Prime for Prime: Jimmy Graham V George Kittle

[mdonnelly21]

Lets see if my Logic adds up correctly. 

Jimmy Graham was always considered close to Gronks equal. They were at least equals at catching the ball when both were playing at their prime. 

Gronk still IMO was better considering his blocking ability. 

Gronk is comfortably a better TE then Travis Kelce. And ATM Travis Kelce is a bit better than George Kittle. More consistent. Healthier. 

Which means that logically Jimmy Graham is better than George Kittle, and probably closer to Kelce than Kelce is to Gronk. How I would rate them. 

Gronk - 100/100 

Kelce - 96/100 

Graham - 96/100 

Kittle 95/100 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

Why do you keep using Madden ratings for players? 

[Billy86]

Kittle, and it's not close. Graham was awesome for a time eith NO but that also had a lot go do sith the scheme and Brees, while Kittle is an absolute physical menace in a way I've only ever seen peak Gronk be better at and is an incredible blocker where Graham for his strengths was always a glorified receiver. 

[BayRaider]

This is 5-2 cause I votes Graham by mistake

[Nabbs4u]

17 hours ago, TecmoSuperJoe said:

Why do you keep using Madden ratings for players? 

Its easier to play video games then watch 100's of NFL games to form an opinion.  🤷‍♂️

[SkippyX]

In 5 years Kittle has 20 TDs. After 5 years Graham had 51. Graham has him on yards at 4752 to 4489. Kittle has him on average at 13.4 vs 12.3

Its pretty clear that its Graham who was better but Kittle has lots of time to put together a new peak or an extended great career.

 

We can talk about how Brees was awesome for target 1 going from Colston to Graham to Cooks to Thomas.

We can talk about Jimmy G's injuries and some uneven play behind him.

Its still 51 TDs to 20 TDs.

 

[Soko]

There were lots of conclusions drawn up in the OP that I disagree with. 

Prime/healthy, I’ll take Kittle.

[mdonnelly21]

8 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

There were lots of conclusions drawn up in the OP that I disagree with. 

Prime/healthy, I’ll take Kittle.

Which ones? 

Gronk and Graham were compared to each other. Gronk was not worlds apart from Graham during like a 5 year stretch. 

Kelce is better than Kittle although that's not a stretch to say the reverse. 

So what do you disagree with? 

[Soko]

3 hours ago, mdonnelly21 said:

Which ones? 

Gronk and Graham were compared to each other. Gronk was not worlds apart from Graham during like a 5 year stretch. 

Kelce is better than Kittle although that's not a stretch to say the reverse. 

So what do you disagree with? 

Were Gronk and Graham worlds apart? No, but I don’t think they were equals, especially with revisionist history, which we have the luxury of right now. Gronk was the better blocker, by FAR. He was the better big play threat. He had more reliable hands. Was able to run routes from anywhere in the formation. Bigger threat carrying the ball. It was just health. Other than that, Gronk really had no limitations. 

I also think that if Kelce’s 2016-2020 happened in 2011, he’d be right in there with those two. Probably better than Graham. Kelce doesn’t/didn’t have the jump ball ability that Graham had, but he is certainly the better route runner (probably best of the 3) and is/was absolutely a bigger threat with the ball in his hands than Graham was. Graham beats him in the red zone for that reason, but Kelce’s comparable or better in most areas. Graham was probably closer to what Waller is right now, essentially a big receiver. 

And then we have Kittle. Shades of all - great route runner, very fast, great with YAC, and a tenacious blocker. He’s also playing in, by far, the worst offensive environment of the three. Kelce gets the nod over Kittle because Kelce is basically a model of consistency, an iron man. Does Kittle have a better skill set on paper? Maybe, very possibly. But you can’t take anything from Kelce, he’s proven it on the field. I’d probably look at Randy Moss’ skill set and want that in a vacuum over Rice’s, but one guy was otherworldly consistent and productive while the other wasn’t. Have to give credit, which Kelce deserves. 

So the idea that Gronk = Graham, Gronk > Kelce, Kelce > Kittle, therefore Graham>Kittle…doesn’t really work, for me.

[Jakuvious]

3 hours ago, mdonnelly21 said:

Which ones? 

Gronk and Graham were compared to each other. Gronk was not worlds apart from Graham during like a 5 year stretch. 

Kelce is better than Kittle although that's not a stretch to say the reverse. 

So what do you disagree with? 

Gronk and Graham comparisons only really lasted like 2 years, around 2012/2013. Before that and after that it was comfortably Gronk, it was just this brief window where Graham's peak aligned with Gronk's health issues, where the debate was basically, would you rather have the more complete Gronk or the more healthy Graham? For the vast majority of their careers, there was no debate. And even moreso now in hindsight, as both careers are winding down, there's no real debate. 

[SkippyX]

If Gronk and Graham were 1 and 1A at TE for only 2 or 3 years, how is that worse than Kittle only putting up 1 elite year and 2 very good years out of 5 so far?

[mdonnelly21]

6 hours ago, SkippyX said:

If Gronk and Graham were 1 and 1A at TE for only 2 or 3 years, how is that worse than Kittle only putting up 1 elite year and 2 very good years out of 5 so far?

I don't think they were 1A and 1B. But Graham for 2 or 3 years was just a touch behind Gronk. And we aren't talking prime stats, but just talent during their prime. 

[SkippyX]

2 hours ago, mdonnelly21 said:

I don't think they were 1A and 1B. But Graham for 2 or 3 years was just a touch behind Gronk. And we aren't talking prime stats, but just talent during their prime. 

So production is meaningless when comparing players? 

Talent is meaningless if it gets you 20 TDs in 5 years instead of 51 and people have to imagine your theoretical talent greatness.

[RaidersAreOne]

Peak Graham was one of the scariest receiving TE's I can remember. Whereas Kittle is more well-rounded in my eyes.