(02-01-2021, 11:59 AM)Rubekahn29 Wrote: My only fear with Pitts is our HC doesn't like to use TEs very much. 

People keep saying this, but it’s really not true. Go back and watch the first couple games with Uzomah this season. He had 11 targets, and that was without even finishing the second game. Uzomah also had Burrow’s longest TD pass for a while.

If you give ZT a weapon like Pitts he’s going to use him.

Don’t get your hopes up, if there is anything I’ve learned these past two years it’s that this staff is extremely stubborn. I can see them sitting around going “Drew Sample can develop into a good TE.”, “We drafted LBs last year that showed some promise!”.

I’m scared they are going to overthink things and reach on an OL prospect.

(02-01-2021, 06:57 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I’d be ecstatic if we take Pitts.

Hard pass on Parsons. And I felt that way even before all these character concerns started coming out.

Even if both Pitts and Parsons reach their full potential who would you rather have; a Travis Kelce type weapon at TE? Or whoever the best stack LB in the league currently is? It probably says a lot that I’m not even sure off the top of my head who that is right now.

We have Kelce vs Gronk in this Super Bowl, and last year we had Kelce vs Kittle. An elite TE is just an absolute matchup nightmare in today’s NFL.

Bobby Wagner for the Seahawks

1st Team All-Pro each of the last 5 years, was 2nd team the year before that, and 1st team the year before that.

I'd take a Bobby Wagner in a heartbeat (who wouldn't take a 1st ballot HoFer?) if you can guarantee him, but I don't think he has as much impact on the game as Kelce does now, or Gronk did in the past. I also don't think Parson is Wagner. Neither performance nor character.

I still think I am in on Chase over Pitts (if Sewell isn't there), though. Look what Diggs did for Allen by giving him a true #1. Also look what Jefferson did for the Vikings as a rookie, and then realize that Chase was significantly better. 

Nearly 1,800 yards, over 21 yards per catch, 20 TDs. If they can't have the generational OT talent in Sewell, they should take the absurd WR talent that also already has chemistry with our QB. They're going to have to double him, and that means more 1-on-1 coverage for Boyd and Higgins, 1 less guy in the box for Mixon, or 1 less blitzer for our OL to pick up.

(02-01-2021, 10:43 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: And the Bucs are probably going to lose to Travis Kelce and KC...

Anyway, you don’t “need” a stud LB anymore. At least not as much as pass rush and coverage. I think we should let Logan Wilson, ADG, and Pratt develop and see what we have in them before we think about adding yet another young LB.

You don't "need" a stud TE to win a sb anymore either. I never said take a LB. 

(02-01-2021, 01:13 PM)Big_Ern Wrote: You don't "need" a stud TE to win a sb anymore either. I never said take a LB. 

I never claimed you do (unlike your statement about “needing an Alpha LB.”

But let’s look at the last bunch of Super Bowl winners shall we?

Chiefs - Kelce
Pats - Gronk
Eagles- Ertz
Broncos - Owen Daniels

All multiple time Pro Bowlers.

I’d say you have to go back to 2013 (Seahawks) to find the last team that won a SB without a top TE.

(02-01-2021, 01:25 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: I never claimed you do (unlike your statement about “needing an Alpha LB.”

But let’s look at the last bunch of Super Bowl winners shall we?

Chiefs - Kelce
Pats - Gronk
Eagles- Ertz
Broncos - Owen Daniels

All multiple time Pro Bowlers.

I’d say you have to go back to 2013 (Seahawks) to find the last team that won a SB without a top TE.

Owen Daniels 2015 (SB year): 46/517 (11.2)/3  (59.7% catch rate)

He was hardly a stud.

Gronkowski 2018 (SB year): 47/682 (14.5)/3  (65.3% catch rate) 

Good, but nowhere near Gronk good and not a "top TE". Neither of them were Pro Bowlers in those years. They were both at the tail ends of their careers. In fact, both of those guys retired after those years. 

Heck, Owen Daniels wasn't even an above-average TE in 2015 (he was 17th in receiving yards among TEs).

(02-01-2021, 11:57 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: And the exact same can be said for Pitts as a TE. Maybe even longer.

I can't remember where I saw it, but I recall someone mentioning Pitts was the best TE prospect to enter the draft in two decades.
Vernon Davis has been the highest TE drafted in the past two decades at 6, and Pitts arguably had a better season than he did leading up to the draft.

Davis 2005 (11 games) - 51 rec, 871 yards, 6 TDs
Pitts 2020 (8 games) - 43 rec, 770 yards, 12 TDs

A big reason Davis went so high in the draft is because of his Combine too. 4.38 40 yard dash, 10.67 ft broad jump, 42" vert, 33 bench reps. 10 yard split of 1.53 secs, 20 yard split of 2.56 secs. 7.0 second 3-cone. He did that at 254 lbs.

If Pitts can come close to Davis's measurables on top of his ridiculous tape and production, he definitely will be discussed around 5th pick.

(02-01-2021, 01:50 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Ok Fred, nice stats. Regardless of catch rates (seriously?) they all had BIG NAME  tight ends. Or do you want to quibble over that too?

Kelce, Kittle, Ertz, Gronk, there just is no denying the impact of TE’s in the modern NFL.

Oh, okay. So you're saying a big NAME TE is more important to a SB win than how that TE actually performed. Got it, Fred. The Bengals will just have to work on getting Shannon Sharpe out of retirement.

Also yes, catch rates are an important stat to include. Not for this thread in particular necessarily, but in general when talking about pass catchers. If you are only catching 50% of your targets, 500 yards isn't as good as 500 yards while catching 60% of your targets. It's why Michael Thomas, even though he didn't have a high yards per catch (career 11.7), he was catching over 80% of his targets the previous two years. That's absurdly high.

(02-01-2021, 01:44 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I can't remember where I saw it, but I recall someone mentioning Pitts was the best TE prospect to enter the draft in two decades.
Vernon Davis has been the highest TE drafted in the past two decades at 6, and Pitts arguably had a better season than he did leading up to the draft.

Davis 2005 (11 games) - 51 rec, 871 yards, 6 TDs
Pitts 2020 (8 games) - 43 rec, 770 yards, 12 TDs

A big reason Davis went so high in the draft is because of his Combine too. 4.38 40 yard dash, 10.67 ft broad jump, 42" vert, 33 bench reps. 10 yard split of 1.53 secs, 20 yard split of 2.56 secs. 7.0 second 3-cone. He did that at 254 lbs.

If Pitts can come close to Davis's measurables on top of his ridiculous tape and production, he definitely will be discussed around 5th pick.

Worth noting that despite 2020 being a partial season for a lot of teams...

In 2005, there were only 7 QBs in college who threw for 3,500+ yards, and 2 that threw for 4,000+ yards.
In 2020 there were 5 QBs who threw for 3,500+ yards, and 2 that threw for 4,000+ yards.
(17 who threw for 3,500+, 4 who threw for 4,000+, and 2 who threw for 5,000+ in 2019 for a full season reference.)

In 2005 there were only 5 QBs who threw for 30+ TDs, 0 for 40+ TDs.
In 2020 there were 6 QBs who threw for 30+ TDs, 2 for 40+ TDs.

In 2005 there was only 1 QB who had 70%+ completion rate.
In 2020 there were 8 QBs who had 70%+ completion rate.  

Eras aren't exactly same. It's why I keep wishing for a football version of ERA+/OPS+ so we can directly compare players from different eras without having to keep in mind the statistical differences in norms.

(02-01-2021, 02:08 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Worth noting that despite 2020 being a partial season for a lot of teams...

In 2005, there were only 7 QBs in college who threw for 3,500+ yards, and 2 that threw for 4,000+ yards.
In 2020 there were 5 QBs who threw for 3,500+ yards, and 2 that threw for 4,000+ yards.
(17 who threw for 3,500+, 4 who threw for 4,000+, and 2 who threw for 5,000+ in 2019 for a full season reference.)

In 2005 there were only 5 QBs who threw for 30+ TDs, 0 for 40+ TDs.
In 2020 there were 6 QBs who threw for 30+ TDs, 2 for 40+ TDs.

In 2005 there was only 1 QB who had 70%+ completion rate.
In 2020 there were 8 QBs who had 70%+ completion rate.  

Eras aren't exactly same. It's why I keep wishing for a football version of ERA+/OPS+ so we can directly compare players from different eras without having to keep in mind the statistical differences in norms.

True, but you can also say an elite pass-catching TE is more important now than it was back in the early 2000's.
So therefore, it should be more realistic for a TE to go in the Top 10 now compared to back then.

I think Pitts absolutely should be in the same discussion as Chase, Smith, and Waddle. The order should just come down to what your team's depth chart looks like and what offensive scheme you are trying to run.

EDIT - Compare Pitts's final college season to Eric Ebron and TJ Hockenson, the other two TEs who have gone in the Top 10 but have come in this "era."
Ebron 2013 (13 games) - 62 rec, 973 yards, 3 TDs
Hockenson 2018 (13 games) - 49 rec, 760 yards, 6 TDs

If they were in the same draft class with Pitts, I'd take Pitts over both.

(02-01-2021, 01:42 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Owen Daniels 2015 (SB year): 46/517 (11.2)/3  (59.7% catch rate)

He was hardly a stud.

Gronkowski 2018 (SB year): 47/682 (14.5)/3  (65.3% catch rate) 

Good, but nowhere near Gronk good and not a "top TE". Neither of them were Pro Bowlers in those years. They were both at the tail ends of their careers. In fact, both of those guys retired after those years. 

Heck, Owen Daniels wasn't even an above-average TE in 2015 (he was 17th in receiving yards among TEs).

Owen Daniels probably doesn’t belong with the rest, that’s fair, but Gronk’s numbers were down a bit in 2018 because he missed a few games. Almost 700 yards in 13 games is still pretty good though. He came up clutch in the Super Bowl, too. 6 catches for 87 yards. In a low scoring defensive game like that it made a difference.

Anyway, the point still stands with the guys like Kelce, Kittle (did that offense even have any WR’s?), and Ertz.

(02-01-2021, 02:00 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Oh, okay. So you're saying a big NAME TE is more important to a SB win than how that TE actually performed. Got it, Fred. The Bengals will just have to work on getting Shannon Sharpe out of retirement.

The reason I say even just the name matters a lot is situations like we saw at times with AJ this season. He still demanded attention. And opened it up for other guys. There was at least a couple games where teams stupidly put their best CB’s on AJ (Cleveland with Ward, Philly with Slay) and that helped Boyd and Tee. Even an 80% version of Gronk would still scare me if I’m an opposing DC.

At #5 it's Pitts or Sewell for me. That could change, but I doubt it.

(02-01-2021, 11:34 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: No they haven’t. At least not if you put any stock in to PFF grades. I think it was Whatever that posted that list of the recently taken high 1st round LBers, and there was a bunch of grades in the 40’s and 50’s. Devin White was a 43.4 this year for example.

LBers takes a lot of time to develop. Idk why you keep trying to argue otherwise.

So since 2015 here is the group of LBS (listing at draft) vs. Wrs picked top 10, you tell me as a group who has performed better.  As for PFF I did catch Simmons was on top rookie PFF team at LB this year. 

Lbs:  Simmons Arz (all PFF rookie),   White (all rookie team), J. Allen Jacksonville, (all rookie team) R. Smith Bears (all rookie teams)  and Floyd (pro bowl, all pro, )

WRs: Davis (Titans)   Williams Chargers   Ross Bengals, White Bears   Cooper Dallas (4 pro bowls)

It is pretty clear as a group the LBS in top 10 have out performed WRs in the Top 10.....Idk why you trying to argue otherwise

I'd love for this team to address OL in FA and get a playmaker on the team with their first draft pick. I haven't decided who I like more of the candidates, but having another weapon on offense (assuming the OL was improved) cannot hurt at all. It's about creating mismatches, and either a receiver or TE could make that happen. If they want to build a team around Burrow, bringing in established guys for the line (so they don't need 2 years to get up to speed) and giving him weapons would be the most logical steps in my mind.

My gut tells me the Bengals will lean defense with their first pick, though.

(02-01-2021, 03:00 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: So since 2015 here is the group of LBS (listing at draft) vs. Wrs picked top 10, you tell me as a group who has performed better.  As for PFF I did catch Simmons was on top rookie PFF team at LB this year. 

Lbs:  Simmons Arz (all PFF rookie),   White (all rookie team), J. Allen Jacksonville, (all rookie team) R. Smith Bears (all rookie teams)  and Floyd (pro bowl, all pro, )

WRs: Davis (Titans)   Williams Chargers   Ross Bengals, White Bears   Cooper Dallas (4 pro bowls)

It is pretty clear as a group the LBS in top 10 have out performed WRs in the Top 10.....Idk why you trying to argue otherwise

Why in the world are you bringing WR’s into it? This thread is not about WR’s. It’s about a TE vs a LB.

A TE that happens to be so special of a prospect that’s he’s being considered a top 10 pick. And we know how rare that is. The only other TE taken that high in recent years is already a Pro Bowler in his second season.

Anyway, the character concerns alone are going to take Parsons off their board. Unless Zac Taylor is full of shit about wanting only high character players. He prefers his scummy employees to only be on his coaching staff.

I’m okay with Pitts if you can guarantee ZT will change the offense to make the TE a receiving target and not an inline blocker. You also need to guarantee that both our LT and RT will be able to play on an island as we wound up having to keep the TE in a LOT to assist one of the Tackles (frequently RT).

(12-30-2020, 01:44 PM)Whatever Wrote: The other thing people are missing is that teams that have spent 1st rounders on stack LB's recently have not seen a quick return on investment.  Here are the PFF grades for the 4 stack LB's taken in the 1st this year...

Isaiah Simmons 60.5(sub package player, not starting)
Kenneth Murray 50.9
Patrick Queen 29.9
Jordyn Brooks 49.0

And the '19 and '20  grades for '19 1st rounders...

Devin White 51.9/43.4
Devin Bush 62.9/59.7

It doesn't make much sense to invest a 1st round pick in a position group where you can get similar performance from journeyman FA's.  Josh Bynes has a 54 grade by comparison.  Plus, we've drafted 4 stack backers over the last two drafts.  

(02-01-2021, 03:00 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: So since 2015 here is the group of LBS (listing at draft) vs. Wrs picked top 10, you tell me as a group who has performed better.  As for PFF I did catch Simmons was on top rookie PFF team at LB this year. 

Lbs:  Simmons Arz (all PFF rookie),   White (all rookie team), J. Allen Jacksonville, (all rookie team) R. Smith Bears (all rookie teams)  and Floyd (pro bowl, all pro, )

WRs: Davis (Titans)   Williams Chargers   Ross Bengals, White Bears   Cooper Dallas (4 pro bowls)

It is pretty clear as a group the LBS in top 10 have out performed WRs in the Top 10.....Idk why you trying to argue otherwise

^There’s the post I was thinking of btw.

If Sewell isn't there, I go Pitts or Chase. I know Taylor hasn't used the TE as much but there is also a lack of talent
there, well at least elite talent. As Nicomo said, we see where the teams with the best TE's end up now a days.

Chase already has chemistry with Burrow which is a major plus. Think he could come in seamlessly and be better
than AJ was last season.

(02-01-2021, 02:35 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: The reason I say even just the name matters a lot is situations like we saw at times with AJ this season. He still demanded attention. And opened it up for other guys. There was at least a couple games where teams stupidly put their best CB’s on AJ (Cleveland with Ward, Philly with Slay) and that helped Boyd and Tee. Even an 80% version of Gronk would still scare me if I’m an opposing DC.

(02-01-2021, 03:11 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Why in the world are you bringing WR’s into it? This thread is not about WR’s. It’s about a TE vs a LB.

As to the OP: I'd be happy with either unless there's fire to the Parson's character Smoke