Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Kyle Pitts as a WR/TE Good for Carolina ?


Leotiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Pantha-kun said:

He is not a damn TE. If he can't or wont block hes a WR. Seriously. Especially because we lost Manhertz. 

 

Kyle Pitts did a great job blocking against Bama. So he absolutely CAN block. He is not a WR. This was what people who don’t watch the Gators kept spouting all year because he wasn’t asked to block as a Sophmore. Then during the game day thread for the Gators vs Bama game everyone who doesn’t watch seemed surprised as to how well he was blocking when he wasn’t running routes. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, rippadonn said:

Pitts had like 750yrds this year iirc.

4300-750=3550 yrds

 

That's still pretty damn good even without Pitts, much better than most of his peers.

He may not be flashy but he's a much better QB than teh huddle gives credit for. Another one of those QBs people will be wondering about why he wasn't picked by the genius bottom feeder NFL teams.

 


I like Trask a lot ! So this pains me to say but if Pitts wasn’t out those stats would have been lower by more then 750 yards... I like Trask but Sec teams werr game planning to stop Pitts and they could not .. that’s a super nice thang to have for any qb 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we want a tall, fast, redzone target that's not going to be an in-line blocker, we can wait until the 3rd/4th round to draft that guy (Strachan or Fehoko).  No need to get Pitts at #8.  Plus, we just signed Dan Arnold... a tall, rezone target that's not a blocking TE.  That signing took Pitts out of the picture for us, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

If we want a tall, fast, redzone target that's not going to be an in-line blocker, we can wait until the 3rd/4th round to draft that guy (Strachan or Fehoko).  No need to get Pitts at #8.  Plus, we just signed Dan Arnold... a tall, rezone target that's not a blocking TE.  That signing took Pitts out of the picture for us, IMO.

No third rounder or Arnold has the talent Pitts does. However, I don’t believe he’s even going to be on the board when we pick anyway. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Varking said:

No third rounder or Arnold has the talent Pitts does. However, I don’t believe he’s even going to be on the board when we pick anyway. 

 If Pitts were available at #8 and the 4 QBs are gone, I have a feeling he still would not be the pick or the team would trade back.   I don't think Brady values the TE position highly, especially as a top 10 pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

 If Pitts were available at #8 and the 4 QBs are gone, I have a feeling he still would not be the pick or the team would trade back.   I don't think Brady values the TE position highly, especially as a top 10 pick.

Is an LT available at that spot we believe in? If so, LT is the pick. I don’t trust any corners at this spot. Outside of Slater/Sewell, if QBs 1-4 are gone, I could see Pitts being the pick. I just don’t think he makes it to 8. Brady values offense, period. If he had an elite TE, he would use him. He hasn’t had one to work with but that’s not his fault. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Varking said:

Kyle Pitts did a great job blocking against Bama. So he absolutely CAN block. He is not a WR. This was what people who don’t watch the Gators kept spouting all year because he wasn’t asked to block as a Sophmore. Then during the game day thread for the Gators vs Bama game everyone who doesn’t watch seemed surprised as to how well he was blocking when he wasn’t running routes. 

He did a great job blocking...for a WR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Varking said:

No third rounder or Arnold has the talent Pitts does. However, I don’t believe he’s even going to be on the board when we pick anyway. 

Pains me to say that's likely true. Pitts is damn close to that megatron freak but at TE. He also has production to match eye popping athletic ability.  And yeah Pitts is another few levels above Arnold. I mean I like what Arnold is going to bring as a pass catcher, but even in that regards, Pitts is the better receiver. He's grown on me as our pick if Sewell and the top 4 QBs are gone. I'm hoping atl and miami pass on him.

.

8 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

 If Pitts were available at #8 and the 4 QBs are gone, I have a feeling he still would not be the pick or the team would trade back.   I don't think Brady values the TE position highly, especially as a top 10 pick.

Brady would definitely use him. We saw the TE still used in NO with Brady. In 2018, the #3 guy in receptions was 38 year old TE Ben Watson. In 17, they had Hill and no one at the position to use. When NO has one they use one, see Cook in 2019 and even 2020. Brady is from the school of Payton so it's not like they never use a TE. Peyton has never had a top TE since Jimmy Graham. And oh he was dominant in 2011-2014. 

 

Let's be honest, Brady had 3 top WR at LSU: Chase, Jefferson, and Marshal. Maybe all 1st rounders. Hell the RB was also a 1st rounder so yeah  the weekend link at TE didn't get the ball as much. Everyone goes with Moss getting 47 receptions and 570 yards not using the TE. BTW, those are LSU records, and Moss's only season of merit. Give him a top 5 TE, and he's not going to just put him in for only blocking. Think the Arnold signing points to a willingness to go get good receivers at TE.

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.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
    • Bro I don't mind debating you, but did you really have to write all that to get your point across.   This isn't Madden. If you have the #1 pick you literally control your own destiny. If nobody wants to trade which I have a hard time believing they won't then you obviously take the best QB.   I think we will have suitors. If that's Madden then so be it.
×
×
  • Create New...