TE group

[kungfoodude]

10 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

What you are saying isn't always true and I'll give you several examples to demonstrate this.

1) The best player on the board at the end of in round 1 by all consensus is RB (top 15 player in draft who slips b/c of the devaluation of the RB position). Your team is in desperate need of a LT because the current one is getting your QB killed. You already have a serviceable RB in place. The LT has a 2nd round grade and you have the first pick on day 2 of the draft Who do you choose?

2) Your run defense was abysmal the previous season. A DT in round 2 does not provide much in terms of pass rush, but most reports have him rated as the best pure run stuffing DT in the draft. The two highest rated players on your board at the time are a TE and tweener at OLB/DE who slipped into round 2 after a run on WR's. Who do you choose?

3) Your pass rush rush is solid across the board. You even have guy coming off of the bench to provide production. Your secondary in below average. No Safety on the roster is a difference maker and as a unit the squad doesn't have an INT. The highest rated player on the board is a DE. The 5th highest rated player on the board is a an intelligent ball hawking Safety. Which player would make the team immediately better? 

1) I think the BPA logic applies when your team is solid across the board and you can afford to draft for depth

2) I think it also applies when your team stinks and any solid player will be an immediate upgrade over what you already have.

I agree that you should NEVER reach for a player when you are need at a position like we did for Bryce Young. But I also think if there's is a player on the board that will fill a glaring weakness you need to take him even if a player with a higher over all ranking is available at another position (which isn't a need)

 

Well I should also say another caveat is positional value. You have to be careful violating that.

For the scenarios you are describing, those are also things that free agency is for. Free agency should always set up the draft. Improve the roster and then go shopping for things to potentially take your roster up a notch. 

Lastly, we are in scenario 2. Our roster is still not good and we have holes at most position groups. We are actually in the "BPA All Day" range.

 

[tukafan21]

4 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

Literally three of the top 10 overall receivers from this draft so far(guys I really liked pre-draft, BTW) are not 1st round TE's.

 

1 hour ago, X-Clown said:

I will never understand with how we've seen things play out over the years that there is a such thing as we KNOW such and such player will be great before they've taken a snap. Kyle Pitts came into the league with more hype than any TE prospect I can remember going 4th overall (thanks Falcons for drafting him one pick before Jamarr Chase). Eric Ebron and TJ Hockenson are two others that come to mind. Bowers had a historically great rookie year, but the knock on him was staying healthy and so far this year that's been a huge issue. Warren wasn't even the first TE drafted in this year's class. 

You guys aren't following me

It's not that 1st round TEs are guaranteed to be instant impact players and it's not that you can only find elite TEs in the first.  But realistically, if a TE is expected to be a true elite player at the position, particularly as a rookie, they're going to be taken in the 1st round these days.

I can't see a situation where in the 2nd round of the draft, there will be a TE there that would be expected to be an immediate and significant upgrade over what we have on the roster for next year already.  Any TE taken there would go into the season expected to be a backup to the guys we already have (which sure, they could over take them and be our starter, but it would be more of a surprise than an expectation).

If we bring in another TE for next year, they better be immediately slotted in as our #1 TE the second we draft/sign him or I don't see it as a worthy use of pick/cap.  The only way I see us getting a known and immediate TE upgrade next year is to splash in FA or draft one in the 1st round.

Because of that combined with the players who will be available in the 1st round at positions we have a greater need, i.e. LB, DB, and DL, I then don't see a scenario where taking a TE in the 1st round would make any sense either.

But say we're picking at like 15 next year, a Bowers type of TE falls and it feels like any defensive player at that spot would be a real reach or not a good fit for our schemes.  Then sure, I'd be open to considering it, I just find that to be highly unlikely of a situation to happen, hence my feeling comfortable with TE for next year and not wanting us to target it this offseason as of right now.

Edited 3 hours ago by tukafan21

[SCO96]

14 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

For the scenarios you are describing, those are also things that free agency is for. Free agency should always set up the draft. Improve the roster and then go shopping for things to potentially take your roster up a notch. 

FA may or may not be the best option each time. You know as well as I do that the LT is the highest paid position on offense behind QB and WR. If you have cap concerns, it would be better to draft a quality LT and hold him for 3-4 years before you have to sign him to a long term (and expensive 2nd contract).

I wouldn't want to acquire a run stuffing DT in FA if I could get a younger one much cheaper in the draft. 

Let's say no good Safties are on the market when prior to drafting. Once again you'd go to the draft. FA is a good way to feel out the roster prior to the draft, but it's possible to REACH there too. FO's usually end up over playing guys (at least at certain positions) who have already peaked. Besides, you always have to consider that the team that let them go didn't think they were worth the price they were asking to retain them.

21 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

Lastly, we are in scenario 2. Our roster is still not good and we have holes at most position groups. We are actually in the "BPA All Day" range.

That certainly applies to our defense. We could draft the BPA at any level of our defense and immediately improve our team.

A stud on the line beside DB would help the the run and pass defense.

Our LB core needs a thumper/impact player at any position.

We need another CB to play alongside JC.

We have yet to see a Safety on our roster significantly impact a game this year.

[UNCrules2187]

FWIW PFF grades Mitchell Evans as the #1 TE OVR in the league so far this season. 
 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by UNCrules2187

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

 

You guys aren't following me

It's not that 1st round TEs are guaranteed to be instant impact players and it's not that you can only find elite TEs in the first.  But realistically, if a TE is expected to be a true elite player at the position, particularly as a rookie, they're going to be taken in the 1st round these days.

I can't see a situation where in the 2nd round of the draft, there will be a TE there that would be expected to be an immediate and significant upgrade over what we have on the roster for next year already.  Any TE taken there would go into the season expected to be a backup to the guys we already have (which sure, they could over take them and be our starter, but it would be more of a surprise than an expectation).

If we bring in another TE for next year, they better be immediately slotted in as our #1 TE the second we draft/sign him or I don't see it as a worthy use of pick/cap.  The only way I see us getting a known and immediate TE upgrade next year is to splash in FA or draft one in the 1st round.

Because of that combined with the players who will be available in the 1st round at positions we have a greater need, i.e. LB, DB, and DL, I then don't see a scenario where taking a TE in the 1st round would make any sense either.

But say we're picking at like 15 next year, a Bowers type of TE falls and it feels like any defensive player at that spot would be a real reach or not a good fit for our schemes.  Then sure, I'd be open to considering it, I just find that to be highly unlikely of a situation to happen, hence my feeling comfortable with TE for next year and not wanting us to target it this offseason as of right now.

I think the issues are:

- You think the TE's on the roster are much better than they actually are.

- You are hyperfocused on the 1st round.

- You are a "need" based draft guy.

All of those can get you in trouble as a roster builder.

[Move the Panthers to Raleigh]

Evans owns this unit

[kungfoodude]

5 minutes ago, SCO96 said:

FA may or may not be the best option each time. You know as well as I do that the LT is the highest paid position on offense behind QB and WR. If you have cap concerns, it would be better to draft a quality LT and hold him for 3-4 years before you have to sign him to a long term (and expensive 2nd contract).

I wouldn't want to acquire a run stuffing DT in FA if I could get a younger one much cheaper in the draft. 

Let's say no good Safties are on the market when prior to drafting. Once again you'd go to the draft. FA is a good way to feel out the roster prior to the draft, but it's possible to REACH there too. FO's usually end up over playing guys (at least at certain positions) who have already peaked. Besides, you always have to consider that the team that let them go didn't think they were worth the price they were asking to retain them.

That certainly applies to our defense. We could draft the BPA at any level of our defense and immediately improve our team.

A stud on the line beside DB would help the the run and pass defense.

Our LB core needs a thumper/impact player at any position.

We need another CB to play alongside JC.

We have yet to see a Safety on our roster significantly impact a game this year.

It applies to the offense largely, as well. Not as significantly but if you go position by position taking into account core players or guys that can't be upgraded, the numbers get pretty small. 

There is a ton of nuance to each scenario, as you are pointing out and I am very aware of that. 

There is no such thing as TRUE BPA because it flies in the face of logic. But overall, BPA needs to be the winning factor over need, IMO. That's how you end up bad for a long time by panic drafting. Gettleman, Rhule and Fitterer were the kings of that poo.

[kungfoodude]

5 minutes ago, Move the Panthers to Raleigh said:

Evans owns this unit

To be fair, it's a pretty small sample size but I think he needs to get getting a lot more reps based on the limited looks.

[tukafan21]

1 minute ago, kungfoodude said:

I think the issues are:

- You think the TE's on the roster are much better than they actually are.

- You are hyperfocused on the 1st round.

- You are a "need" based draft guy.

All of those can get you in trouble as a roster builder.

I'm not a need based guy, I'm very much a combination of need and BPA.  But realistically, we have so many defensive needs next year (even with our defense playing better) that I can't see a situation where there is a TE available that is such a no brainer combined with a lack of defensive options that would be similarly ranked as BPA's.

And no, I don't think the TE's are much better than they are, but I do think there is real potential in them, particularly as a group.  I don't think we have the next elite TE who can do it all, but I do think between the 3 of them we have guys who can do everything we need from the TE position while we use our draft and cap assets elsewhere while we evaluate the TE position for another season.

And yes, I'm hyperfocused on the 1st round in this situation as I very much think that even a TE drafted in the 2nd round... while they could end up being a stud for us and take over as our main TE at some point, they would start the season 3rd or 4th on the depth chart.

Any team that doesn't already have a SB contending roster and is taking a Week 1 3rd string TE with their 2nd round pick would be utterly insane.  

And this of course comes down to who's available and what we do in FA this offseason, but personally, if I'm Morgan (or whoever the GM is next year), I'm going into the draft with Center as my main focus with our 2nd round pick.  

[kungfoodude]

Just now, tukafan21 said:

I'm not a need based guy, I'm very much a combination of need and BPA.  But realistically, we have so many defensive needs next year (even with our defense playing better) that I can't see a situation where there is a TE available that is such a no brainer combined with a lack of defensive options that would be similarly ranked as BPA's.

And no, I don't think the TE's are much better than they are, but I do think there is real potential in them, particularly as a group.  I don't think we have the next elite TE who can do it all, but I do think between the 3 of them we have guys who can do everything we need from the TE position while we use our draft and cap assets elsewhere while we evaluate the TE position for another season.

And yes, I'm hyperfocused on the 1st round in this situation as I very much think that even a TE drafted in the 2nd round... while they could end up being a stud for us and take over as our main TE at some point, they would start the season 3rd or 4th on the depth chart.

Any team that doesn't already have a SB contending roster and is taking a Week 1 3rd string TE with their 2nd round pick would be utterly insane.  

And this of course comes down to who's available and what we do in FA this offseason, but personally, if I'm Morgan (or whoever the GM is next year), I'm going into the draft with Center as my main focus with our 2nd round pick.  

I mean we had more of a defensive need in the 2025 draft than we may in the 2026 draft(so far). But we took a TE. We did it in the 5th round. Also he has overwhelmingly been our best TE to date. He and the FA pickup.

I think you just have an extremely skewed view of TE's in the NFL. I would implore you to take a look at some draft history, depth charts and career progressions of a lot of those players. You are going to see ample examples of lower round guys being drafted and then immediately starting at TE. The reason it isn't rare is that there aren't many TE's taken in the 1st at all. 

It's the same with other positions. You think that it's impossible to find a C outside the 1st? Well....most of them aren't 1st rounders because they rarely get taken there. How about OG? The NFL is mostly non-1st round OG's and the elite tier is almost all not former 1st round OG's. How about RB's? Pretty similar right?

That's not just numbers, it's positional value historically. High value positions litter the first round. It's always been that way.

[tukafan21]

31 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I mean we had more of a defensive need in the 2025 draft than we may in the 2026 draft(so far). But we took a TE. We did it in the 5th round. Also he has overwhelmingly been our best TE to date. He and the FA pickup.

I think you just have an extremely skewed view of TE's in the NFL. I would implore you to take a look at some draft history, depth charts and career progressions of a lot of those players. You are going to see ample examples of lower round guys being drafted and then immediately starting at TE. The reason it isn't rare is that there aren't many TE's taken in the 1st at all. 

It's the same with other positions. You think that it's impossible to find a C outside the 1st? Well....most of them aren't 1st rounders because they rarely get taken there. How about OG? The NFL is mostly non-1st round OG's and the elite tier is almost all not former 1st round OG's. How about RB's? Pretty similar right?

That's not just numbers, it's positional value historically. High value positions litter the first round. It's always been that way.

I mean, I obviously don't think it's impossible to find a Center outside of the 1st, in my last post I said that's what I'd be looking to use our 2nd round pick on this upcoming draft.

And sure, if there is a TE there in the 4th or 5th round that we like, I'm not against taking them, but I also wouldn't consider taking a TE there "upgrading the position" in the sense we're talking about it here.  That's a draft pick where it could upgrade the position, but not a concerted effort to upgrade the position, which are two different things.

And that's my point... it's not about NOT upgrading the position, it's that I think we have potential at the position on cheap contracts for the next few years, and because of that, I'd personally rather use our 1st 3 draft picks and available cap room on other positions before considering a TE with them.

With what we know right now, I'm ranking LB, DB, DE, Center, and backup OL as bigger needs than TE going into next offseason.  Sure that could always change based on how our season finishes and/or who we sign in FA, but as of this moment, TE is not high on my list of upgrades for next year.

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, tukafan21 said:

I mean, I obviously don't think it's impossible to find a Center outside of the 1st, in my last post I said that's what I'd be looking to use our 2nd round pick on this upcoming draft.

And sure, if there is a TE there in the 4th or 5th round that we like, I'm not against taking them, but I also wouldn't consider taking a TE there "upgrading the position" in the sense we're talking about it here.  That's a draft pick where it could upgrade the position, but not a concerted effort to upgrade the position, which are two different things.

And that's my point... it's not about NOT upgrading the position, it's that I think we have potential at the position on cheap contracts for the next few years, and because of that, I'd personally rather use our 1st 3 draft picks and available cap room on other positions before considering a TE with them.

With what we know right now, I'm ranking LB, DB, DE, Center, and backup OL as bigger needs than TE going into next offseason.  Sure that could always change based on how our season finishes and/or who we sign in FA, but as of this moment, TE is not high on my list of upgrades for next year.

I am not saying what I would or wouldn't want us to do because it isn't draft time. My general rule is that if a draft has very strong and deep classes of a position, you target those. BPA, after all.

So if those "need" positions fall into that, fine. But we often as an organization ignore these things and reach in drafts that have weak classes at specific positions. Hence why I don't agree with your philosophy for the most part.

It's easy to understand the "need" part. But needs shouldn't lead to rash decisions and poor drafting. The past decade has been a textbook example of that here in Carolina. Ignoring BPA and reaching for need more than vice versa. With hefty amounts of "smartest guy in the room" syndrome, which has been a massive accelerant to the dumpster fire.

We just aren't going to agree on draft strategy. We don't view team building the same way.