Why taking Brock Bower with a top-10 NFL Draft pick is a tough sell financially

[LAD_Brooklyn]

By Austin Mock

Want to win the Super Bowl? Win the NFL Draft. Then do it again. And again.

Every executive, every coach and every fan of the league knows championship-level rosters are built through the draft. They also know winning the draft year after year is tough. It’s complicated. It’s nuanced. Picking great players is obviously the top priority, but there are other considerations.

One of them is drafting to take advantage of the rookie wage scale under the current collective bargaining agreement.

NFL rookie wage scale for top-10 picks

PICK NO.	ESTIMATED SALARY ($M)
1	$38.5M
2	$36.8M
3	$35.8M
4	$34.5M
5	$32.4M
6	$28.5M
7	$25.5M
8	$22.3M
9	$22.2M
10	$21.3M

Let’s examine the top of the draft. Right now, the first overall pick in the 2024 NFL Draft is slated to make just over $38 million in four years — with the potential for a fifth-year team option — or about $9.6 million per year. If that pick hits, it ends up being a huge bargain, especially if it’s a player who plays a premium position like quarterback, wide receiver, offensive tackle or edge rusher.

But tight ends? There’s not a lot of surplus value to be had there, which means making the case for Georgia’s Brock Bowers to be a top-10 pick is tough. There’s little debate he’s an elite prospect. He’s ranked No. 6 on The Athletic’s consensus big board and No. 5 among draft guru Dane Brugler’s top 100 players. There’s a real case to be made he’s the best tight end prospect the NFL has seen in years.

So why not take him in the top 10?

Because even if he hits, teams aren’t squeezing as much value out of their top-10 pick as they would be if they hit on a player at a premium position.

First, let’s consider quarterbacks. The NFL’s top five QBs made about $51.8 million in average annual salary in 2023, according to Spotrac.com. In contrast, last year’s second overall pick, Houston’s C.J. Stroud, will make about $9.1 million annually, or about a million more than backup QB Jacoby Brissett made last year. Stroud was the 23rd-highest-paid QB in the NFL last year.

Drake London, the wide receiver for the Atlanta Falcons, was taken with the eighth pick in the 2022 draft; his average annual salary is $5.4 million. A top-five salary at wide receiver in 2023 was about $26.7 million annually. You see where this is going?

Spending high draft picks on premiere positions provides teams with surplus value and increased cap flexibility that can be used to retain their own top players and/or dipping into free agency.

Here’s the full breakdown by position (though not every position has a recent top-10 pick):

Note: We used the highest-drafted player at each position over the past two years.

Now, not every player will outperform his rookie contract to the level of Stroud or even London. But you can see in the table, there’s not nearly as much surplus value to be had by drafting a tight end in the top 10.

And that’s simply because the league does not consider tight end a premiere position. Look at the salaries across the league. The current average salary among the top five tight ends is $15.4 million. If Bowers is selected in the top 10 — it would then be safe to project his average salary to be around $6 million — he would instantly become one of the higher-paid tight ends in the NFL. That means the team that drafts him isn’t creating nearly as much surplus value as it could have had it taken a wide receiver, edge rusher, offensive tackle or pretty much any other position. Even running back.

To make the case for Bowers as a top-10 pick, you have to believe he can be an elite pass catcher. There aren’t many at the position who are thought of that way, but a couple who fit the bill are Kansas City’s Travis Kelce and Baltimore’s Mark Andrews, who have proven to make impacts similar to some top-end wide receivers.

According to my own NFL Projection Model, Kelce and Andrews make a similar impact on the expected winning percentage or point spread in an NFL game as Las Vegas’ Davante Adams and Philadelphia’s A.J. Brown. But the average annual salary for Kelce and Andrews is around $14.2 million, while Adams and Brown sit at about $26.5 million.

Seeing that discrepancy, there’s a case to be made that while drafting a top tight end might not save a team much on his rookie contract, it could net big savings on a second contract. Of course, that draft pick has to hit in a big way for that math to work out in favor of the team.

Can Bowers be the next Kelce or Andrews? His college production seems to indicate he can be.

Bowers was dominant as soon as he stepped on the field as a true freshman at Georgia. Over the past two seasons, Bowers ranks seventh in EPA/route among receivers and tight ends who have run at least 500 routes, according to TruMedia. The names ahead of him? Oregon’s Tez Johnson, Ohio State’s Marvin Harrison Jr., LSU’s Malik Nabers, Oregon’s Troy Franklin, and USC’s Tahj Washington. The name directly behind him? Washington’s Rome Odunze.

And if we wanted to expand a little further, going back to 2019, Bowers ranks 11th among all pass-catching prospects — even ahead of Pitts, who was 17th. The names ahead of him include DeVonta Smith, Justin Jefferson, Garrett Wilson and Chris Olave. Meanwhile, the likes of London, Jordan Addison and Amon-Ra St. Brown rank well behind him.

Now, those ready to make an argument against taking Bowers in the top 10 would surely point out that none of the league’s best tight ends were taken in the top 10. In fact, Kelce, Andrews and George Kittle — arguably the top three tight ends in the NFL — were all taken in the third round or later. Rob Gronkowski, maybe the greatest tight end of all time, also was a second-round pick.

Perhaps those players should serve as a cautionary tale against drafting a tight end so high. Perhaps they confirm that evaluating the position isn’t as easy as saying, “This is a generational prospect,” and making the easy selection.

Tight end production may rely more heavily on circumstance than other positions. Do they have the kind of coach who’s looking to take advantage of their skill set? What about the quarterback?

Let’s take Pitts as an example. Ahead of the 2021 draft, Brugler rated Pitts as the No. 2 prospect in his final big board, but he has yet to live up to the hype. He also hasn’t benefited from quality quarterback play during his first three seasons, and the Falcons fired coach and offensive play caller Arthur Smith this offseason. So, was Pitts a disappointment, or were his circumstances too tough to overcome?

Now consider Sam LaPorta, a second-round pick by the Detroit Lions in 2023. He ranked No. 64 on Brugler’s final big board, yet he immediately impacted the game as one of the league’s better tight ends. Of course, by the time he got there, the Lions were already considered to have one of the best offensive ecosystems in the NFL with OC Ben Johnson calling the shots. LaPorta walked into an infinitely better situation than Pitts did.

So what are NFL teams going to believe about Bowers? Is he the type of player who will be able to thrive regardless of his circumstances?

“When it comes to Bowers, I had one scout tell me that it should be more about ‘impact’ value and not ‘positional’ value,” Brugler said. “And Bowers has the potential to impact the roster more than most tight ends.”

That is consistent with what I said about the top pass-catching tight ends having a similar impact on an NFL game as some top wide receivers. But that’s not all Brugler had to say on the topic and the next quote is the million-dollar, or in this case, the tens-of-millions-of-dollars question.

“But it would still take a ballsy GM to make the move. You’d have to really trust your play caller to make you look smart.”

GO DEEPER

NFL Draft 2024 order from Rounds 1-7: All 257 picks and 32 teams

And therein lies the problem with the tight end position. If you feel like your play caller needs to make your top-10 selection look smart, should you be drafting that player at that position? Sure, a play caller can make life easier for everyone, and that should be the goal, but I firmly believe a top-10 non-QB pick should be ready to make an impact right away.

Put another way: There’s a reason we’re not having this same discussion about Harrison, Nabers and Odunze.

For Bowers, the question ultimately is about how likely teams believe it is that he becomes an elite pass-catching tight end. If that’s the kind of player they think he’ll be, a top-10 pick can be a sound investment. If not, they’ll be far better off taking someone else.

GO DEEPER

NFL Power Rankings post-free agency: The Texans are going for it, the Cowboys are ... not

(Photo of Brock Bowers: Todd Kirkland / Getty Images)

[JohnnyLV]

That is one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

[BurnleyJet]

I don’t have an issue with it, sometimes people overthink things. The modern Tight End has a big impact on the game. If Bowers can become a top tier Tight end take him. I’d Sooner take Brian Thomas if he’s in the board but no issues from me.

[varjet]

AVT was picked at 15, and his 5th year option makes him an overpaid G.  That is why JD reached for MCD last year.   At 10, we try and find someone who can play LT or WR. 

[Sperm Edwards]

His has been brought up before by a bunch of us. 

A premium position can be a good hindsight pick that high even if he's given merely pretty-good production. A TE taken that high needs to be an all pro or it was poor use of the pick.

I'll take a poor value but still a pretty good player over a bust any day, as would anyone, but the value over replacement isn't there. Ditto over taking a premium position player who doesn't look anything like a top 10 pick until his 3rd or 4th season.

Still, best case scenario (the pick being everything you'd hoped he'd be) for a $6MM/year rookie contract is replacing

• a $50-55MM QB (who'd cost multiple high picks to acquire in the first place)
• a $25-30MM WR (who also costs at least a 1st in trade, if not more)
• a $15-17MM TE (the last one traded - former top 10 pick and current 2nd-highest paid Hockenson - was acquired for a 3rd round pick and a 10-slot swap of 4th rounders)

Note that this $15-17MM 100% healthy, elite TE money is what it just cost the Jets to get Mike Williams - a 30 year-old WR coming off an ACL-tear season - and is also still less than it cost 3 years ago for the Giants to sign 27 yr-old FA Kenny Golladay after his own torn-up knee season. 

If Bowers is a 1200-yd, 10-TD, elite blocking NFL TE, everyone would rightly want to grab him: those are WR1 numbers, and you'd also get to keep that WR1 production for a lot less on a 2nd contract just because he's a TE not a WR.

If he's merely an 800-900 yard, 6 TD, just-ok blocking TE, then - his own ability aside - it's a poor value pick that early (again, unless comparing him to another prospect who outright busted). The gain in production is then negligible - some 10 yards/game, if even that, in an era of 6000+ yard offenses - over an established NFL veteran FA TE who cost no draft picks and was no cap-buster to lock up for years (e.g. Schultz, Engram).

Basically when you take a low value/pay position that high, he almost needs to be an NFL HOFer to hindsight-rationalize drafting early over a high value position whose production is harder to replace for those same acquisition resources.

[bonkertons]

This is and has always been the biggest knock on taking Bowers early - OTHER tight ends.  You've got two rookies who are coming off of great years in Laporta and Kincaid.  If Bowers were to put up Laporta's numbers as a rookie, would he be considered a reach at 10th overall?  I doubt it.  Not to mention the matchup mismatches it creates having a TE with that kind of skillset.  Again though, it only makes sense if you view Bowers as in that elite tier.  If there is any doubt, go with someone else.  

 

Personally I'll be surprised if JD and company don't fall in love with this kid.  I think they'll have a hard time passing on him, tbh.  

[FidelioJet]

I think this type of stuff is heavily overrated.

I get the rookie wage scale - but if you have a TE that can be an impact level player (not necessarily a superstar) you're more than happy to pay that top 10 rookie salary.  

[sourceworx]

I think Bower's value is in his versatility. He can be used as a TE, FB, or receiver.

Basically you can use him all over the place.

I'd be fine with taking him at 10.

[Integrity28]

Eh, the kid is good, but time after time we see evidence that TEs should not be first round picks. No thanks.

Give me a tackle, wideout or QB, if you don’t trade down.

[Gibby]

[Darnold Schwarzenegger]

I’d prefer odunze or BT over bowers.

i don’t think bowers is an elite plug and play prospect that everyone is making him out to be. 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

This article is spot on.

And Dane Brugler is an idiot.  Couldn’t care less where he has anyone ranked.

Zach Wilson was the #2 overall prospect on his board.

Travis’ Kelce’s current deal is “4y 57M” but only 20.75M of that is guaranteed.

Bowers’ deal at #10 would be 4y 21M basically fully guaranteed.

He’d have more guaranteed $ before playing a down than the best TE in the league.

Unlike at QB, WR or LR, even if he “hits” his absolute ceiling, there isn’t much financial benefit / upside but massive downside.

I’d trade back and spread out the risk / reward by multiplying premium picks.

[derp]

47 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

His has been brought up before by a bunch of us. 

A premium position can be a good hindsight pick that high even if he's given merely pretty-good production. A TE taken that high needs to be an all pro or it was poor use of the pick.

I'll take a poor value but still a pretty good player over a bust any day, as would anyone, but the value over replacement isn't there. Ditto over taking a premium position player who doesn't look anything like a top 10 pick until his 3rd or 4th season.

Still, best case scenario (the pick being everything you'd hoped he'd be) for a $6MM/year rookie contract is replacing

• a $50-55MM QB (who'd cost multiple high picks to acquire in the first place)
• a $25-30MM WR (who also costs at least a 1st in trade, if not more)
• a $15-17MM TE (the last one traded - former top 10 pick and current 2nd-highest paid Hockenson - was acquired for a 3rd round pick and a 10-slot swap of 4th rounders)

Note that this $15-17MM 100% healthy, elite TE money is what it just cost the Jets to get Mike Williams - a 30 year-old WR coming off an ACL-tear season - and is also still less than it cost 3 years ago for the Giants to sign 27 yr-old FA Kenny Golladay after his own torn-up knee season. 

If Bowers is a 1200-yd, 10-TD, elite blocking NFL TE, everyone would rightly want to grab him: those are WR1 numbers, and you'd also get to keep that WR1 production for a lot less on a 2nd contract just because he's a TE not a WR.

If he's merely an 800-900 yard, 6 TD, just-ok blocking TE, then - his own ability aside - it's a poor value pick that early (again, unless comparing him to another prospect who outright busted). The gain in production is then negligible - some 10 yards/game, if even that, in an era of 6000+ yard offenses - over an established NFL veteran FA TE who cost no draft picks and was no cap-buster to lock up for years (e.g. Schultz, Engram).

Basically when you take a low value/pay position that high, he almost needs to be an NFL HOFer to hindsight-rationalize drafting early over a high value position whose production is harder to replace for those same acquisition resources.

I do think with the WR market exploding the 800-900 yard 6 TD area gets at least a little fuzzy. That’s roughly what Drake London has been so far. Or Jerry Jeudy, who just got PAID. Not a home run, but I think you pay that guy whatever going market rate for a tight end is on that second contract and you’re pretty happy now.

Tight end is funny because on that second contract if he’s effectively your #2 WR it’s kind of its own surplus value. But guys develop a little slower and teams seem to recognize that - Noah Fant (never broken 700 yards or 4 TD’s) and David Njoku (same as Fant but then broke out for 882 and 6) deals as examples. The slow development is a big problem, but we saw guys like LaPorta contribute early last year.

I think what I’m ultimately getting at is with the #2 receiver type market getting absolutely crazy and the tight end market being relatively cheap, I think we’re in the early stages of the tight end contract market correcting a little. 

That said I’d ultimately rather try to get guys on their second deal and/or draft athletic players who can block in the mid rounds. I think college production at the position is so heavily dependent on situation that talented guys slip through the cracks more than they do at some other spots.

[LAD_Brooklyn]

I love Bower the player but would certainly hate the pick at 10. Would it be that much of a risk to trade back and accumulate more picks then draft him at the 10th spot?

[bla bla bla]

On 3/20/2024 at 9:41 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

His has been brought up before by a bunch of us. 

A premium position can be a good hindsight pick that high even if he's given merely pretty-good production. A TE taken that high needs to be an all pro or it was poor use of the pick.

I'll take a poor value but still a pretty good player over a bust any day, as would anyone, but the value over replacement isn't there. Ditto over taking a premium position player who doesn't look anything like a top 10 pick until his 3rd or 4th season.

Still, best case scenario (the pick being everything you'd hoped he'd be) for a $6MM/year rookie contract is replacing

• a $50-55MM QB (who'd cost multiple high picks to acquire in the first place)
• a $25-30MM WR (who also costs at least a 1st in trade, if not more)
• a $15-17MM TE (the last one traded - former top 10 pick and current 2nd-highest paid Hockenson - was acquired for a 3rd round pick and a 10-slot swap of 4th rounders)

Note that this $15-17MM 100% healthy, elite TE money is what it just cost the Jets to get Mike Williams - a 30 year-old WR coming off an ACL-tear season - and is also still less than it cost 3 years ago for the Giants to sign 27 yr-old FA Kenny Golladay after his own torn-up knee season. 

If Bowers is a 1200-yd, 10-TD, elite blocking NFL TE, everyone would rightly want to grab him: those are WR1 numbers, and you'd also get to keep that WR1 production for a lot less on a 2nd contract just because he's a TE not a WR.

If he's merely an 800-900 yard, 6 TD, just-ok blocking TE, then - his own ability aside - it's a poor value pick that early (again, unless comparing him to another prospect who outright busted). The gain in production is then negligible - some 10 yards/game, if even that, in an era of 6000+ yard offenses - over an established NFL veteran FA TE who cost no draft picks and was no cap-buster to lock up for years (e.g. Schultz, Engram).

Basically when you take a low value/pay position that high, he almost needs to be an NFL HOFer to hindsight-rationalize drafting early over a high value position whose production is harder to replace for those same acquisition resources.

I agree with the entirety of this post, my question is: do the Jets care about the value of the 2nd contract right now? That's the piece that gets me considering we had Gibbs and Mayer on our board at 15

[chirorob]

On 3/20/2024 at 6:47 AM, varjet said:

AVT was picked at 15, and his 5th year option makes him an overpaid G.  That is why JD reached for MCD last year.   At 10, we try and find someone who can play LT or WR. 

While I do like AVT as a player, he was a horrible pick, especially giving up two 3rd round picks to select him.   The only way that would have worked out was for him to become a top 5, Pro Bowl type player.  Instead, he has had back to back severe injuries, which have cost him and the team.

[Claymation]

If the Jets win the Super Bowl, who cares.

[Sperm Edwards]

9 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I agree with the entirety of this post, my question is: do the Jets care about the value of the 2nd contract right now? That's the piece that gets me considering we had Gibbs and Mayer on our board at 15

That's a possibility, but it wouldn't make much sense because the player doesn't exist in a vacuum. They'd still need to burn major resources on WRs anyway -- so they may save (in today's cap dollars) $10MM/year on Bowers instead of a WR, but then they'd be forking over plenty more to a FA WR they don't have.

There's only one Mahomes, who can win a SB without at least one very good to great one, and we don't have him.

[Augustiniak]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That's a possibility, but it wouldn't make much sense because the player doesn't exist in a vacuum. They'd still need to burn major resources on WRs anyway -- so they may save (in today's cap dollars) $10MM/year on Bowers instead of a WR, but then they'd be forking over plenty more to a FA WR they don't have.

There's only one Mahomes, who can win a SB without at least one very good to great one, and we don't have him.

Truth, bowers is more like a slot wr than an in line TE, so if you intend to use him as he’s used at georgia there’s your 3rd wr. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, Augustiniak said:

Truth, bowers is more like a slot wr than an in line TE, so if you intend to use him as he’s used at georgia there’s your 3rd wr. 

3rd WRs don't get signed for $25-30MM/year.

[Integrity28]

TE class last year was super deep, we didn’t take one. This year, the QB and WR class is good at the top of the draft.

Anyone taking a TE this year should have their nuts put in a vice. At least in R1. 

Another great WR has more immediate impact than a rookie TE. Sam Laporta was an exception. Normally rookie TEs are useless. Plus, there are far more top 10 TE picks that never meet expectations. 

Evee since Vernon Davis, I have had TE on my do not draft in R1 ethos.

[Vader]

2 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

TE class last year was super deep, we didn’t take one. This year, the QB and WR class is good at the top of the draft.

Anyone taking a TE this year should have their nuts put in a vice. At least in R1. 

Another great WR has more immediate impact than a rookie TE. Sam Laporta was an exception. Normally rookie TEs are useless. Plus, there are far more top 10 TE picks that never meet expectations. 

Evee since Vernon Davis, I have had TE on my do not draft in R1 ethos.

Plus Bowers isn't really a TE. He's an H-Back.

[rbstern]

40 minutes ago, Vader said:

Plus Bowers isn't really a TE. He's an H-Back.

He's the same size as Sam LaPorta, and nobody seems to think LaPorta isn't a TE.  The difference is, as good as LaPorta is (and he is very good), Bowers is better at everything, which allows more creativity in the offensive scheme.

[Tranquilo]

3 minutes ago, rbstern said:

He's the same size as Sam LaPorta, and nobody seems to think LaPorta isn't a TE.  The difference is, as good as LaPorta is (and he is very good), Bowers is better at everything, which allows more creativity in the offensive scheme.

LaPorta is a better blocker

[#27TheDominator]

55 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

TE class last year was super deep, we didn’t take one. This year, the QB and WR class is good at the top of the draft.

Anyone taking a TE this year should have their nuts put in a vice. At least in R1. 

Another great WR has more immediate impact than a rookie TE. Sam Laporta was an exception. Normally rookie TEs are useless. Plus, there are far more top 10 TE picks that never meet expectations. 

Evee since Vernon Davis, I have had TE on my do not draft in R1 ethos.

The class being deep is not a reason to jump on one in the 1st

We did take a TE last year. 

LaPorta was an exception, but 2 of the top 10 receiving rookies last year were TE and they both had more yards than the 1st WR taken.

[THE BARON]

On 3/19/2024 at 11:53 PM, LAD_Brooklyn said:

By Austin Mock

Want to win the Super Bowl? Win the NFL Draft. Then do it again. And again.

Every executive, every coach and every fan of the league knows championship-level rosters are built through the draft. They also know winning the draft year after year is tough. It’s complicated. It’s nuanced. Picking great players is obviously the top priority, but there are other considerations.

One of them is drafting to take advantage of the rookie wage scale under the current collective bargaining agreement.

NFL rookie wage scale for top-10 picks

PICK NO.	ESTIMATED SALARY ($M)
1	$38.5M
2	$36.8M
3	$35.8M
4	$34.5M
5	$32.4M
6	$28.5M
7	$25.5M
8	$22.3M
9	$22.2M
10	$21.3M

Let’s examine the top of the draft. Right now, the first overall pick in the 2024 NFL Draft is slated to make just over $38 million in four years — with the potential for a fifth-year team option — or about $9.6 million per year. If that pick hits, it ends up being a huge bargain, especially if it’s a player who plays a premium position like quarterback, wide receiver, offensive tackle or edge rusher.

But tight ends? There’s not a lot of surplus value to be had there, which means making the case for Georgia’s Brock Bowers to be a top-10 pick is tough. There’s little debate he’s an elite prospect. He’s ranked No. 6 on The Athletic’s consensus big board and No. 5 among draft guru Dane Brugler’s top 100 players. There’s a real case to be made he’s the best tight end prospect the NFL has seen in years.

So why not take him in the top 10?

Because even if he hits, teams aren’t squeezing as much value out of their top-10 pick as they would be if they hit on a player at a premium position.

First, let’s consider quarterbacks. The NFL’s top five QBs made about $51.8 million in average annual salary in 2023, according to Spotrac.com. In contrast, last year’s second overall pick, Houston’s C.J. Stroud, will make about $9.1 million annually, or about a million more than backup QB Jacoby Brissett made last year. Stroud was the 23rd-highest-paid QB in the NFL last year.

Drake London, the wide receiver for the Atlanta Falcons, was taken with the eighth pick in the 2022 draft; his average annual salary is $5.4 million. A top-five salary at wide receiver in 2023 was about $26.7 million annually. You see where this is going?

Spending high draft picks on premiere positions provides teams with surplus value and increased cap flexibility that can be used to retain their own top players and/or dipping into free agency.

Here’s the full breakdown by position (though not every position has a recent top-10 pick):

Note: We used the highest-drafted player at each position over the past two years.

Now, not every player will outperform his rookie contract to the level of Stroud or even London. But you can see in the table, there’s not nearly as much surplus value to be had by drafting a tight end in the top 10.

And that’s simply because the league does not consider tight end a premiere position. Look at the salaries across the league. The current average salary among the top five tight ends is $15.4 million. If Bowers is selected in the top 10 — it would then be safe to project his average salary to be around $6 million — he would instantly become one of the higher-paid tight ends in the NFL. That means the team that drafts him isn’t creating nearly as much surplus value as it could have had it taken a wide receiver, edge rusher, offensive tackle or pretty much any other position. Even running back.

To make the case for Bowers as a top-10 pick, you have to believe he can be an elite pass catcher. There aren’t many at the position who are thought of that way, but a couple who fit the bill are Kansas City’s Travis Kelce and Baltimore’s Mark Andrews, who have proven to make impacts similar to some top-end wide receivers.

According to my own NFL Projection Model, Kelce and Andrews make a similar impact on the expected winning percentage or point spread in an NFL game as Las Vegas’ Davante Adams and Philadelphia’s A.J. Brown. But the average annual salary for Kelce and Andrews is around $14.2 million, while Adams and Brown sit at about $26.5 million.

Seeing that discrepancy, there’s a case to be made that while drafting a top tight end might not save a team much on his rookie contract, it could net big savings on a second contract. Of course, that draft pick has to hit in a big way for that math to work out in favor of the team.

Can Bowers be the next Kelce or Andrews? His college production seems to indicate he can be.

Bowers was dominant as soon as he stepped on the field as a true freshman at Georgia. Over the past two seasons, Bowers ranks seventh in EPA/route among receivers and tight ends who have run at least 500 routes, according to TruMedia. The names ahead of him? Oregon’s Tez Johnson, Ohio State’s Marvin Harrison Jr., LSU’s Malik Nabers, Oregon’s Troy Franklin, and USC’s Tahj Washington. The name directly behind him? Washington’s Rome Odunze.

And if we wanted to expand a little further, going back to 2019, Bowers ranks 11th among all pass-catching prospects — even ahead of Pitts, who was 17th. The names ahead of him include DeVonta Smith, Justin Jefferson, Garrett Wilson and Chris Olave. Meanwhile, the likes of London, Jordan Addison and Amon-Ra St. Brown rank well behind him.

Now, those ready to make an argument against taking Bowers in the top 10 would surely point out that none of the league’s best tight ends were taken in the top 10. In fact, Kelce, Andrews and George Kittle — arguably the top three tight ends in the NFL — were all taken in the third round or later. Rob Gronkowski, maybe the greatest tight end of all time, also was a second-round pick.

Perhaps those players should serve as a cautionary tale against drafting a tight end so high. Perhaps they confirm that evaluating the position isn’t as easy as saying, “This is a generational prospect,” and making the easy selection.

Tight end production may rely more heavily on circumstance than other positions. Do they have the kind of coach who’s looking to take advantage of their skill set? What about the quarterback?

Let’s take Pitts as an example. Ahead of the 2021 draft, Brugler rated Pitts as the No. 2 prospect in his final big board, but he has yet to live up to the hype. He also hasn’t benefited from quality quarterback play during his first three seasons, and the Falcons fired coach and offensive play caller Arthur Smith this offseason. So, was Pitts a disappointment, or were his circumstances too tough to overcome?

Now consider Sam LaPorta, a second-round pick by the Detroit Lions in 2023. He ranked No. 64 on Brugler’s final big board, yet he immediately impacted the game as one of the league’s better tight ends. Of course, by the time he got there, the Lions were already considered to have one of the best offensive ecosystems in the NFL with OC Ben Johnson calling the shots. LaPorta walked into an infinitely better situation than Pitts did.

So what are NFL teams going to believe about Bowers? Is he the type of player who will be able to thrive regardless of his circumstances?

“When it comes to Bowers, I had one scout tell me that it should be more about ‘impact’ value and not ‘positional’ value,” Brugler said. “And Bowers has the potential to impact the roster more than most tight ends.”

That is consistent with what I said about the top pass-catching tight ends having a similar impact on an NFL game as some top wide receivers. But that’s not all Brugler had to say on the topic and the next quote is the million-dollar, or in this case, the tens-of-millions-of-dollars question.

“But it would still take a ballsy GM to make the move. You’d have to really trust your play caller to make you look smart.”

GO DEEPER

NFL Draft 2024 order from Rounds 1-7: All 257 picks and 32 teams

And therein lies the problem with the tight end position. If you feel like your play caller needs to make your top-10 selection look smart, should you be drafting that player at that position? Sure, a play caller can make life easier for everyone, and that should be the goal, but I firmly believe a top-10 non-QB pick should be ready to make an impact right away.

Put another way: There’s a reason we’re not having this same discussion about Harrison, Nabers and Odunze.

For Bowers, the question ultimately is about how likely teams believe it is that he becomes an elite pass-catching tight end. If that’s the kind of player they think he’ll be, a top-10 pick can be a sound investment. If not, they’ll be far better off taking someone else.

GO DEEPER

NFL Power Rankings post-free agency: The Texans are going for it, the Cowboys are ... not

(Photo of Brock Bowers: Todd Kirkland / Getty Images)

Very clinical, but pointless...

Bowers @10 ALL THE WAY

[Wit]

Take a wide receiver, OT, QB or trade down


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app

[Larz]

Last year at 15 they had the top 3 available as McDonald, Mayer and I can’t remember the other guy lol 

Mayer went 35th 

I wouldn’t have guessed McDonald and Mayer at 15 with a billion guesses 

Bowers is a better prospect than Mayer so it’s reasonable to think that the Jets might have him on their board at 10. 
 

The Ravens took Hamilton at 14 and Linderbaum at 25 and they’ll figure out the money when the time comes. 
 

the last time I looked into it about 45% of the guys taken in the first round have their 5th year option declined so I really don’t worry about the money at 10. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, Larz said:

Last year at 15 they had the top 3 available as McDonald, Mayer and I can’t remember the other guy lol 

Mayer went 35th 

I wouldn’t have guessed McDonald and Mayer at 15 with a billion guesses 

Bowers is a better prospect than Mayer so it’s reasonable to think that the Jets might have him on their board at 10. 
 

The Ravens took Hamilton at 14 and Linderbaum at 25 and they’ll figure out the money when the time comes. 
 

the last time I looked into it about 45% of the guys taken in the first round have their 5th year option declined so I really don’t worry about the money at 10. 

One way to look at it is based on positions and FA availability.  And then i look at zach wilson, becton and think if they just pick someone who is good, that makes me happy

[jetswinbaby!]

So the team picking 10th is afraid that they are not getting sufficient value at that spot, and leaves the better talent for a team picking later?...

Can't wait for the Jets to settle for the 4th best WR talent on the board, and leave the next Travis Kelce for the Denver Broncos at 12...

[JohnnyLV]

On 3/20/2024 at 6:41 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

His has been brought up before by a bunch of us. 

A premium position can be a good hindsight pick that high even if he's given merely pretty-good production. A TE taken that high needs to be an all pro or it was poor use of the pick.

I'll take a poor value but still a pretty good player over a bust any day, as would anyone, but the value over replacement isn't there. Ditto over taking a premium position player who doesn't look anything like a top 10 pick until his 3rd or 4th season.

Still, best case scenario (the pick being everything you'd hoped he'd be) for a $6MM/year rookie contract is replacing

• a $50-55MM QB (who'd cost multiple high picks to acquire in the first place)
• a $25-30MM WR (who also costs at least a 1st in trade, if not more)
• a $15-17MM TE (the last one traded - former top 10 pick and current 2nd-highest paid Hockenson - was acquired for a 3rd round pick and a 10-slot swap of 4th rounders)

Note that this $15-17MM 100% healthy, elite TE money is what it just cost the Jets to get Mike Williams - a 30 year-old WR coming off an ACL-tear season - and is also still less than it cost 3 years ago for the Giants to sign 27 yr-old FA Kenny Golladay after his own torn-up knee season. 

If Bowers is a 1200-yd, 10-TD, elite blocking NFL TE, everyone would rightly want to grab him: those are WR1 numbers, and you'd also get to keep that WR1 production for a lot less on a 2nd contract just because he's a TE not a WR.

If he's merely an 800-900 yard, 6 TD, just-ok blocking TE, then - his own ability aside - it's a poor value pick that early (again, unless comparing him to another prospect who outright busted). The gain in production is then negligible - some 10 yards/game, if even that, in an era of 6000+ yard offenses - over an established NFL veteran FA TE who cost no draft picks and was no cap-buster to lock up for years (e.g. Schultz, Engram).

Basically when you take a low value/pay position that high, he almost needs to be an NFL HOFer to hindsight-rationalize drafting early over a high value position whose production is harder to replace for those same acquisition resources.

This analysis is just so severely flawed.

It does not truly account for the higher value pick being a bust and essentially it is a convoluted way of saying the expectancy of a WR or QB is greater because at the same rate of risk, there is a higher rate of cap return because those positions have higher salary averages. It is the same as folding with 2 to 1 pots odds with a high bet against a flush draw but calling with 3 to 1. Over time, you make more money calling with 3X pot odds and the flush draw than folding although you could lose that hand and the next 5 in the same situation. Similarly when the lottery value is higher than the odds of winning expectancy would tell you that you should actually play the lottery. In it's most extreme example you can win at Poker slot machines over time if you adopt the strategy to always go for the Royal Flush.

But expectancy with the football draft is just not relevant because every single situation is different.

It is certainly true that if you pick at 10 and choose a WR and he is a Pro Bowl guy and choose a TE at 10 and he is a Pro Bowl guy that the WR was the better pick representing savings of 4-5 more players than the TE. In other words you can have not only the WR but the cap space to have 5 additional players over the TE position.

BUT like I said all of that is really irrelevant to whether you should pick TE and at 10. Since the situation is completely unique the only thing that really matters is your evaluation. If he is BPA and your evaluation has him as a "certain" Pro Bowler or All Pro the "value" of the pick is completely irrelevant unless the projection of a higher value position is very similar. And here is where you ditch expectation calculations as all that matters is which has less bust potential.

I forget what it is called but there is a calculation like this for QBs that avoids the expectancy path and just deals with bust/boom potential

[bla bla bla]

2 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

That's a possibility, but it wouldn't make much sense because the player doesn't exist in a vacuum. They'd still need to burn major resources on WRs anyway -- so they may save (in today's cap dollars) $10MM/year on Bowers instead of a WR, but then they'd be forking over plenty more to a FA WR they don't have.

There's only one Mahomes, who can win a SB without at least one very good to great one, and we don't have him.

Sounds like a problem for the next GM if it doesn't work lol

[Vader]

1 hour ago, rbstern said:

He's the same size as Sam LaPorta, and nobody seems to think LaPorta isn't a TE.  The difference is, as good as LaPorta is (and he is very good), Bowers is better at everything, which allows more creativity in the offensive scheme.

TE's don't do end arounds. H backs do. IMO. Bowers isn't a real TE. He's an H-Back. That's how I think the best way to envision him in an offense.

[Sperm Edwards]

6 minutes ago, JohnnyLV said:

This analysis is just so severely flawed.

It does not truly account for the higher value pick being a bust and essentially it is a convoluted way of saying the expectancy of a WR or QB is greater because at the same rate of risk, there is a higher rate of cap return because those positions have higher salary averages. It is the same as folding with 2 to 1 pots odds with a high bet against a flush draw but calling with 3 to 1. Over time, you make more money calling with 3X pot odds and the flush draw than folding although you could lose that hand and the next 5 in the same situation. Similarly when the lottery value is higher than the odds of winning expectancy would tell you that you should actually play the lottery. In it's most extreme example you can win at Poker slot machines over time if you adopt the strategy to always go for the Royal Flush.

But expectancy with the football draft is just not relevant because every single situation is different.

It is certainly true that if you pick at 10 and choose a WR and he is a Pro Bowl guy and choose a TE at 10 and he is a Pro Bowl guy that the WR was the better pick representing savings of 4-5 more players than the TE. In other words you can have not only the WR but the cap space to have 5 additional players over the TE position.

BUT like I said all of that is really irrelevant to whether you should pick TE and at 10. Since the situation is completely unique the only thing that really matters is your evaluation. If he is BPA and your evaluation has him as a "certain" Pro Bowler or All Pro the "value" of the pick is completely irrelevant unless the projection of a higher value position is very similar. And here is where you ditch expectation calculations as all that matters is which has less bust potential.

I forget what it is called but there is a calculation like this for QBs that avoids the expectancy path and just deals with bust/boom potential

Except if it was so flawed then everybody would wise up and ignore positional value and regularly draft TEs and centers with top 5 picks (or non-Jets teams drafting safeties at #6 overall) because the supposed decreased bust potential trumps the value of what you've got if you draft a non-bust either way.

There's really no evidence that TEs is a low bust (or if not a bust, then a low relative disappointment) position. The reality is it's difficult for even the best talent evaluators & the best teams to hit with all the film and analytics and interviews at their disposal. By starting out with a lower-ceiling pick, in terms of team value, you might be lowering your bust potential but then again that might be in one's head.

The flawed thinking is that, because this is a unicorn to have a TE rated this highly, that means he'll be a WR-like TE at the next level. Evaluators have said that plenty about safeties, too - that they wouldn't be this high of a pick possibility if they weren't both nearly zero-bust and (despite the position) high impact - only to see the likes of Donte Whitner, Michael Huff, and (until he went to Seattle) Jamal Adams have nice careers and/or probowl/all-pro accolades, but were far from driving force difference makers that teams couldn't do without. 

Anyway I said above I'd take a great TE over a bust WR/OT 100% of the time in hindsight, but with that same hindsight would probably take a great TE over a great WR/OT roughly 0% of the time. I'd say the same about any lower-value position (center, RB, guard in addition to TE). On draft day you don't get that hindsight, but the premise you're taking is that his [bust/disappointment likelihood + max ceiling value] combo is higher than anyone else we'll have an option to draft. You can believe it, but that doesn't make it so, and the likelihood is he will be a regretted pick unless none of the WRs and OTs with pick value grades ~#10 meet with their pre-draft hopes and Bowers does.

A TE should be the best in football and a mere formality to deservedly go to Canton if you take him way early. A WR can be merely a legitimate WR1 even if not top 5 or top 10; or an OLman a reliable LT; both would typically still be a wiser pick. A merely good TE is a foolish use of a top 10 pick. You don't have to agree. It's my opinion. It just happens to be the opinion most others share, too. 

The concern is if we draft him and he's basically not omg-better than 2-3 of the TEs drafted between the 20s-40s just last year, nor some established known-quantity TEs teams can sign as FAs without breaking the bank. The last unicorn TEs drafted way up top were Pitts, Winslow, and V.Davis. For all their legit omg talent, here isn't one I'd still take with their original pick slot. 

Knowing how he panned out I wouldn't take Hockenson at #8 in a redraft either. BUT I would absolutely go hard after him as a free agent pickup, though. Same player but with different resources used to get him it changes the wisdom, because the opportunity cost of getting him as a veteran is way lower.

[Greenseed4]

Based on this article there is a slot where it makes financial sense to draft a TE, just not in the top-10.  

Trade down, then draft him.