2.42 - Luke Musgrave [TE; Oregon State]

[Refugee]

Just now, squire12 said:

I have the same feeling that Kraft might get ahead of Musgrave early.  Competition should be fun to watch

They are a bit different in what their strengths are, but both have well rounded abilities. I hope Tyler Davis makes it to the PS, where I think he would be in the perfect place to play a few games but get out of the way as the young guys develop. 

[squire12]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Tyler Davis gonna start over both of them, because Love trusts him.

I think he changed his name to Toddler Davis.

Can @Normweigh in on this?

[Mr. Fussnputz]

1 minute ago, squire12 said:

I think he changed his name to Toddler Davis.

Can @Normweigh in on this?

Toddler or Tyler, either way he's a fraud as a football player. I'm looking forward to his new career as a sales rep at Bergstroms.

[Mazrimiv]

52 minutes ago, Sandy said:

Agreed. Part of why I was so high on him throughout the draft process is that while he may not have perfect technique already, he has the tools and the drive to get there. He has the mindset. It's not unreasonable to suggest he can become a plus blocker in time.

Throw in the fact that he's a mismatch as a receiver for just about anyone and he has "future star" written all over him.

Yeah, I am far less concerned about someone who has the "want to" but isn't good at something vs someone who clearly doesn't want to do it.  By all accounts I've read, Musgrave is fine with the idea of blocking.  He's just not particularly good at it right now.

[Norm]

10 minutes ago, squire12 said:

I think he changed his name to Toddler Davis.

Can @Normweigh in on this?

He's going to somehow end up being a useful player after all the **** I've given him. 

It wouldn't even surprise me either.

[squire12]

3 minutes ago, Norm said:

He's going to somehow end up being a useful player after all the **** I've given him. 

It wouldn't even surprise me either.

Just like @vegas492 has done.

Some players just need the right guidance to reach their full potential 

[Sandy]

6 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

Yeah, I am far less concerned about someone who has the "want to" but isn't good at something vs someone who clearly doesn't want to do it.  By all accounts I've read, Musgrave is fine with the idea of blocking.  He's just not particularly good at it right now.

Exactly. Some receiving tight ends make those "business decisions" to the detriment of the run offense.

[Refugee]

3 hours ago, Sandy said:

Exactly. Some receiving tight ends make those "business decisions" to the detriment of the run offense.

Sounds like he needs to sit at the Thanksgiving table with Bakhtiari this year. 

[craig]

32 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

People really didn't do their homework on Musgrave IMO. I think everone was expecting one of LaPorta, Washington, Mayer, or Kincaid. 

If so, I don't think that was wise.  Seemed certain we'd not use a 13/15 on TE, so 2nd round in the 40's was our earliest TE slot.  Pretty safe that Mayer or Kincaid wouldn't still be there at 43.  

DraftNetwork actually had Musgrave as their highest-rated TE.  Even so, they wrote "Musgrave is not a uber-hysical blocker-do not expect him to displace defenders.  Also, he attempted to engage blocks with high hips and pad level.  This limits his overall effectiveness as a man or gap scheme run blocker."  My point being that even a scouting group that liked him a lot, they still didn't profile him as a physical/gritty/blocker type.  On the TE continuum, he profiled more Tonyan than Mercedes, more on the long/lean receiver side than the o-lineman side of the TE continuum.  Obviously Musgrave profiles as much faster than the NFL-version of Tonyan, but both have physiques not naturally oriented towards low pad level.  

Personally, I'm a believe that SB-caliber teams always have good passing games, and that while running a lot can work great against vulnerable defenses, that it often doesn't work that great against playoff-caliber defenses.  So I philosophically support wanting to improve the passing game, a lot.  And I always believe that having pass-catchers who defenses fear often does more for your running game than a no-threat blocking TE.  So I admit I kinda like them having gone with a passing-oriented, vertically-capable guy like Musgrave.  Hope he works out.  

As a blocker, I think Kraft should be very physical and could be really good, and has a good chance to be a very good all-around TE, even if perhaps not the vertical threat that Musgrave may become.  So I kinda love the combination of the two guys.  I could imagine a lot of future two-TE sets with both guys doing well.  And it's not like Musgrave isn't big enough, smart enough, or willing enough to add some strength and to want to improve himself as a blocker.  

[Spartacus]

3 minutes ago, craig said:

If so, I don't think that was wise.  Seemed certain we'd not use a 13/15 on TE, so 2nd round in the 40's was our earliest TE slot.  Pretty safe that Mayer or Kincaid wouldn't still be there at 43.  

DraftNetwork actually had Musgrave as their highest-rated TE.  Even so, they wrote "Musgrave is not a uber-hysical blocker-do not expect him to displace defenders.  Also, he attempted to engage blocks with high hips and pad level.  This limits his overall effectiveness as a man or gap scheme run blocker."  My point being that even a scouting group that liked him a lot, they still didn't profile him as a physical/gritty/blocker type.  On the TE continuum, he profiled more Tonyan than Mercedes, more on the long/lean receiver side than the o-lineman side of the TE continuum.  Obviously Musgrave profiles as much faster than the NFL-version of Tonyan, but both have physiques not naturally oriented towards low pad level.  

Personally, I'm a believe that SB-caliber teams always have good passing games, and that while running a lot can work great against vulnerable defenses, that it often doesn't work that great against playoff-caliber defenses.  So I philosophically support wanting to improve the passing game, a lot.  And I always believe that having pass-catchers who defenses fear often does more for your running game than a no-threat blocking TE.  So I admit I kinda like them having gone with a passing-oriented, vertically-capable guy like Musgrave.  Hope he works out.  

As a blocker, I think Kraft should be very physical and could be really good, and has a good chance to be a very good all-around TE, even if perhaps not the vertical threat that Musgrave may become.  So I kinda love the combination of the two guys.  I could imagine a lot of future two-TE sets with both guys doing well.  And it's not like Musgrave isn't big enough, smart enough, or willing enough to add some strength and to want to improve himself as a blocker.  

I couldn't give a crap about how they are as a blocker in college as long as they have the frame to do it effectively if needed which Musgrave has. 

[vegas492]

I feel this way....  Kincaid is a better route runner and receiver than Kincaid right now.  Kincaid's floor is higher than Musgraves in the receiving game.  Both have more or less the same ceiling.

Musgrave has more "want to" in his blocking game than Kincaid has.

For where each were taken in the draft, I prefer Musgrave.  Doesn't mean I don't like Kincaid, does mean that I like the TE value more in the second round or later than the first round.

Very happy with that pick.  

[craig]

One hesitation with Musgrave, which I also have with Wooden and Brooks, is the Spriggs factor.  Often draftees try to add weight, and sometimes it does more harm than good.  Sometimes weight is mistaken for functional strength, and guys add weight, eat more, thinking that will help them.  Sometimes that comes at the expense of their speed/mobility/quickness/agility/flexibility.  Spriggs obviously added 20 pounds to get to more typical OT weight; after which he was stiff and slow and had none of the quickness/athleticism that was why he got drafted high. 

Not only can added weight sometimes cost flexibility/quickness, sometimes it doesn't really even help their functional play strength.  If Musgrave adds upper body mass, even if it's all muscle and not stomach weight, will that make it easier for him to get low and to leverage?  It might perhaps make pad-level even more problematic, beats me.  

Obviously the training staff is trained to evaluate all that stuff.  So hopefully they can evaluate guys right away and only guide/allow them in directions that will actually help them.  For sure, sometimes guys add really good strength and do become more physical and NFL-competitive, all without losing their mobility/agility/flexibility/quickness/speed.  Hopefully that can be all true for Musgrave, Wooden, Brooks, and VanNess.  And sometimes that improved strength and physicality comes without added weight; sometimes more weight, sometimes not, sometimes less.  

But even within the hypothetical sophistication of the Packers, it hasn't always worked perfectly.  Not sure how much was with vs without Packer training guidance, but we all recall the Amari story last summer: how he'd supposedly added way too much weight, and by working off a lot of that, he was hypothetically supposed to regain some level of quickness.  (That obviously didn't quite make him worth keeping either.). I think a couple of years back K Keke added weight to hypothetically get better against the run; then was supposedly trying to take some off to regain some quickness.  So, I don't feel like the Packers training staff in recent years has a perfect record of being able to perfectly diagnose what's ideal for a player, AND also being able to persuade/direct the player to make those exact modifications.   Seems to be either an inexact science, or else one where some player don't necessarily actually modify themselves the way the staff directs them too.  

[craig]

18 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

I couldn't give a crap about how they are as a blocker in college as long as they have the frame to do it effectively if needed which Musgrave has. 

Yeah, it's not what's behind, it's what's ahead that counts.  If you're confident that he has the frame, that's good to hear. 

I'd wondered if his frame might be a little on the lanky side, without the leg thickness to be ideal physique as a blocker?  And perhaps with longish legs that make it a little harder to bend low and get optimal pad level?  Beats me, I don't know anything.  Given that the Packers are blocking-oriented, and took him that high, suggests that they don't perceive his long-term blocking-potential to be problematic.   

[NFLGURU]

Musgrave is the guy who is going to "kill you ugly".  He isn't going to look pretty doing it, but after the game he'll be the gangly guy which defenses will say how the hell did we let that happen.    4 catches 80 yards and about 3 yards of YAC.  

[craig]

Finally had chance to listen to Sullivan talk about the Musgrave selection. 

1. He made a positive reference regarding his blocking, built into a hyperbole sentence dealing with liking him so much after watching him run and block.  But within the complexity of the sentence, blocking was definitely included as a reason to like him as a prospect, rather than as a yellow-flag reason to hesitate.  
2. Sullivan was very clear that the real standout trait was his speed, his vertical speed, at the size that he has.  Other than Kincaid, obviously faster than the other TE guys.  
3. Acknowledged that of course anybody can get hurt.   But said no health concerns, despite his former injuries. 
4. Spoke pretty effusively about Musgrave's intelligence, and his motivation to prove himself.  My thought:  TE are expected to be able to do so many things physically, lots of various tasks, but I think the ability to read-and-react on the split-second fly is so important for TE's.  For in-line blocking, for on-the-move blocking; for reading seams; defenders; scramble drill; etc..   If he's football smart, that could be really nice.
5. He was pretty enthusiastic about Musgave's long-term potential.  

Fun interview.  Obviously scouts always like the guys they take, otherwise the team wouldn't take them; and very often their enthusiasm proves misguided as a guy's career progresses.  But it's always fun to hear what the scouts liked about a guy they selected.