Eric Ebron cut by Lions

[NFL_Fan]

10 hours ago, beats2rock said:

I remember analysts predicting that the Lions take Donald, OBJ, Lewan, or Martin and passing on Ebron because of his history of drops in College. Mayhew was like Millen 2.0 for us.

[SteelKing728]

8 minutes ago, NFL_Fan said:

i agree...we had Fauria for a Undrafted FA and he put up better numbers in redzone and was so much fun....and basically free!!! Never draft a TE in round 1....never....idc if its Gronk...the value isn't there for me....especially when you have a dumb coach that will just run in shotgun two plays and then everyone knows its time to throw and ohh nice in the dirt or a sack..

I'm out of likes, so I give this to you!

Yeah, Tight End isn't a priority position. Detroit should worry more about rebuilding other parts of their team early with their 1st 2 picks and then consider a TE in the 3rd or 4th.

[NFL_Fan]

22 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said:

I'm out of likes, so I give this to you!

Yeah, Tight End isn't a priority position. Detroit should worry more about rebuilding other parts of their team early with their 1st 2 picks and then consider a TE in the 3rd or 4th.

yeah. i personally like Austin Seferian-Jenkins. I wanted him that year he was drafted, but went pretty early. We have to many holes. Especially for how much we use a TE, I don't think its number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or even 6 priority right now...they should just sign a FA that is healthy and can catch.

[Soko]

@HorizontoZenith

Your post didn’t specify where in the first round, so yeah, I included guys picked later too. Don’t see why their success doesn’t count. 

And I also never really said they were picked right where they should be - saying that so and so wasn’t worth the pick because another guy was picked after them is a complete misrepresentation of my response to your post. Saying that “player y was a bad pick because player z was taken after them” isn’t rationally sound either. 

My response was aimed strictly at tight ends going in the first, and despite majority of those players not having superstar careers (or even great careers), I’d again say there were more hits than misses.

[Soko]

6 hours ago, nextsuperstar1 said:

What is conspicuous in that list of players are the guys not mentioned: Gronk, Witten, Jimmy Graham, Gates.

The truly transcendent tight ends, the guys who dominated and will be remembered, were not first round picks. 

You’re right about that. 

I’m kind of going against the logic I was using earlier, but I don’t really agree with picking/not picking a player because of things like that. Meaning, if I saw a guy in the first round that I thought could play like Gronkowski, I wouldn’t not pick him because you don’t really see the great ones go in the first. 

[Eagles $5$]

Can he block at all?

[MacReady]

Just now, Yin-Yang said:

@HorizontoZenith

Your post didn’t specify where in the first round, so yeah, I included guys picked later too. Don’t see why their success doesn’t count.

It's pretty simple.  It's about value.  Higher up in the first round, the less value you have taking a tight end.  I'll put it this way in a simple process to follow:

You expect your first round draft pick to be an all-pro player.  That's the hope.  Where would you rather have an all-pro player?  QB, LT, Pass Rusher, CB.  Those are the most important positions in today's NFL.  There's the least amount of talent, most amount of need at those positions considering what the NFL is today. 

Say for argument's sake that each player gets a grade 1 out of 100.  You have a tight end at 90 and a pass rusher, QB, left tackle or cornerback at 85 and those 5 points aren't enough to go tight end over a far more important position. 

Teams later in the draft had better seasons (for the most part), and likely have fewer holes.  It's alright for them to take a tight end because they don't have many holes and a tight end might be their only hole.

The players drafted after Ebron are evidence enough for my argument.  Case closed.

One final question: When has a tight end ever been the difference in a game?  You say Gronkowski, I say Brady is throwing to him and Gronkowski with Tyrod Taylor ain't doing crap.

The more a position relies on other positions to excel, the less important that position is.  A corner can take a receiver out of the game regardless of the rest of his defense.  A pass rusher can get to the QB regardless of who is covering the receivers.  A QB can make a talent-devoid offense thrive.  A left tackle can protect the worst QB in the league.

How many tight ends have gone to the pro bowl with a crap QB throwing them the ball?

[Soko]

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

It's pretty simple.  It's about value.  Higher up in the first round, the less value you have taking a tight end.  I'll put it this way in a simple process to follow:

Well yeah, clearly. Not what was said in your original post that I responded to, so moving goal posts makes things sort of moot.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

You expect your first round draft pick to be an all-pro player.  That's the hope.  Where would you rather have an all-pro player?  QB, LT, Pass Rusher, CB.  Those are the most important positions in today's NFL.  There's the least amount of talent, most amount of need at those positions considering what the NFL is today. 

Yeah, you hope they’re all-pros (not that that award is particularly meaningful IMO) but not being an all-pro doesn’t make a first rounder a miss, in my eyes. There are tons of players that are simply solid or good players taken in the first round. I say if they get on the field and are solid players that help a team, then that’s more of a hit than a miss, especially when colossal busts can’t even do that.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Say for argument's sake that each player gets a grade 1 out of 100.  You have a tight end at 90 and a pass rusher, QB, left tackle or cornerback at 85 and those 5 points aren't enough to go tight end over a far more important position. 

Yet wide receivers go top 10 pretty often. Also this kind of goes against the whole “BPA” strategy that seems to work for most winning teams.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

The players drafted after Ebron are evidence enough for my argument.  Case closed.

I mean, it’s a specific case, sure. You can find dozens of individual cases that either contradict or coincide with your opinion - that’s why one example doesn’t cut it. You said tight ends shouldn’t be taken in the first round and I showed you tight ends that were that had success in the league.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

One final question: When has a tight end ever been the difference in a game?  You say Gronkowski, I say Brady is throwing to him and Gronkowski with Tyrod Taylor ain't doing crap.

That doesn’t make sense. Your response to Gronkowski is “well look who’s throwing to him”, which doesn’t contradict that Gronkowski is the difference in plenty of games. And if we’re going to use that rationality, then Rodgers isn’t the difference in any games because with an offensive turnstile-line, then he “ain’t doing crap”. 

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

A corner can take a receiver out of the game regardless of the rest of his defense. 

Nah, even the best defenders can’t cover #1s if the pass rush isn’t getting there and gives the QB too much time to throw.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

A pass rusher can get to the QB regardless of who is covering the receivers. 

Somewhat true, but if the corners are playing soft and the OL doubles, pass rushers come up with 0 sacks all the time. Watt for instance doesn’t do much against NE.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

A QB can make a talent-devoid offense thrive. 

Not very often. Even then, I think we both agree that a quarterback is sort of an exception when it comes to discussing positional values across football.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

A left tackle can protect the worst QB in the league.

Yeah, and the QB can still get sacked if the guard next to him or the tackle on the other side of him is awful.

26 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

How many tight ends have gone to the pro bowl with a crap QB throwing them the ball?

Jack Doyle with Brissett (maybe not crap, but backup quality). Barnidge with Browns.  Not common, but not unheard of. 

There aren’t many really good tight ends on teams with bad quarterback situations. Closest thing to that last was was probably Clay in Buffalo, but it’s not like he’s a top 12 guy or anything, nor is Taylor complete crap. 

Anyways, we can agree to disagree. I don’t hold the “you don’t take position x in this round” mindset unless we’re discussing special teamers. 

[nextsuperstar1]

3 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

You’re right about that. 

I’m kind of going against the logic I was using earlier, but I don’t really agree with picking/not picking a player because of things like that. Meaning, if I saw a guy in the first round that I thought could play like Gronkowski, I wouldn’t not pick him because you don’t really see the great ones go in the first. 

I agree, but maybe it tells us that teams are really bad at evaluating college tight ends predraft. 

[Louis Friend]

3 hours ago, Eagles $5$ said:

Can he block at all?

The few fans who liked him will tell you he improved in that area, but he's a horrible blocker. There was one play where he blocked his guy for a second, the play continued behind him and he's just standing there lost. It perfectly summed up his career in Detroit. If I can find the clip, I'll post it. 

[sp6488]

4 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

@HorizontoZenith

Your post didn’t specify where in the first round, so yeah, I included guys picked later too. Don’t see why their success doesn’t count. 

And I also never really said they were picked right where they should be - saying that so and so wasn’t worth the pick because another guy was picked after them is a complete misrepresentation of my response to your post. Saying that “player y was a bad pick because player z was taken after them” isn’t rationally sound either. 

My response was aimed strictly at tight ends going in the first, and despite majority of those players not having superstar careers (or even great careers), I’d again say there were more hits than misses.

Agreed.  I really hate this argument.  Draft value is about expected results, upside combined with likelihood of realizing it.  Being the first of X position taken doesn't mean you should automatically be the best from the draft ten years down the road.  It means that you should have the best chance of realizing some high level of upside.  There are surely a lot of guys picked after who were far worse in most cases.

[DoleINGout]

17 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Since 2000, you have more hits than misses IMO. Not all world guys, but solid-to very good. 

Todd Heap, Jeremy Shockey, Dallas Clark, Kellen Winslow, Ben Watson, Heath Miller, Vernon Davis, Mercedes Lewis, Greg Olsen, Dustin Keller, Brandon Pettigrew, Jermaine Gresham, Tyler Eifert, jury out on Howard/Engram/Njoku.

Jury came to a decision on Evan Engram, guy is a stud. OJ Howard looks like a Daniel Graham esk pick but should be better. Njoku... who knows yet.

[sp6488]

1 hour ago, nextsuperstar1 said:

I agree, but maybe it tells us that teams are really bad at evaluating college tight ends predraft. 

Maybe, maybe not.  Gronk would likely have been a first rounder were it not for tricky medicals.  I'd argue that Jimmy Graham going in the third round actually speaks to teams being good at spotting/evaluating talent and potential considering his college stats consisted of 1 season with 17 catches for 213 yards and 5 TD.

[nextsuperstar1]

14 minutes ago, sp6488 said:

Maybe, maybe not.  Gronk would likely have been a first rounder were it not for tricky medicals.  I'd argue that Jimmy Graham going in the third round actually speaks to teams being good at spotting/evaluating talent and potential considering his college stats consisted of 1 season with 17 catches for 213 yards and 5 TD.

If you remember Aaron Hernandez went in the fourt round of the Gronk draft. Obviously off the field stuff got in the way, but his production before that was outstanding, and indicative of someone who (based on production) should have been taken higher. 

[sp6488]

1 minute ago, nextsuperstar1 said:

If you remember Aaron Hernandez went in the fourt round of the Gronk draft. Obviously off the field stuff got in the way, but his production before that was outstanding, and indicative of someone who (based on production) should have been taken higher. 

I think the weariness on that front has been largely borne out...