For an offensive line's sustained success, continuity plays an equal role to individual talent. Further, the salary cap dictates that every roster position cannot be filled with a superstar. Finally, we didn't hear Milton Williams name very often in Bradford's biggest game of his career.
Having said all of that, I think that every team should have a policy of annually drafting a quality offensive lineman within the first three rounds because that group occupies nearly fifty percent of the starting offensive unit and natural roster churn dictates that there will be inherently frequent recurring vacancies. It is a position group that requires perpetual player development or otherwise, any given team may end up like the Patriots with an offensive line that simply isn't collectively experienced enough to deal with an elite defensive front. Hence, I wouldn't draft to specifically replace Bradford but instead to simply stay ahead of the fore mentioned recurring vacancies and done so as a matter of following routine roster management ideology. Quality depth at positions that are in high demand will also likely return more compensatory draft picks as well.
We just witnessed a representative example of how winning at the line of scrimmage, on both sides of the ball, can make every other position group better. For Super Bowl LX, winning the line of scrimmage made Seattle's linebackers, secondary, and running backs better and conversely made the quarterback worse for New England.
