in front of him. Speed is good to get to the second level, but his lateral agility is what really impresses me, as he is able to adjust his positioning to land his block. Smith held his own at the Senior Bowl and is someone with some developmental upside.
Weaknesses
Smith is very athletic, but severely lacking in both the strength, length, and size departments. His frame is lacking bulk, and bigger pass rushers can be a mismatch for him. The strength isn’t there to consistently anchor, and you see him taking steps backwards more than you would like. Stalemates make up much of his “wins” in power battles. As well, he doesn’t generate a lot of push in the run game, relying more on his athleticism to block a zone. Hand technique and footwork will need to be improved as he transitions to the NFL.
Summary
Smith has athletic upside and can be a solid player in the right scheme. However, a small frame, short arms, and below average strength put a limit on his game. Bigger, stronger pass rushers can give him trouble. If he is able to add some muscle mass and improve his technique, perhaps he can develop into a more complete player. But he may top out as a solid backup.
Grade: 56.3 | Round Grade: 7th |
C Rankings:
1
Tyler Linderbaum (Iowa) 6’2″, 296 lbs |
Stengths
Linderbaum is freakishly athletic for an offensive lineman. Extremely quick feet. Outstanding mirroring ability and he refuses to let defenders squeak through the edge. His high running motor also helps in this aspect. Linderbaum detects pressure well, and senses when someone is coming in late. He has the lateral agility to react quick enough without it even being a real scare. Linderbaum gets into space in a hurry and stacks his blocks well. When he has the chance to pick up speed, he is able to get more power into his blocks. He plays with a nasty attitude and is a good finisher.Linderbaum is a technically sound player. Hand placement and timing is good, and footwork is smooth. He plays at a good pad level and stays square to his opponent.
Weaknesses
Size is a decent concern for Linderbaum. He lacks the necessary bulk and power rushers gave him some trouble. There were instances where he wasn’t just walked back, but pushed back multiple steps in a matter of a second. Length also does not work in his favour. His arm length is very short, even for an interior lineman, and there are times where it is difficult for him to win the leverage battle.
Summary
Linderbaum possesses elite athleticism that is easy to get excited about. He can patrol the line and react quickly to threats, and snuff them out. The Iowa product stacks blocks well in the run game, and is outstanding on the move. Size will be a concern at the next level. He will need to add strength, but you still have to wonder how he will fare against stronger, beefier interior linemen. His short arms don’t make things any easier. Ultimately, I do expect Linderbaum to be a good starter at the next level if he finds himself in a scheme that revolves more around athleticism and technique than pure strength. That said, I don’t think the ceiling is as high as some make it out to be.
Grade: 84.0 | Round Grade: 2nd |
2
Zach Tom (Wake Forest) 6’4″, 304 lbs |
Stengths
Tom is an underrated player in this class. He offers C/OT versatility. Tom has very quick feet and the agility to mirror speedier edge rushers. Mirroring interior rushers is no problem for him. He is a smooth mover who does well when operating in space. He is able to react quickly to his constantly changing surroundings, and land blocks on short notice. Tom has shown the ability to anchor in pass protection, giving the QB enough time to get rid of the ball.
Weaknesses
Tom offers C/OT versatility, but has different weaknesses that separately relate to each position. When looking at him as an interior lineman, it is fair to question his strength and how he will fare against stronger defensive tackles. On the outside, his shorter arm length will hurt him. As he transitions to the NFL, Tom will need to get stronger. He showed anchoring ability, but didn’t create a lot of forward movement in the process. He also seems to lack that extra bit of edginess and grit that you like in offensive linemen. Tom will need to be careful of the swim move, which showed some vulnerability. He usually recovered in time, but it is still something to be aware of.
Summary
Tom offers starting potential thanks to his good athleticism and solid strength. His versatility is something that teams will find very appealing. At the next level, he’ll need to add strength and play a bit tougher. As well, ironing out a few of the technical kinks would be good.
Grade: 79.7 | Round Grade: 3rd |
3
Cam Jurgens (Nebraska) 6’3″, 307 lbs |
Stengths
Jurgens is an athletic freak for an offensive lineman. He is light on his feet and moves very efficiently. The ability to mirror quick pass rushers is there. He is at his best when blocking on the move. Jurgens gets out into the open field in a hurry. He can pull across the line and get in front of the ball carrier on a screen play. His high motor and nasty attitude are both evident on a play to play basis. He makes an effort to get everything into his strikes, and has caught some defenders by surprise with his pop. Jurgens looks for work, and has no problem lending a hand when sitting alone.
Weaknesses
Jurgens is small and lacks the bulk and strength to operate against beefier interior linemen. He often found himself getting overpowered at the line. Defenders used push/pull moves and leveraged their way around him. And if they couldn’t get around him, they were often able to at least push the pocket. Jurgens doesn’t have the longest arms you’ll see, so he doesn’t have the ability to gain leverage to make up the strength deficit.
Summary
Jurgens is an interesting player thanks to his elite athleticism. It is something that coaches will get excited about. He lacks size and length, which limits the upside. As well, his strength is below par. That said, if he can bulk up in the weight room and improve his game with some coaching, he may be able to end up a solid starter. Scheme will also be key for him. A zone scheme that would let him use his athleticism often would be ideal.
Grade: 71.6 | Round Grade: 4th |
4
Dawson Deaton (Texas Tech) 6’5″, 306 lbs |
Stengths
Deaton has a big frame and brings a lot of power to the table. When his technique is on point, he possesses the ability to stifle power rushers, as well as pass rushers coming in late with a ton of momentum. He has strong hands and is able to sustain his block through the defenders continued aggression. Deaton brings some toughness of his own, so it is never easy to work through him. He creates good forward push in the run game. He is at his best blocking in a phone booth in both phases, where he can let his grit, size, and strength do the talking.
Weaknesses
Deaton is an average to below average athlete, and can struggle in situations that require more quickness. Especially as a run blocker, he is much better closer to the line, as he can be sluggish blocking in space. Technique comes and goes. He has a tall frame for a C, and can have trouble keeping that pad level low. As well, he sometimes allows defenders to twist him out of position, when ideally, he’d be able to keep his frame square. He was often still able to sustain the block, but as he ends up leaning one way, the opportunity opens for the defender to leak through. Deaton has somewhat of a different snapping technique. Depending on the team, that may or may not be an issue.
Summary
Deaton is a solid prospect with the strength and attitude that you look for in the position. His frame is tall for an interior player, and especially a C, so he will need to focus extra attention on consistently keeping his pad level low enough. There are athletic limitations that will limit him to certain schemes. But in the right one, he could develop into a solid starter, if not a good backup.
Grade: 70.4 | Round Grade: 4th |
5
Luke Fortner (Kentucky) 6’4″, 307 lbs |
Stengths
Fortner has gone up against some top prospects over the course of his college career and has held his own. He shows solid strength and is capable of going up against stronger rushers without giving up much ground. I like how he stacks his blocks in the run game. He has good straight line speed and can work his way up the field ahead of the ball carrier. Fortner offers positional versatility and can serve as a depth option for multiple positions.
Weaknesses
Traits are all solid, but unspectacular. Fortner has the strength to hold up for a while, but has often been unable to sustain his blocks as long as you’d like. In some of these cases, he lost the hands battle, which caused him to lose his leverage. As well, his lateral agility doesn’t quite match his straight line speed. He can have trouble when tasked with mirroring quicker rushers. Defenders squeezed by him more often that I would have liked to see.
Summary
Fortner offers a solid all around skillset, but may end up being closer to average if he works his way up to a starting spot. He has decent strength and speed, but lateral agility concerns are evident. I’d like to see him sustain his blocks longer and be a bit more consistent with his technique. Fortner offers positional versatility which should boost his stock. He also performed well at the Senior Bowl, which should also help.
Grade: 68.1 | Round Grade: 5th |
6
Alec Lindstrom (Boston College) 6’3″, 296 lbs |
Stengths
Lindstrom is a solid all around player that can be a good depth option and perhaps a backend starter. He meets the strength threshold and is able to hold his own against power rushers. He uses rushers’ momentum against them, and is able to subtly redirect them out of harm’s way. Lindstrom is able to get to the second level, and is a strong finisher when he lands his block. He plays at a good pad level and is able to neutralise blitzing LB’s and other rushers coming in with more momentum. Lindstrom’s redirecting ability also shows up in the run game. He gets his angles right, which somewhat makes up for average quickness.
Weaknesses
Solid player, but traits are unspectacular. He has the strength to hold his own against power, but sometimes has to redirect because his ability to sustain is only average. If he can continue to add strength, this should improve. Additionally, more strength should help him generate more forward push in the run game. Athleticism isn’t bad, but it doesn’t stand out. Lindstrom is capable of executing the basic stuff, but isn’t a guarantee to reach his target every time. I don’t think it will be a huge concern going forward, but there was the odd bad snap on tape.
Summary
Lindstrom is capable of just about every task, but his traits are only average, which might limit him to being either a depth option or a backend starter. I don’t mind his technique, and his strength is solid, so if he can add to that, he may be able to outplay the projection. He has experience against good competition and is a team leader, both things that will appeal to coaches when considering mid-round offensive linemen.
Grade: 64.0 | Round Grade: 6th |
7
Ben Brown (Ole Miss) 6’5″, 312 lbs |
Stengths
Brown’s frame is built solid and he has good arm length. Strength is above average and he has shown the ability to hold up against bullrushes. In the run game, he is able to generate some forward push. His experience against top competition should help him in his development. As well, Brown’s versatility will go a long way in helping him earn a roster spot, as he has experience at C, G, and OT.
Weaknesses
Brown is a sluggish mover and lacks the lateral agility that would help round out his game. He is stiff when pulling across the line and isn’t always able to reach his target on blocks down the field. Anchor strength is solid, but he needs to sustain his blocks a bit longer. He allowed his opponent to disengage more often than I would have liked. Additionally, there were times where the defender landed his hands first and was able to get under his pads. This caused Brown to raise his pad level and get pushed back because he didn’t have any leverage.
Summary
Brown meets the baseline strength threshold and shows the ability to anchor against power. This and his ability to play all three spots gives him the potential to be drafted as a versatile backup. He lacks the quickness to truly become a complete player. That said, if he can continue to add to his strength, improve his technique, and sustain blocks a bit longer, he has the chance to become a valuable depth option.
Grade: 59.2 | Round Grade: 7th |
8
Chasen Hines (LSU) 6’3″, 327 lbs |
Stengths
Hines is a strong player that shows glimpses of high quality play. He is capable of anchoring against stronger interior linemen. He’s got a thick, beefy frame and a long reach that helps him in his battle for leverage and allows him to create push in the run game. Athleticism is decent and he is capable of executing shorter pulls and can block in space if it is closer to the line. As he builds up speed, he can deliver a punishing blow, and he definitely enjoys doing so.
Weaknesses
The size and strength traits are good, but the bottom line is that he just got beat too often. Hines needs a lot of work on his technique. Footwork is sloppy and lacks the quickness to mirror in pass protection. He often finds himself on the wrong side of the leverage battle, and he gets twisted around, allowing the defender to get by. Hines had some trouble with swim moves and inside moves. He also allowed his opponent to get under his pad too often and walk him backwards. This hurt his ability to sustain blocks.
Summary
Hines has the size and strength to make it in the NFL. As well, while he isn’t a great athlete, his mobility is passable. However, at this point, he is strictly a developmental project. Technique is in need of a lot of work in order to reduce his number of losses.
Grade: 54.7 | Round Grade: UDFA |
Full G Rankings:
- Zion Johnson (85.3, Rd 1)
- Kenyon Green (83.0, Rd 2)
- Jamaree Salyer (82.4, Rd 2)
- Ed Ingram (82.2, Rd 2)
- Logan Bruss (77.6, Rd 3)
- Dylan Parham (77.0, Rd 3)
- Darian Kinnard (75.9, Rd 3)
- Luke Goedeke (74.9, Rd 4)
- Cole Strange (74.8, Rd 4)
- Cordell Volson (73.9, Rd 4)
- Cade Mays (68.7, Rd 5)
- Marcus McKethan (63.9, Rd 6)
- Andrew Stueber (63.6, Rd 6)
- Justin Shaffer (58.7, Rd 7)
- Lecitus Smith (56.3, Rd 7)
Full C Rankings:
- Tyler Linderbaum (84.0, Rd 2)
- Zach Tom (79.7, Rd 3)
- Cam Jurgens (71.6, Rd 4)
- Dawson Deaton (70.4, Rd 4)
- Luke Fortner (68.1, Rd 5)
- Alec Lindstrom (64.0, Rd 6)
- Ben Brown (59.2, Rd 7)
- Chasen Hines (54.7, UDFA)
Notables Not Graded:
- G, Zach Thomas
- G, Marquis Hayes
- C, Dhonovan West