Jump to content

Iowa TE George Kittle Had Himself An Excellent Pro Day


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, hjerry said:

We're already set for years.

Any position could be upgraded. I'm just saying that the idea that we have to take a TE this year is flawed.

We could, but it's by no means a priority. 

That's part of the problem. Most peoples priority is RG. Understand there are other teams drafting too and will take a high octane stance on this draft and get much better. Not one RG or OL for that matter will change us much in this draft. Even the Patriots are upgrading in weak areas and their OL isn't the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

12 minutes ago, Knight of God said:

That's part of the problem. Most peoples priority is RG. Understand there are other teams drafting too and will take a high octane stance on this draft and get much better. Not one RG or OL for that matter will change us much in this draft. Even the Patriots are upgrading in weak areas and their OL isn't the best.

Correct

It has to do with long term and short term impact on the team as well as a difference in needs and wants.

I understand perfectly the desire for a new TE. Guys see all these great new toys and they want one. ****, I want one too, but our TE core is already really good. Could it be better? Absolutely, but it's just fine the way that it is now.

What you have to ask yourself is, with our TE core being what it is right now, how much will this rookie actually contribute?

We have TE depth, but there are some positions where we have very little, or no depth at all. Allen for example, could be upgraded just like some feel about our TEs, but more importantly, there's absolutely nothing behind him right now, making FS a must in this draft. Luckily, this draft is full of great FS that fit our scheme, which is a tremendous rarity, b/c of the unique skill set which we look for there. Meanwhile, at TE, if we were to miss here, I'm plenty confident we could find a good one next year too.

It's also the reason why I'm more concerned with OT this year, than OG. At OG we have Thornton, Garland, and Schweitzer. Whether you like them as options or not, all have arguments to be made toward them starting. OT, on the other hand, we have nothing behind our starters, just like with FS.

Based on all this, combined with the reports coming out about our visits, I'm forced to see Edge, FS, LB, and OT as our priorities in this draft. Everything else is gravy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Knight of God said:

That's part of the problem. Most peoples priority is RG. Understand there are other teams drafting too and will take a high octane stance on this draft and get much better. Not one RG or OL for that matter will change us much in this draft. Even the Patriots are upgrading in weak areas and their OL isn't the best.

I'm with this take. So many teams have abysmal o-lines still after Free Agency that I expect a lot of reaching in the draft. That said RG is really the only weakness i see on this team right now. Another edge rusher would be preferred, but if we re-signed freeney I would totally be ok with the group we have right now, that dominated o-lines in the playoffs up until the 2nd half of the superbowl.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hjerry said:

Remarking on this one more time, there have thus far been zero reports of us talking to or working out TEs since the SB, and the only "TE" who we talked to there, was Engram, and Engram isn't even a really a TE, he's a WR.

Did we visit with Hooper before we drafted him?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Simicager said:

I'm with this take. So many teams have abysmal o-lines still after Free Agency that I expect a lot of reaching in the draft. That said RG is really the only weakness i see on this team right now. Another edge rusher would be preferred, but if we re-signed freeney I would totally be ok with the group we have right now, that dominated o-lines in the playoffs up until the 2nd half of the superbowl.

You could say the exact same thing about RG and Chester.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, athell said:

Did we visit with Hooper before we drafted him?

Looking back at the reports, I see no report that we did, however there were numerous reports of us with other TEs; certainly more than we've had this year.

We can only go based on reports, but with the lack thereof on TEs, at very least it shows a general lack of interest in TEs this cycle. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hjerry said:

You could say the exact same thing about RG and Chester.

Exactly, he was the weakness on the offense last year and we were still historically great, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt find someone better. At this stage its lamp at 31 or give Garland and our pick last year a shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hjerry said:

Looking back at the reports, I see no report that we did, however there were numerous reports of us with other TEs; certainly more than we've had this year.

We can only go based on reports, but with the lack thereof on TEs, at very least it shows a general lack of interest in TEs this cycle. 

I was just curious, I honestly did not remember.  This regime does seem to draft who they meet with, which is a good point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Simicager said:

Exactly, he was the weakness on the offense last year and we were still historically great, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt find someone better. At this stage its lamp at 31 or give Garland and our pick last year a shot.

I agree. We've been scouting OGs hard, but they've pretty much been all guys expected to go undrafted. Lamp is the only draftable one who we've shown significant interest in.

I think that he's the only one near the top that our staff really likes, and would consider taking. After him, they'd rather just stand pat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hjerry said:

Correct

It has to do with long term and short term impact on the team as well as a difference in needs and wants.

I understand perfectly the desire for a new TE. Guys see all these great new toys and they want one. ****, I want one too, but our TE core is already really good. Could it be better? Absolutely, but it's just fine the way that it is now.

What you have to ask yourself is, with our TE core being what it is right now, how much will this rookie actually contribute?

We have TE depth, but there are some positions where we have very little, or no depth at all. Allen for example, could be upgraded just like some feel about our TEs, but more importantly, there's absolutely nothing behind him right now, making FS a must in this draft. Luckily, this draft is full of great FS that fit our scheme, which is a tremendous rarity, b/c of the unique skill set which we look for there. Meanwhile, at TE, if we were to miss here, I'm plenty confident we could find a good one next year too.

It's also the reason why I'm more concerned with OT this year, than OG. At OG we have Thornton, Garland, and Schweitzer. Whether you like them as options or not, all have arguments to be made toward them starting. OT, on the other hand, we have nothing behind our starters, just like with FS.

Based on all this, combined with the reports coming out about our visits, I'm forced to see Edge, FS, LB, and OT as our priorities in this draft. Everything else is gravy.

That's a really bad attitude to make it about new toys man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hjerry said:

Correct

It has to do with long term and short term impact on the team as well as a difference in needs and wants.

I understand perfectly the desire for a new TE. Guys see all these great new toys and they want one. ****, I want one too, but our TE core is already really good. Could it be better? Absolutely, but it's just fine the way that it is now.

What you have to ask yourself is, with our TE core being what it is right now, how much will this rookie actually contribute?

We have TE depth, but there are some positions where we have very little, or no depth at all. Allen for example, could be upgraded just like some feel about our TEs, but more importantly, there's absolutely nothing behind him right now, making FS a must in this draft. Luckily, this draft is full of great FS that fit our scheme, which is a tremendous rarity, b/c of the unique skill set which we look for there. Meanwhile, at TE, if we were to miss here, I'm plenty confident we could find a good one next year too.

It's also the reason why I'm more concerned with OT this year, than OG. At OG we have Thornton, Garland, and Schweitzer. Whether you like them as options or not, all have arguments to be made toward them starting. OT, on the other hand, we have nothing behind our starters, just like with FS.

Based on all this, combined with the reports coming out about our visits, I'm forced to see Edge, FS, LB, and OT as our priorities in this draft. Everything else is gravy.

I agree with your take on who they're looking at.

But I think you're looking at TE (and long term drafting) all wrong.  There are a lot of 3rd-4th round TEs now, who would have been 2nd rounders last year, and will be in the next TE weak draft.  That means get one if you might need one.  Otherwise you'll be spending 8M or a 1st/2nd round pick on it when you find you need it.

Pair that with the fact that we have 1 TE who has shown he might be able to catch in traffic.  One.  It makes it a bit more of a need.

What truly pushes it over the edge is it's a player who can play immediately, a lot, and is one of the few "injury proof" options for our offense.  Instead of thinking of us taking a WR, think of us taking a tall WR, a TE, and a FB all in one pick.

If Julio goes down now, we don't have much of an offense.  However, if we have a 6'5, 4.5 40 type TE...we can spread him out as our Brandon Marshall and run him, Sanu and Gabriel as the 3 wides and Hooper at TE.

Similarly, imagine Hooper gets injured.  We're now relying on Toilolo as our receiving TE.  That just made the offense way easier to defend.

So, with a 3rd round pick, we can get a guy who can make our offense far more difficult to defend currently (by seam splitting when Julio is bracketed), gives coverage if Julio or Sanu get injured, and gives coverage if Hooper gets injured.  Oh, and future proofs the offense.  I'd say that is a remarkable value out of a 3rd rounder.

It's not about toys, it's about matchups and value.

I prefer to load up on what has value in the mid rounds so I don't have to spend earlier picks to fill a hole next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Knight of God said:

That's a really bad attitude to make it about new toys man.

Ehh, I don't make it all about that, but there is an understandable desire for skill position players year to year moreso than other (less sexy) positions. 

I don't mean it as an insult.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, takeitdown said:

 

Similarly, imagine Hooper gets injured.  We're now relying on Toilolo as our receiving TE.  That just made the offense way easier to defend.

 

I'd say it's more about how much Sarkisian values Perkins, since he's more of a receiving type than Toilolo is.

Kinda like how I see them viewing OG, in relation to the younger players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hjerry said:

I'd say it's more about how much Sarkisian values Perkins, since he's more of a receiving type than Toilolo is.

Kinda like how I see them viewing OG, in relation to the younger players.

I do think the Perkins part plays in.  But if you said...we have an offense heavily reliant on our passing game, and mismatches we can create, and we're going into the season with a TE who caught for 300 yards and another who was a UDFA who caught for 70...we're good.  That seems crazy to me.  I think it's a case of people overvaluing our guys or hoping they'll be something they haven't shown. 

I think even if they bring in a TE they'll keep Perkins, because someone will be an H-back and will take the fullback's spot.

I normally am heavy on drafting OL or DL (generally interior OL and DL) because I think most of the game is won there.  But I'm also heavy into creating mismatches, getting value, and "proofing" your O or D by having guys who can fill multiple roles.

I'd rather take an OT who can play OG this year than just an OG, because it also gives us versatility if one of our OT's goes down.

And I think OT/OG and speed TE are the two important things on offense.  If we had seven 2nd round picks, I'd take OT, TE and 5 defenders (Edge, DT, FS, LB, bonus)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, takeitdown said:

I do think the Perkins part plays in.  But if you said...we have an offense heavily reliant on our passing game, and mismatches we can create, and we're going into the season with a TE who caught for 300 yards and another who was a UDFA who caught for 70...we're good.  That seems crazy to me.  I think it's a case of people overvaluing our guys or hoping they'll be something they haven't shown. 

I think even if they bring in a TE they'll keep Perkins, because someone will be an H-back and will take the fullback's spot.

I normally am heavy on drafting OL or DL (generally interior OL and DL) because I think most of the game is won there.  But I'm also heavy into creating mismatches, getting value, and "proofing" your O or D by having guys who can fill multiple roles.

I'd rather take an OT who can play OG this year than just an OG, because it also gives us versatility if one of our OT's goes down.

And I think OT/OG and speed TE are the two important things on offense.  If we had seven 2nd round picks, I'd take OT, TE and 5 defenders (Edge, DT, FS, LB, bonus)

Not to mention we are losing our most productive TE (last year anyway) so there is a hole to fill.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, athell said:

Because we are not set at the position and could use an upgrade.  No one is saying spend a 1st round pick on a TE, but it is a position not necessarily of need but should be addressed if the right player at the right round is available.

Dunno about that man if OJ Howard miraculously fell into our laps I'd take him in a heartbeat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hjerry said:

Remarking on this one more time, there have thus far been zero reports of us talking to or working out TEs since the SB, and the only "TE" who we talked to there, was Engram, and Engram isn't even a really a TE, he's a WR.

Engram isn't a wr. He's a move TE, who could play H-Back as well. He's not huge by any means but far from just a wr. His comparison is Jordan Reed. And, he'll probably end up around 245ish when all is said and done

If we drafted him, which I have no idea that we will or not; he's perfect as a vertical seam threat and an H-Back. Sure, you could line him in slot, but they do that with Gronk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 years down the line, half the starting TE's in the league could come from this class. There's probably 6 guys who have pro bowl potential and another 8-10 guys who have starter potential. 

I think this will go down as the best TE class in draft history and whilst we might not have a massive need at TE, you can get quality guys with starter potential as late as the 5th round.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hjerry said:

Correct

It has to do with long term and short term impact on the team as well as a difference in needs and wants.

I understand perfectly the desire for a new TE. Guys see all these great new toys and they want one. ****, I want one too, but our TE core is already really good. Could it be better? Absolutely, but it's just fine the way that it is now.

What you have to ask yourself is, with our TE core being what it is right now, how much will this rookie actually contribute?

We have TE depth, but there are some positions where we have very little, or no depth at all. Allen for example, could be upgraded just like some feel about our TEs, but more importantly, there's absolutely nothing behind him right now, making FS a must in this draft. Luckily, this draft is full of great FS that fit our scheme, which is a tremendous rarity, b/c of the unique skill set which we look for there. Meanwhile, at TE, if we were to miss here, I'm plenty confident we could find a good one next year too.

It's also the reason why I'm more concerned with OT this year, than OG. At OG we have Thornton, Garland, and Schweitzer. Whether you like them as options or not, all have arguments to be made toward them starting. OT, on the other hand, we have nothing behind our starters, just like with FS.

Based on all this, combined with the reports coming out about our visits, I'm forced to see Edge, FS, LB, and OT as our priorities in this draft. Everything else is gravy.

I get what you're saying; but TE depth is one thing--a dangerous TE capability is another. I'm not saying that we will draft an Engram (who we chatted with) or another guy; but Perkins is far from a sure thing; and Toilio is the guy from "guardians of the galaxy." Matt had great synergy with Tamme (who isn't much bigger than Engram); and it's not inconceivable to see us add Matt a weapon.

I like OL picks; but you're right beyond Lamp they, likewise, have showed interest in a bunch of UDFA types.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...