Elite TEs

[extmenace]

9 minutes ago, bonkertons said:

Is it bad that I really wouldn't give af about Rodgers' preference when deciding on whether or not to draft Bowers?  Rodgers could be gone as early as next offseason.  At best he probably is only here another two seasons.  Bowers will be 23 years old by that time.  Also it's not like Bowers would just be riding pine with Rodgers here.  When he's had good TEs he hasn't been afraid to go to them.  Finley, Graham, even Tonyan to a degree.  

 

If you think Bowers is the next great TE, Rodgers' preferences wouldn't stop me from taking him.  That said, the guy isn't a dope.  No way he doesn't find a way to get a weapon like that involved.

That’s fine and dandy but you need to read the room. The entire staff and front office are in a do or die a season. That first round pick and his contributions next season could be the difference in getting extensions and getting sh*t canned. Drafting a TE in rd 1 that your qb won’t target frequently doesn’t help immediately. I get why people want him, I’m not opposed to it either, but if I’m JD and Saleh, I only care about 2024. Does bowers help save their jobs with Aaron running the offense? We’re in a situation where the staff and front office don’t necessarily care about the long term future.

[Paradis]

On 1/29/2024 at 7:32 AM, Barry McCockinner said:

Kelce: R3
Kittle: R5
Andrews: R3
LaPorta: R2

this means nothing, and ignores the 30000 TEs taken in those rounds that are never saw the light of day. 

[bonkertons]

1 hour ago, extmenace said:

That’s fine and dandy but you need to read the room. The entire staff and front office are in a do or die a season. That first round pick and his contributions next season could be the difference in getting extensions and getting sh*t canned. Drafting a TE in rd 1 that your qb won’t target frequently doesn’t help immediately. I get why people want him, I’m not opposed to it either, but if I’m JD and Saleh, I only care about 2024. Does bowers help save their jobs with Aaron running the offense? We’re in a situation where the staff and front office don’t necessarily care about the long term future.

This is fair, but also how much does a rookie OT really help their chances anyway?  I think people talk about taking an OT at 10 as if that guy is going to come in and play at a PB level out of the gate, but in reality it's just as much of an investment pick as Bowers would be(assuming Rodgers doesn't want to target him the way we'd expect/hope).  Not saying a rookie OT wouldn't still be an upgrade, but if a GM is putting a roster together to save his job, personally if I were the GM I'd feel a lot better about adding veteran tackles and using the 10th pick on a weapon.  If TE isn't a consideration, trade down for Brian Thomas Jr or Troy Franklin.  

 

I wouldn't even hate the OT pick.  I'd be happy with it, since IMO we need more long-term pieces on the OL.  I just wouldn't look at it as a "win-now" move.  If anything I think taking at 10 does more to help Rodgers' heir apparent than it does Rodgers.  Again though, that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world IMO.

[extmenace]

29 minutes ago, bonkertons said:

This is fair, but also how much does a rookie OT really help their chances anyway?  I think people talk about taking an OT at 10 as if that guy is going to come in and play at a PB level out of the gate, but in reality it's just as much of an investment pick as Bowers would be(assuming Rodgers doesn't want to target him the way we'd expect/hope).  Not saying a rookie OT wouldn't still be an upgrade, but if a GM is putting a roster together to save his job, personally if I were the GM I'd feel a lot better about adding veteran tackles and using the 10th pick on a weapon.  If TE isn't a consideration, trade down for Brian Thomas Jr or Troy Franklin.  

 

I wouldn't even hate the OT pick.  I'd be happy with it, since IMO we need more long-term pieces on the OL.  I just wouldn't look at it as a "win-now" move.  If anything I think taking at 10 does more to help Rodgers' heir apparent than it does Rodgers.  Again though, that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world IMO.

The thing is, the jets have a decent TE in Conklin, and they spent draft capital on ruckert. They are good enough. At OT, we don’t have anyone that is good enough. 
 

free agency will be interesting. We need top end talent. I have zero confidence we’ll land a WR better than maybe Curtis Samuel or Tyler Boyd. The opportunity to be productive is very risky here. Will one of the best Offensive line players view this team as risky? bowers looks awesome but even if he makes it to 10, if JD and company can’t pull off a good free agency, it’s going to be really tough to pull the trigger on the TE.

[bonkertons]

5 minutes ago, extmenace said:

The thing is, the jets have a decent TE in Conklin, and they spent draft capital on ruckert. They are good enough. At OT, we don’t have anyone that is good enough. 
 

free agency will be interesting. We need top end talent. I have zero confidence we’ll land a WR better than maybe Curtis Samuel or Tyler Boyd. The opportunity to be productive is very risky here. Will one of the best Offensive line players view this team as risky? bowers looks awesome but even if he makes it to 10, if JD and company can’t pull off a good free agency, it’s going to be really tough to pull the trigger on the TE.

Oh for sure our TE room right now is good enough.  I'd be completely fine if it ends up being Conklin-Ruckert-Yeboah/Kuntz.  I just don't really view Bowers as a pure TE.  If it comes down to wanting a weapon and all of the top WRs are gone, I think Bowers makes more sense than looking to move down for someone in that B-tier of WRs.  You'll probably have to run more 12 or 13 personnel to maximize value but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, especially considering how bad our OL has been these last few years.

 

Drafting Bowers + signing Samuel or Boyd would be perfect, IMO.  Sign a solid veteran LT on a short-term deal, then try to move up from your 3rd rounder to get one of the top guards(we have two 4ths to play with IIRC - package one and your 4th next year and that should get you into the late 2nd I'd imagine).  Slot them in at RG and bounce AVT to RT.  You should have the weapons to compete, even without a high-end #2(which I do think Boyd can be).  It really all comes down to how good you think Bowers can be, and how well you can implement him into the offense.  

[#27TheDominator]

17 hours ago, 68JET11 said:

First we need an offensive staff that knows how to use a TE correctly. As much as Bowers might be a great pick, it would be a waste of a pick for us seeing as we don't have the staff that would make the most of his talents. We've been without a staff for at least the last 15 years that knew how to use one properly.

People keep spouting this, but Conklin was 3rd on the team in targets behind Wilson and Hall.  He had almost double the next closest.  TEs got like 23% of the targets and more than 30% of targets to players other than Wilson.  They may suck and not know how to run an O, but failing to use the TE is not the issue.

[Sperm Edwards]

5 hours ago, jamesr said:

Kittle's first catch came with 5 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter. Very different from Kelce who was targeted 11 times and was a huge part of their opening two drives.

I also wonder if Andrew's return after such a long absence maybe threw Baltimore off a bit? They had done well without him and seemed to go away from Likely to go back to a guy who hadn't played in a long time. Not sure if this messed up the dynamics a bit.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

Which group is more likely to have pass plays drawn up away from their respective stud TEs:

• Rashee Rice + Justin Watson + Isiah Pacheco

vs.

• Brandon Aiyuk + Deebo Samuel  + Christian McCaffrey

[Jack Straw]

6 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Which group is more likely to have pass plays drawn up away from their respective stud TEs:

• Rashee Rice + Justin Watson + Isiah Pacheco

vs.

• Brandon Aiyuk + Deebo Samuel  + Christian McCaffrey

George Kittle regularly sodomizing Aiden Hutchinson in the blocking game also reduces his pass catching opportunities. 

[PepPep]

6 hours ago, Rhg1084 said:

Fuaga also has the makings of a big time bust. I’ve seen plenty of rookie tackles get drafted high and come in the league looking completely lost. (Evan Neal, Iky Ekwonu) 

My point is not that a team should not draft Bowers at 10 or a TE early in general. My point is FOR THE JETS, the TE position is a luxury right now. They have a clear, massive need at both T positions. How is this not clear? Their other need is at the WR position. And it is my opinion that you can find an impact WR later on in the draft, via FA or via trade. At least MUCH, MUCH easier than a quality or impact RT or LT. 

That is all I am trying to say. 

So it behooves us to draft the best possible T we can. The best players typically go early. There's no two ways about it. It's why the draft works the way it does. Its why we sometimes root for losses to try and get the most heralded prospect. In fact, if we were sitting at pick #5 the and not #10 the conversation would be Alt or Fashanu not should we take an OT...because OT's who get drafted early tend to bust LMFAO.  

OF COURSE any player, either taken early or late, can bust, and often do. Why does Fuaga have the 'makings of a bust'? Because Iky and Neal did? Wirfs, Slater and Sewell did not. But that proves nothing anyway. So I'm just not sure where you are going with this.