Jump to content

Possible solution at TE


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Randomfalcon12 said:

I’d rather see us sign a more traditional TE who plays inline and blocks if we are trying to add another to that group. We already have Kyle Pitts who is basically the same skill set and better than Gesicki. But who knows, maybe the staff wants another hybrid TE who plays outside rather than in three point stance.

I agree.  OJ Howard would seem ideal if we can make the numbers work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

My main issue is that the offense relies heavily on Pitts. If for any reason he goes down then we don’t have any established pass catching weapons on offense. Our biggest gun then becomes a rookie Drake London. At least if we have Gesicki our offensive playcalling could stay relatively the same while not forcing London to be the primary target. 

That goes for any superstar at a given position. If the superstar gets inquired you just can't replace their production. Teams just don't have #2s who can perform at the top 3 of a given position. You also don't pay top money for a guy to see a handful of snaps a game.  If we are picking up a guy at this point and paying top 10 positional value they need to see majority of the snaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, why did most of his yard come at the WR position? I would think because our receiver last year sucked. He had to move around. This year, London should ball, Edwards should be at least serviceable at WR2. CP will have his moments. Pitts will prob have a lot of TE snaps.

Edited by Norwood all the way!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Randomfalcon12 said:

That goes for any superstar at a given position. If the superstar gets inquired you just can't replace their production. Teams just don't have #2s who can perform at the top 3 of a given position. You also don't pay top money for a guy to see a handful of snaps a game.  If we are picking up a guy at this point and paying top 10 positional value they need to see majority of the snaps.

Uhmmm….yes and no. Teams typically have 2-3 pass catching playmakers on their team, superstars is another story as that’s an whole different level of production. Those are few and far between. A few playmakers can make up for a lack of a superstar.

Pitts is definitely a playmaker, superstar, and our only primary pass catching weapon (Patterson is too but not pure pass catching).

I already addressed the cap issue in my initial post; not sure why it’s being reiterated as if it hasn’t already been stated.

That being said, if we were to get Gesicki he wouldn’t be playing just a “handful of snaps a game”. He would be worked into the offense extensively. His ability to play all over the field would be an extra piece we can use to create havoc for opposing DCs. Imagine Pitts, London, and Gesicki out there; with Patterson in the backfield. That’s a lot of mismatches you just created out there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

Rumors swirling around Dolphins shopping TE Mike Gesicki. McDaniel was approached about this rumor and didn’t shoot it down. I’ve been watching him for a few years and he’s been underutilized. He’s currently on a franchise tag so we’d have to sign him to a new deal. If he’s asking for top TE money I would immediately nix that idea. However if we can sign him to a reasonable deal he would be an absolute asset to the team.

Pitts receiving yard breakdown from last season based on position:

Tight End: 71 yards

Slot: 391 yards

WR: 564 yards

Of Pitts 1,026 yards, 955 yards came from a position other than TE. That’s about 93%. Now I’m not saying to move Pitts from TE, however it would benefit us greatly if when we do move Pitts around the field, that we have another mismatch nightmare still at the TE position. Not to mention a two TE set nightmare with the ability of both TEs being able to be split out wide.

Mike Gesicki:

6’6”

249lbs

4:54 forty

41.5 vertical jump (higher than Pitts)

22 reps at 225 (same as Pitts)

 

https://youtu.be/Es7bJJpGusU

 

 

I’d rather just bring back the guys we had and keep it moving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

Thank you for being one of the few people to stay on topic. I think people forget how integral Pitts is to this offense. Being that he’s the only established pass catching weapon, if he were to go down then our offense would fundamentally be changed.

None of our TE depth can do what he does; heck not even Gesicki could do what he does. However, Gesicki would be a much better alternative than Hesse, Franks, or Fitzpatrick by a wide margin. As well as Gesicki’s athleticism would make him viable in this offense.

More than likely Pitts stays healthy so we’re still looking at mismatch nightmares for opposing defenses with the ability to move either TE. This in turn would open up London a decent bit. 

 Pats when they had Gronk and Hernandez

colts when they had Dallas Clark and Marcus Pollard. 
 

Way Back in day, Raiders when they had Ray Chester and Dave Casper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I understand the post, to a point.  I just don't think we would invest the kind of money Gesicki would ask for, and what his skill set brings to the offense.  Without a doubt, Pitts is our bell cow, but the whole reason we went after Drake London was to offer a 2nd, prime receiving option.  The way we flex Patterson out, really gives us 3 very good options.  AS loves his TE's, but they are blockers first, and Gesicki isn't going to fill that roll.  Not to mention, in 2023, we have to handle the Ridley scenario, which could mean he is back on the roster.  While I think Gesicki is a helluva player, don't see the capital it would take to bring him on the team, with the weapons we have, or potentially have in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Vandy said:

 Pats when they had Gronk and Hernandez

colts when they had Dallas Clark and Marcus Pollard. 
 

Way Back in day, Raiders when they had Ray Chester and Dave Casper

Pretty much. We don’t have any established receivers on offense other than Pitts. Having two monsters at TE would benefit this offense exponentially. Not only in terms of versatility but in the development of our young QB in the future. People complain about moving the chains; here’s a good solution to that problem  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, blutarski said:

I guess I understand the post, to a point.  I just don't think we would invest the kind of money Gesicki would ask for, and what his skill set brings to the offense.  Without a doubt, Pitts is our bell cow, but the whole reason we went after Drake London was to offer a 2nd, prime receiving option.  The way we flex Patterson out, really gives us 3 very good options.  AS loves his TE's, but they are blockers first, and Gesicki isn't going to fill that roll.  Not to mention, in 2023, we have to handle the Ridley scenario, which could mean he is back on the roster.  While I think Gesicki is a helluva player, don't see the capital it would take to bring him on the team, with the weapons we have, or potentially have in the near future.

As stated in the first post, if the contract is reasonable, I would be cool with it. If he wanted top tier, hard pass. Coming into the league, Pitts blocking was highly suspect and Smith managed to make it better. Gesicki has been highly underutilized and misused in Miami since his arrival. It stands to reason he wasn’t taught to be a complete TE. I doubt Ridley is here after his contract is done. Falcons have show him infinite patience. Another benefit is that if for whatever reason Pitts missed time; Gesicki can come in an fill his role better than Hesse or Franks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

As stated in the first post, if the contract is reasonable, I would be cool with it. If he wanted top tier, hard pass. Coming into the league, Pitts blocking was highly suspect and Smith managed to make it better. Gesicki has been highly underutilized and misused in Miami since his arrival. It stands to reason he wasn’t taught to be a complete TE. I doubt Ridley is here after his contract is done. Falcons have show him infinite patience. Another benefit is that if for whatever reason Pitts missed time; Gesicki can come in an fill his role better than Hesse or Franks. 

He is going to be looking for top 15 money, he's on the franchise tag for 2022 ($10 mil).  Have to assume he is asking for at least 7-8 Mil averaged a year, but he'll be looking for long term deal.  That's a pretty expensive "backup" option to Pitts, when they pretty much have the same skill set.  I just don't think it's feasible.  Totally agree he could fill the role of Pitts better than Hesse or Franks, but our money is better spent somewhere else, where we don't already have a superstar on a rookie contract.  Not to mention, in 2024, we'll need to pony up for Pitts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

As stated in the first post, if the contract is reasonable, I would be cool with it. If he wanted top tier, hard pass. Coming into the league, Pitts blocking was highly suspect and Smith managed to make it better. Gesicki has been highly underutilized and misused in Miami since his arrival. It stands to reason he wasn’t taught to be a complete TE. I doubt Ridley is here after his contract is done. Falcons have show him infinite patience. Another benefit is that if for whatever reason Pitts missed time; Gesicki can come in an fill his role better than Hesse or Franks. 

My guess is he will be looking for top 5 TE money. That’s just how it goes with these ever increasing contracts for upper echelon players. My default pick is for Bill B to make a run for him, as cliche as it is. Prototypical move TE with elite athleticism…like Aaron Hernandez, but without all the murder stuff…

Link to comment
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...