Bengals Insiders Don’t Have Us Taking Pitts

[*bfine32*]

I think JB and CJ are spending a lot of time rehabbing together. I can see them building a bond.

[BFritz21]

(02-07-2021, 10:49 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: We need to protect Burrow. So draft the TE who can’t block...

It's kind of irrelevant that he can't block since we'd be drafting him for his receiving abilities (and maybe a bit of run blocking) and tight ends generally don't block on passing plays.  

I've been all for drafting Sewell or some other lineman in the first, but will they be better than anything we can find in free agency or later in the draft to justify passing on Pitts?

Pitts would also be beneficial to protecting Burrow by giving him a safety valve and also occupying a backer or backers who might otherwise be blitzing.

(02-09-2021, 06:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think JB and CJ are spending a lot of time rehabbing together. I can see them building a bond.

There's a difference between a friendship bond and an on-field bond/connection where they can just be in each other's head and know what to do in certain situations.

[Bilbo Saggins]

I don't know about this Pitts fellow, but that Gronkowski guy who caught the first TD in the SuperBowl sure is a BUM. I mean he really sucks. When I look at players like him I think to myself: "You are not worth a top 5 pick. No siree. Taking you at number 5 would basically be like taking a punter in the first round." Yup. And that Kelce guy blows too. He'd only be worth drafting at the end of the second round. The first round is for taking injured corners and high 40 times Al Davis style. I sure am RELIEVED to know that someone has their head on straight and would never consider drafting a player like either of these two in the top half of the first round. They are total and complete BUMS. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-09-2021, 09:43 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: I don't know about this Pitts fellow, but that Gronkowski guy who caught the first TD in the SuperBowl sure is a BUM. I mean he really sucks. When I look at players like him I think to myself: "You are not worth a top 5 pick. No siree. Taking you at number 5 would basically be like taking a punter in the first round." Yup. And that Kelce guy blows too. He'd only be worth drafting at the end of the second round. The first round is for taking injured corners and high 40 times Al Davis style. I sure am RELIEVED to know that someone has their head on straight and would never consider drafting a player like either of these two in the top half of the first round. They are total and complete BUMS. 

I mean, Kelce only had 133 yds in the SB, and they didn’t even win...

Clearly not top 5 value there.

[Benton]

(02-09-2021, 09:43 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: I don't know about this Pitts fellow, but that Gronkowski guy who caught the first TD in the SuperBowl sure is a BUM. I mean he really sucks. When I look at players like him I think to myself: "You are not worth a top 5 pick. No siree. Taking you at number 5 would basically be like taking a punter in the first round." Yup. And that Kelce guy blows too. He'd only be worth drafting at the end of the second round. The first round is for taking injured corners and high 40 times Al Davis style. I sure am RELIEVED to know that someone has their head on straight and would never consider drafting a player like either of these two in the top half of the first round. They are total and complete BUMS. 

Sarcasm noted but you make the best point for not taking pitts at five.

Gronk is at the end of his career. Still a solid te, but no kelce. Kelce is kelce.

Which te had the better game? The one whose line gave the time for plays to develop or the line that let the front four slap around their qb?

Pitts is a good player, but against good defenses with this line, were going to be the team getting three field goals.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(02-09-2021, 09:58 PM)Benton Wrote: Sarcasm noted but you make the best point for not taking pitts at five.

Gronk is at the end of his career. Still a solid te, but no kelce. Kelce is kelce.

Which te had the better game? The one whose line gave the time for plays to develop or the line that let the front four slap around their qb?

Pitts is a good player, but against good defenses with this line, were going to be the team getting three field goals.

They both had good games. Kelce had 133 yds (he was their entire offense), and Gronk had 2 TD.

[Essex Johnson]

(02-09-2021, 05:15 PM)pulses Wrote: I understand what you're saying. But coming back from an achilles injury is not going to be easy and while also paying him like 6 million it's more feasable to draft someone cheaper with a higher ceiling and not rush him back. Who knows he may not be 100 %.

I agree they will have to monitor the injury but at least it was early in Sept, by April they should have a better idea of how his recovery is going but also remember Burrow is also coming back from a major knee injury.. so im thinking they will be wanting to get the line much better via draft and fa and is most likely why they are probably not looking at Pitts at #5

[Benton]

(02-09-2021, 10:00 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: They both had good games. Kelce had 133 yds (he was their entire offense), and Gronk had 2 TD.

Five catches, forty something first half yards. He made around the same number of catches in the second half and most of those yards as the bucs were giving up the middle to keep the clock going.

Kelce wasn't any kind of a factor. Same with hill. I think it was two first half receptions, the rest (and most of his yards) came after the game was over.

[BURROWorBUST]

(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.

Totally agree. Have they not paid any attention to Kelce? Kittle? GRONK? 

Do they really think Sample has that level of talent? Uzomah might be closer to that mark, but who knows what kind of impact his injury will have on his level of play longterm?

Have they forgotten that not long ago they took Eifert in the first round? What did he (when healthy) do for our offense? 

Granted, Eifert wasn't a top 5 pick, or even a top 10 pick, but Pitts' ceiling is higher than Eifert's was. 

Sorry, it just ticks me off to hear these Bengals "insiders" write off a perfectly legit target for us, one that could help Burrow, Boyd, Higgins, and whichever free agent WR we might sign in the coming weeks.

[Bilbo Saggins]

(02-09-2021, 09:58 PM)Benton Wrote: Sarcasm noted but you make the best point for not taking pitts at five.

Gronk is at the end of his career. Still a solid te, but no kelce. Kelce is kelce.

Which te had the better game? The one whose line gave the time for plays to develop or the line that let the front four slap around their qb?

Pitts is a good player, but against good defenses with this line, were going to be the team getting three field goals.

This sounds like a rehash of the same arguments from last year about why they shouldn't draft Burrow: "It's pointless to draft Burrow because he isn't an entire offensive line."  Sorry, I don't see an entire starting offensive line studded with pro bowlers available with the top 5 pick.  Say they opted to trade down and draft nothing but OL in this draft; that doesn't guarantee that they'd get even a single good starter.  It might increase their chances, but wouldn't it be better in 2020 hindsight to take a Kittle, Kelce, etc. caliber TE than an average starting OG and a bunch of backups?  

I just find it astounding that both teams who made it to the dance this year have all pro TEs on their rosters.  The year before this?  It was Kelce and Kittle who made it to the dance.  2015 was Tyler Eifert's best year as a pro and was also the closest the Bengals have come to winning a playoff game in recent memory.  It would seem that TEs might be undervalued by many teams/fans.   

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Assuming that Sewell is gone at 5...

I would rather have Chase + Ertz (or Henry) than just Pitts.

Eagles are going to either trade or cut Ertz (and maybe take Pitts themselves?), and either he or Hunter Henry would be a good add in FA. I would give a 2021 4th or a 2022 3rd for Ertz in a trade if he was willing to agree a 2 year extension (on top of his 1 year he already is under contract), if it meant not having to bid for him in FA. Whatever he will make, you can basically offset $5.2m of it by cutting Uzomah.

Add 2 real good OL in FA, add 1 OL with your 2nd round pick, add Chase with your 1st round pick, and add either Ertz or Henry and you have an offense that can easily keep pace with literally anyone in the league. Won't matter if your defense can't stop the run, because the opposing team won't be able to run the ball while down three scores.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(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.

Plus it is a weak spot on our roster. Pitts would be a great pick for us especially if we got Moton or Daryl Williams in FA.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(02-10-2021, 09:35 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Assuming that Sewell is gone at 5...

I would rather have Chase + Ertz (or Henry) than just Pitts.

Eagles are going to either trade or cut Ertz (and maybe take Pitts themselves?), and either he or Hunter Henry would be a good add in FA. I would give a 2021 4th or a 2022 3rd for Ertz in a trade if he was willing to agree a 2 year extension (on top of his 1 year he already is under contract), if it meant not having to bid for him in FA. Whatever he will make, you can basically offset $5.2m of it by cutting Uzomah.

Add 2 real good OL in FA, add 1 OL with your 2nd round pick, add Chase with your 1st round pick, and add either Ertz or Henry and you have an offense that can easily keep pace with literally anyone in the league. Won't matter if your defense can't stop the run, because the opposing team won't be able to run the ball while down three scores.

Well in this case yeah, I take Chase.