Jump to content

2023: Offseason


onejayhawk

Recommended Posts

It's definitely about the structure. Ours was 6 years for $139M, so $23M per year, but the last year of that deal was $44M unguaranteed, and none of the signing bonus pushes out to year 6, so the odds of him seeing the last year of that deal was non-existent. It was fluff to make it the "highest paid OL ever," since some guys care about that. Really would've been something like $18M per year for 5 years, for $95M overall.

Cincy's 4 year $64M deal seems a lot lower on the surface, but supposedly $42M comes in the first two years, and they guaranteed the same amount that we did ($31M) despite a shorter and lower total deal. What wouldn't surprise me is if Brown takes his first 2 years at $21M and then tries to start renegotiating already in 2025.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, EMAW_KSU said:

You’re the one talking about drafting a TE.  I’m all for best player available.  There’sa stack of DL I have above every TE in this draft.  If a WR that makes Andy want that cheeseburger drops ok, but I’m looking heavily at edge or Mazi the Mountain if he’s available.

What you are saying is contrary to BPA. You are doing a need driven approach.

This is not a good WR draft, especially compared to the last two but it may be the best TE draft in a decade. While there can be DL ahead of a TE, it is contrary to BPA to kick every TE out of the top 31 players. By my count there are at least two and perhaps as many as four the who rate in the top 30-40 players. 

Personally, I go with a modified approach. For the first two rounds, go with the best player at a position of need, and accept that it may not be the most urgent need. Once you get past the top 75 or so, you might as well go pure BPA. Even then, you will have researched your need positions in more depth and can find Jaylen Watson in the 7th round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, onejayhawk said:

What you are saying is contrary to BPA. You are doing a need driven approach.

This is not a good WR draft, especially compared to the last two but it may be the best TE draft in a decade. While there can be DL ahead of a TE, it is contrary to BPA to kick every TE out of the top 31 players. By my count there are at least two and perhaps as many as four the who rate in the top 30-40 players. 

Personally, I go with a modified approach. For the first two rounds, go with the best player at a position of need, and accept that it may not be the most urgent need. Once you get past the top 75 or so, you might as well go pure BPA. Even then, you will have researched your need positions in more depth and can find Jaylen Watson in the 7th round.

There will be a point in this draft where there are multiple TE's on the board,  that would have went a full round earlier in most drafts.    Taking a guy early completely takes TE off the board for the remainder of the draft and you lose the point of that depth.

I have 0 issues taking a TE in this draft,  but it should be when that guy rated a full round above where we take him.    That is why I say taking a TE in the 1st/2nd is dumb.   Combined with the fact we have 3 guys who already know and accept their roles.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RedGold said:

There will be a point in this draft where there are multiple TE's on the board,  that would have went a full round earlier in most drafts.    Taking a guy early completely takes TE off the board for the remainder of the draft and you lose the point of that depth.

I have 0 issues taking a TE in this draft,  but it should be when that guy rated a full round above where we take him.    That is why I say taking a TE in the 1st/2nd is dumb.   Combined with the fact we have 3 guys who already know and accept their roles.     

I would not go this far. If there is a TE who is rated in the top 20 we should take him at #31. And there is at least one TE rated that high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, onejayhawk said:

I would not go this far. If there is a TE who is rated in the top 20 we should take him at #31. And there is at least one TE rated that high.

Well if that is your stance,   your argument for taking a TE because of the the depth of this class is pointless.   

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RedGold said:

Well if that is your stance,   your argument for taking a TE because of the the depth of this class is pointless.

I never argued that we take a TE because of the depth of the class. 

What I argued was that we will have better talent available at our pick at TE because of the depth of the class, especially compared to WR which is not a good class. 

I have argued for years that we need a TE of the future. Kelce has been the ageless man but I still consider it a position of need. If there is value available at TE, even in the first two rounds, take the player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, onejayhawk said:

I never argued that we take a TE because of the depth of the class. 

What I argued was that we will have better talent available at our pick at TE because of the depth of the class, especially compared to WR which is not a good class. 

I have argued for years that we need a TE of the future. Kelce has been the ageless man but I still consider it a position of need. If there is value available at TE, even in the first two rounds, take the player. 

Huh?  That's exactly what I'm saying,  you're talking about taking a guy 5-10 spots over "where they're suppose to go",    when you could just let the board fall to you and take a guy in Rounds 4-5   that would normally go in round 3.    Taking one that is just solid value at the beginning,   completely removes TE from the board at a position that you could get amazing value in the mid/late portions of the draft.        At a position that we have 3 guys who know and accept their role,   that is the type of value you should be looking.     And it's already been stated,  the chances we replace Kelce's production with another TE,   when he starts breaking down..   are slim to none.  

It's not a bad WR class,    their may not be a true #1 guy where you can line up anywhere...  but there will be guys Rounds 1-4 that could produce well in certain roles.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last 15 years, these are the first round draft picks at tight end.

  • Kyle Pitts, Falcons (2021)
  • T.J. Hockenson, Lions (2019)
  • Noah Fant, Broncos (2019)
  • Hayden Hurst, Ravens (2018)
  • O.J. Howard, Buccaneers (2017)
  • Evan Engram, Giants (2017)
  • David Njoku, Browns (2017)
  • Eric Ebron, Lions (2014)
  • Tyler Eifert, Bengals (2013)
  • Jermaine Gresham, Bengals (2010)

Not exactly the human highlight reel. First round TEs are a myth. I’m not saying this Draft isn’t talented, just saying I don’t know that the separation is real.  Most college offenses run very little through the position.

  • Like 3
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...