(06-06-2017, 05:12 PM)KYjaggy Wrote: It doesn't add up that Caldwell has said more than once that C is the 2nd most important position on the line (I could be convinced it's the most important), and Linder is a young, proven, pro bowl caliber player at the position by theirs, PFFs, and NFL1000s opinion.

Just making up percentages here, but if a guard spot gets say 40% better by moving Linder there and center only gets 30% worse by switching to Bowanko, I don't know if that really makes the oline better considering C positional value.

That's a rather myopic view, considering Linder could be an even better G with a higher ceiling than he is at C.

Maybe that takes him from a chartreuse 89 A-B foxtrot, to a magenta 97 A-A butter by PFF's "rankings?"

I'm having fun with their metrics, but making a serious point.

I understand the importance of C and agree with those who feel it's probably the second most critical position to LT. But I have no reservation whatsoever putting Linder wherever they feel is best for the team on the OL.

There's no contradiction there at all. If you have an interior guy who's your best at all three positions, the other two will be "worse" by comparison without him no matter where you plug him in. That doesn't default him to C just because you value the position more. You have to find the best fit by group. Hopefully, one you feel is sustainable and long term.

I don't think bias towards a position should keep you from making the right/best decision for the team. If we've got guys who can play really good C, can't do the same at G (limited to C,) and have a guy playing C who could be an even better G... you have to do the best for the club (and likely the player) and let him prosper at G.

---