RS Mock #1 - We Like to Have Fun Here

[vegas492]

15 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Is that the criteria, one good year, two ****ty years. 
 

He has 6 TD’s in three years. He has 1000 yards over the last two years. 
 

Maybe we have different views on what a generational talent looks like. 
 

The correct answer is never. 

Hock is about as good as it can get at TE, especially if drafting high.  Maybe he is in fact a "generational" talent at TE.  You just have to lower the bar on that definition because of the position (TE).

Your point stands in my book, even a "generational" talent at TE is not worth it.  

[ReasonablySober]

7 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Hock is about as good as it can get at TE, especially if drafting high.  Maybe he is in fact a "generational" talent at TE.  You just have to lower the bar on that definition because of the position (TE).

Your point stands in my book, even a "generational" talent at TE is not worth it.  

My counter to that is if you were handed the information that Gronk, Kittle, and Kelcey were going to be what they turned out to be, you would take them top five in just about any class. That they weren't taken that high doesn't mean they weren't that valuable to their teams. Mahomes doesn't have two rings right now without Kelce. Brady isn't winning all those rings without Gronk. A **truly** elite tight end can transform an offense in ways that even the best WRs don't. 

It's just a matter of identifying them. 

[Mazrimiv]

The fantasy of Bowers being some kind of game altering player lives on.  Bowers isn't Gronk by a long shot.  His ceiling is somewhere around Kittle, and it's far from guaranteed that he'll reach that level.  GB has no reason to make Bowers a priority, let alone make an aggressive trade up to get him.

[ReasonablySober]

6 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

The fantasy of Bowers being some kind of game altering player lives on.  Bowers isn't Gronk by a long shot.  His ceiling is somewhere around Kittle, and it's far from guaranteed that he'll reach that level.  GB has no reason to make Bowers a priority, let alone make an aggressive trade up to get him.

 

He'll be better than Kittle if he lands in the right spot. He's a better prospect than Kittle was in every way.

But who knows? Kyle Pitts should be Megatron-esque but he landed on a team with garbage QB play and a garbage coach. Like Kittle, Bowers needs to land on a team with a coach who understands how to use his unique ability. 

[Mr. Fussnputz]

So we don't like Watson because he can't stay healthy, so we trade him to another team that apparently has no concerns about his inability to stay healthy. Please explain why the other team is going to overlook our injury concerns with Watson and make that trade.

[ReasonablySober]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

So we don't like Watson because he can't stay healthy, so we trade him to another team that apparently has no concerns about his inability to stay healthy. Please explain why the other team is going to overlook our injury concerns with Watson and make that trade.

I'm playing make believe on that one. I have no idea what kind of value Watson has, but I highly doubt it's what the PFF simulator believes. 

But I'd probably use next year's first round pick to move up and get Bowers. There are six guys I'd give up a haul for: MHJr, Odunze, Nabers, Bowers, Arnold, and Mitchell. I'm sitting at #25 or trading down for anyone else.

[vegas492]

15 hours ago, ReasonablySober said:

My counter to that is if you were handed the information that Gronk, Kittle, and Kelcey were going to be what they turned out to be, you would take them top five in just about any class. That they weren't taken that high doesn't mean they weren't that valuable to their teams. Mahomes doesn't have two rings right now without Kelce. Brady isn't winning all those rings without Gronk. A **truly** elite tight end can transform an offense in ways that even the best WRs don't. 

It's just a matter of identifying them. 

First point, you are right.  I'd argue Gonzo was an equivalent if not better than those guys.  Winslow Sr, too.  Not sure those guys ever won a SB.

Now....look at those 3 that you brought up and then look at all the first round TE's that were the "next big things".  Top of my head, Vernon Davis, Ebron, Pettigrew, Engram, Howard, Winslow Jr, Shockey.....  and there are more..... not worth it.  So, run the math and see how likely it is to get Gronk, Kittle or Kelce.

Or?  Gronk was taken where he should have been taken due to the back injury.  Kittle was taken a lot later, and I remember there was a story on him as to why he slipped, but I cannot recall, either way, it was a bad eval by the NFL as a whole.  Kelce?  I want to say he went a round lower than he should, and I want to say it was due to character issues, but I'm not really sure.

Onto Brady, he won without Gronk.  Gronk helped, no doubt.  But Tommy did just fine without him.

Last point, "it's just a matter of identifying them."  100% agree.  Seems like the second round and third round are great rounds to take TE's.  Your three guys listed are prime examples.

[VegasDan]

If we could pull off that trade it would be quite a steal. We could replace Watson and pick a WR who is as good and more reliable (which is why Denver would never make that deal). This would be in the realm when the Bills traded for Diggs and Minny used that pick on Justin Jefferson. Got a better and younger receiver at a fraction of the cost.

 

I like the players for the most part. Wouldn't pick Bowers but go for fashanu, or CB thomas, or trade back a bit for Dejean. No TEs.

Edited April 11 by VegasDan