Found this on Facebook and posting from my phone, so it doesn’t have the quoting function, but Bengals insiders don’t think we’ll take Pitts:

Quote:The Cincinnati Bengals could end up choosing to go the luxury route with the fifth pick in the 2021 NFL draft.

That luxury could be Florida tight end Kyle Pitts.

Pitts, a 6’6″ weapon who scored 12 times over eight games last year, figures to come off the board over the first 10 picks no matter what the Bengals do.

But for Dave Lapham, Pitts just isn’t a good value in the top five, as he noted on the latest “Bengals Booth Podcast” episode:

“At number five I think that’s a little bit rich to consider the tight end position….But taking a tight end at the fifth spot, I don’t know, to me that’s just a little bit too rich. This kid’s really good.”
Bengals team reporter Geoff Hobson followed up with this: “I don’t think they would take him even if they traded back.”

It’s an easy line of thinking to get behind when the objective of the offseason is better protecting Joe Burrow. Paying a free agent, then using a top-five pick or top 12ish after a trade back to take another lineman is a safe, smart way to go about things.

But the Bengals also need a complimentary piece to Tyler Boyd and Tee Higgins. It’s why mocks have Pitts going to the Bengals and we’ve argued the front office needs to target the Florida star.

The nice part about the conversation surrounding the fifth pick? This is a good problem for the Bengals to have and the team has plenty of time to go through the paces and upgrade the roster.

You know Mike Brown’s completely out of the picture if they’re talking about a full draft strategy with trading down to still get their guy and acquiring more picks, and also about paying linemen in free agency. They’re also talking like AJ is gone, which is sad to see because I’d love him for at least one more year to make a playoff run and get him a win. I know that we don’t have a Randy Moss, but I feel like he could play the Chris Carter role where he could still be a consistent piece of the offense to move the sticks and occasionally make the big play.

If we were to address the line in FA, I think Pitts could be a solid pick because he could take attention off the guys on the outside and be a great red zone threat. I would prefer if he were a bit thicker, but I guess I’m still in the old school NFL mentality where tight ends bang more and are tougher, but he could also be bulking up in preparation for the draft.

He’s dangerous down the seam, which, like I said, will keep safeties off of the receivers on the outside, and that would also help Burrow tremendously to give him a safety valve and an easy target.

We need to pick up at least one lineman in FA, but then I think that I’d be on board with the pick!

Thoughts?!

That's ridiculously dumb.
Pitts is definitely worth a top 5 pick and the TE position is easily worth a top 5 pick. The stuff that this organization clings to is ridiculously dumb.

(02-07-2021, 04:59 PM)J24 Wrote: That's ridiculously dumb.
Pitts is definitely worth a top 5 pick and the TE position is easily worth a top 5 pick. The stuff that this organization clings to is ridiculously dumb.

Yep. It’s such an outdated mindset. How anyone could say an elite TE isn’t worth a top 5 pick after a season where a TE was 2nd in receiving yards is beyond me.

(02-07-2021, 05:15 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Yep. It’s such an outdated mindset. How anyone could say an elite TE isn’t worth a top 5 pick after a season where a TE was 2nd in receiving yards is beyond me.

Agreed.
Further more when you look at the when the Bengals have been successful they have always have had a pro bowl level TE.
70s Trumpy
80s Ross & Holman 
2011-15 Gresham & Eifert
So why don't they value the position? It makes zero sense. Same thing can be said about them not valuing IOLs.

I'm good with that.

If kelce wasn't having a standout season on one of the leading passing offenses, most people probably wouldn't be talking about pitts as a top 5 pick. Fewer would be "he's a generational talent" or "he's going to define that position."

If we address the line in fa and could trade back a few spots (and pick up another pick), then sure. But if we're going with receiver id rather have someone more vertical than a tight end.

Hobbs and Lap are clowns. Glad I don't agree with them.

I could see Pitts as more of a WR than TE, especially if he runs a good 40.

I can understand a lot of reasons why you might not want to draft TE at 5, but this particular reason is just bad. Gotta catch up to the modern NFL offenses and not try to cling to the 80s and 70s crap. Pitts is worth the 5th pick. This is garbage reasoning.

(02-07-2021, 05:43 PM)psychdoctor Wrote: I could see Pitts as more of a WR than TE, especially if he runs a good 40.

Yeah, one of the predraft sites said that was a possibility, calling him a "poor man's Calvin Johnson."

(02-07-2021, 05:48 PM)Gdale_Bengal Wrote: I can understand a lot of reasons why you might not want to draft TE at 5, but this particular reason is just bad. Gotta catch up to the modern NFL offenses and not try to cling to the 80s and 70s crap. Pitts is worth the 5th pick. This is garbage reasoning.

Nay, just the wrong team. Barring some trades, I don't see how he fits any of the teams in the top 5.

I don't remember if it was Zac's first year or this year, but one of those (hell, maybe both), we were dead last in having TEs on the field. And when they are on the field they're in more blocking schemes because the line isn't great.

If we took Pitts (or any other primarily pass catching TE), we'd either A- Have to redo the playbook based around him (that's unlikely and means a significant change for existing players); or B- We're moving him to WR (which is possible, but I don't think he's what we need at WR); or C- We'd have a guy with solid talent that we're completely misusing.

(02-07-2021, 05:25 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm good with that.

If kelce wasn't having a standout season on one of the leading passing offenses, most people probably wouldn't be talking about pitts as a top 5 pick. Fewer would be "he's a generational talent" or "he's going to define that position."

If we address the line in fa and could trade back a few spots (and pick up another pick), then sure. But if we're going with receiver id rather have someone more vertical than a tight end.

The hard truth is that the TE position is only a great weapon in offenses that feature them as a focal point of their offensive game plan.  A great example is Jimmy Graham.  When he was with the Saints, people viewed him as the next HOFer at the position.  Then after going to Seattle, where they don't necessarily utilize the TE as effectively, and then with the Bears, he seems more of an afterthought than one of the greatest.

Zac Taylor thus far with the Bengals, as well as his former team, the Rams, don't really make the TE a focal point of the offense.  They drafted a guy like Drew Sample, with his skill set for a reason, that reason is that he fits how they want to incorporate the TE into their offensive game plan.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with you in that if they do go for a receiving weapon at #5, it will most likely be a WR.

(02-07-2021, 06:07 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The hard truth is that the TE position is only a great weapon in offenses that feature them as a focal point of their offensive game plan.  A great example is Jimmy Graham.  When he was with the Saints, people viewed him as the next HOFer at the position.  Then after going to Seattle, where they don't necessarily utilize the TE as effectively, and then with the Bears, he seems more of an afterthought than one of the greatest.

Zac Taylor thus far with the Bengals, as well as his former team, the Rams, don't really make the TE a focal point of the offense.  they drafted a guy like Drew Sample, with his skill set for a reason, that reason is that he fits how they want to incorporate the TE into their offensive game plan.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that I agree with you in that if they do go for a receiving weapon at #5, it will most likely be a WR.

Good example. Double digit touchdowns and a couple seasons over a thousand yards while he's with the Saints. Then it's a big drop off.

Hell, I think Eifert had more targets this year than Sample and Uzomah combined. The Jags just use that position differently.

Zac Taylor is very likely not even going to be here past next season. I certainly hope Tobin and co don’t limit their options on a top 5 pick to suit a coach that might not even be around much longer.

And between Gresham and Eifert we do tend to value TE’s in the 1st.

Kyle Pitts is a play maker that lined up as a TE-Y, TE-F, H-Back, Slot Receiver, and X Receiver. If he has a great Pro Day and runs in the mid to low 4.5s he could definitely be considered a top 5 pick.

...but its February Pro Days haven't even started and Free Agency won't be for another month.

(02-07-2021, 06:16 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Zac Taylor is very likely not even going to be here past next season. I certainly hope Tobin and co don’t limit their options on a top 5 pick to suit a coach that might not even be around much longer.

And between Gresham and Eifert we do tend to value TE’s in the 1st.

Not trying to be argumentative but two things:

Why take guys guys who aren't going to be utilized? Feelings about zac are incidental. Even if he's gone next year, he could get replaced with a guy who doesn't use tes either.

Setting a coach up for failure is a good way to not move forward, either with that coach or another one. Picking players that he "has" to use while not filling the holes on the current system isn't going to improve the offense, it's just going to create friction.

(02-07-2021, 06:38 PM)Benton Wrote: Not trying to be argumentative but two things:

Why take guys guys who aren't going to be utilized? Feelings about zac are incidental. Even if he's gone next year, he could get replaced with a guy who doesn't use tes either.

Setting a coach up for failure is a good way to not move forward, either with that coach or another one. Picking players that he "has" to use while not filling the holes on the current system isn't going to improve the offense, it's just going to create friction.

Well the Zac Taylor doesn’t use TE’s narrative is not even entirely accurate anyway. He was utilizing Uzomah the first couple games this season before CJ went down. He had 11 targets in less than 2 full games, and played 72% of the offensive snaps in week one.

And it’s not really setting Taylor up for failure. His offense was what, like 29th in the league? If Pitts is the BPA when we pick, and the FO feels he will give us a dimension we’re currently lacking, then it should be seen as helping him succeed.

(02-07-2021, 06:55 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Well the Zac Taylor doesn’t use TE’s narrative is not even entirely accurate anyway. He was utilizing Uzomah the first couple games this season before CJ went down. He had 11 targets in less than 2 full games, and played 72% of the offensive snaps in week one.

And it’s not really setting Taylor up for failure. His offense was what, like 29th in the league? If Pitts is the BPA when we pick, and the FO feels he will give us a dimension we’re currently lacking, then it should be seen as helping him succeed.

I'll disagree with the failure part and then leave it alone as this doesn't need to devolve into a zac thread.

But, yeah, it does. We've got lots of significant holes. Pitts doesn't fit any of them. Moreover, we don't use tightends much in the passing game. I looked, bottom six or so, even when uzomah was healthy. Picking a receiving tight end as a blocker is like taking a dump truck fullback when you have solid halfbacks and just need a blocker or picking slot receiver who can't block when you need someone to help with the run game.

Pitts is a good te, he just wouldn't be kelce here, which is what people are going to expect.

(02-07-2021, 08:31 PM)Benton Wrote: I'll disagree with the failure part and then leave it alone as this doesn't need to devolve into a zac thread.

But, yeah, it does. We've got lots of significant holes. Pitts doesn't fit any of them. Moreover, we don't use tightends much in the passing game. I looked, bottom six or so, even when uzomah was healthy. Picking a receiving tight end as a blocker is like taking a dump truck fullback when you have solid halfbacks and just need a blocker or picking slot receiver who can't block when you need someone to help with the run game.

Pitts is a good te, he just wouldn't be kelce here, which is what people are going to expect.

If Eifert was still here, and playing at a high level I guarantee we’d be higher in TE production even under Taylor. Eifert had the 2nd most receptions on the team in 2019. And that was with him looking like a shell of his former self. I like Uzomah well enough, but there’s a reason him and Sample aren’t a bigger part of the passing game.

But we can just disagree. Personally I think if a coach who’s offense is 29th in the league isn’t willing to reevaluate what he’s doing then that’s a huge problem.

I wouldn't hate the Pitts pick... but would ideally like to trade down and get him rather than at 5.

When your offensive genius HC cant this get this offense above 24 pts a game in scoring
In 2 years then he needs to really take a step back and evaluate how and why the scheme
Is failing.

The TE is a position that separates great offenses from garbage offenses like Zac
Has trotted out the last 2 years. He doesnt feature the TE cause maybe he doesnt know
How to make the TE a focal point.

Funny how both Super Bowl teams have no.issues on using their TEs.
And the fact that ZT is trying to replicate what McVay is doing in L.A tells me
ZT doesnt have a single original concept in head on X and Os

This franchise cant afford to be simply disregarding elite talent like Pitts
Because he doesnt fit the scheme. From what I seen in 2 years ZTs scheme
Is really garbage