Tom’s Draft Media Brainworms 2024 Mock Draft

[Greenseed4]

19 minutes ago, slats said:

Travis Kelce had 50 first downs on 93 receptions with Patrick Mahomes throwing him the ball in a championship season. Garrett Wilson had 47 first downs on 95 receptions with some of the worst QB play in the league, in what he called his most frustrating season ever. 

Not sure why we are comparing Kelce and Wilson.  

How does Bowers' first down completion rate compare to the top 25 WRs.  That's what we were discussing right?

[Claymation]

3 minutes ago, slats said:

Travis Kelce had 50 first downs on 93 receptions with Patrick Mahomes throwing him the ball in a championship season. Garrett Wilson had 47 first downs on 95 receptions with some of the worst QB play in the league, in what he called his most frustrating season ever. 

Garrett was targeted 168 times. Kelce was targeted 121 times. Wilson had a 1st down percentage of 27% per target, Kelce was at 41%. Hill was at 48%, CeeDee was at 44%.

Conklin had 31% 1st down to target percentage. Granted the Jets had poor QB play. Kittle had a 46% conversion.

Rashee Rice was at 43%, and he was targeted 102 times.

[slats]

Just now, Greenseed4 said:

Not sure why we are comparing Kelce and Wilson.  

How does Bowers' first down completion rate compare to the top 25 WRs.  That's what we were discussing right?

So your position is that Bowers will convert 68% of his receptions in the pros as first downs? Will he continue to do that by catching 48% of them behind the LOS? 
 
Once again, I’m generously comparing him to a HoF TE, and the production isn’t much, if any, greater than a top 25 level WR. 

[Augustiniak]

Just now, slats said:

So your position is that Bowers will convert 68% of his receptions in the pros as first downs? Will he continue to do that by catching 48% of them behind the LOS? 
 
Once again, I’m generously comparing him to a HoF TE, and the production isn’t much, if any, greater than a top 25 level WR. 

Another issue with taking bowers is that you need to keep throwing him the ball.  He’s a volume guy, but most TEs are.  We already have 2 volume guys in breece and garrett and now we also have williams.  And there’s still Conklin who is decent.  So if you take bowers, you have to make a point to keep getting him the ball.  Georgia ran their offense through him.  The jets won’t.  

[slats]

1 minute ago, Claymation said:

Garrett was targeted 168 times. Kelce was targeted 121 times. Wilson had a 1st down percentage of 27% per target, Kelce was at 41%. Hill was at 48%, CeeDee was at 44%.

Conklin had 31% 1st down to target percentage. Granted the Jets had poor QB play. Kittle had a 46% conversion.

Rashee Rice was at 43%, and he was targeted 102 times.

Yes, I compared Garrett Wilson’s most frustrating season with the top TEs in the league to point out the value of WRs over TEs. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, Gastineau Lives said:

Well you’re not the best with words 😋

I’ve seen reception yardage being used as the only measuring stick when I don’t think it should be with TEs. If you want to say he can’t block you can, you’d be wrong but you could.

I didn't say anything about his blocking at all.

Put it more simply: if he's actually Kelce II, of course he's worth the pick. If he's merely a very good TE - typically measured by production, like a 700-800 yard guy - then he's not. Conversely, if a WR is (take your pick of future HOF WRs) then he's worth the pick AND if he's a very good WR (a 1000-1100-yard guy) then he's also worth it. 

The point is the bar to measure success is - and, given their cost on acquiring a veteran in his 20s, appropriately is - higher for a TE if taken that early.

[Claymation]

1 minute ago, slats said:

Yes, I compared Garrett Wilson’s most frustrating season with the top TEs in the league to point out the value of WRs over TEs. 

Yes a WR is more valuable, however when it comes to 1st down percentage per target its only slightly more valuable.

I'm all for either Odunze or MHJ in the draft. But the Jets have a gaping hole at TE and a middle of the field receiver. Bowers can fill that hole easily.

LaPorta is at 40% and Pitts is 38%.

[Greenseed4]

3 minutes ago, slats said:

So your position is that Bowers will convert 68% of his receptions in the pros as first downs? Will he continue to do that by catching 48% of them behind the LOS? 
 
Once again, I’m generously comparing him to a HoF TE, and the production isn’t much, if any, greater than a top 25 level WR. 

Let's take a step back.  

If we compare a "special" TE prospect to a "special" WR prospect, I would want the receiver.  Top-3 in the class, gimme gimme gimme. 

But we're not.  We are comparing a "special" TE prospect to the second tier of WRs. And in that light, I would want the special TE. 

 

We cannot compare straight yards and receptions because the positional roles are different.  That would be like comparing rushing yards between a RB and a WR.  Of course a RB will look better!  Comparing a WR and a TE and looking just at the receiving stats (receptions, receiving yards) is biased. 

To evaluate a TE, other factors come into play, like: third-down conversions, run-blocks that assist in the running game, and being an asset in the red zone.  

This whole thread is guilty of comparing a TE to what WR's do best, but it hasn't yet looked at what TEs do best.    Instead of comparing Kelce to Wilson, lets compare LaPorta to the second-tier of WRs from any particular draft.  But lets look at both WR and TE stats to get a more complete picture. 

[slats]

4 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

Let's take a step back.  

If we compare a "special" TE prospect to a "special" WR prospect, I would want the receiver.  Top-3 in the class, gimme gimme gimme. 

But we're not.  We are comparing a "special" TE prospect to the second tier of WRs. And in that light, I would want the special TE. 

 

We cannot compare straight yards and receptions because the positional roles are different.  That would be like comparing rushing yards between a RB and a WR.  Of course a RB will look better!  Comparing a WR and a TE and looking just at the receiving stats (receptions, receiving yards) is biased. 

To evaluate a TE, other factors come into play, like: third-down conversions, run-blocks that assist in the running game, and being an asset in the red zone.  

This whole thread is guilty of comparing a TE to what WR's do best, but it hasn't yet looked at what TEs do best.    Instead of comparing Kelce to Wilson, lets compare LaPorta to the second-tier of WRs from any particular draft.  But lets look at both WR and TE stats to get a more complete picture. 

Then we’re back to positional value, where WRs destroy the TE position. The league pays the top TEs in the league $17M (Waller), $16.5M (Hockenson), $15M (Kittle), and $14.3M (Kelce). 
 
The top paid WR in the league makes twice as much as Kittle at $30M/year (Hill), and 20 WRs make more than Waller, with 17 of them making over $20M/year. The league is pretty clear on which position it values more presumably factoring in everything you might expect a TE to do (and plenty of WRs block, convert third downs, and are assets in the red zone, too, lol). 

[JustInFudge]

3 hours ago, slats said:

I’ve very clearly said all along that positional value is huge here and that whether you want to list Bowers as a TE, H-back, “big slot,” or FB, it doesn’t matter, because none of those positions are worth a top ten pick. Then, yes, I grow more concerned because he’s undersized. Another red flag is all the work he’s done from behind the LOS, because that’s not what TEs do a lot of in the NFL. David Njoku was the last big TE with a similar (but not quite as large) behind the LOS catch rate, and he just put up his first elite-TE level performance in his 7th year with 882 yards on 123 targets. 
 
I’m surprised that you’re presenting him in this same Gold Jacket way that @Gastineau Lives is putting forward without at least acknowledging the inherent risk involved. He is undersized. He looks fast, but he either refused to test or hasn’t been healthy enough to, and either one is bad. He’s the best TE prospect ever who also only lined up at TE like 40% of the time. He’s done next to no work in the 0-9 range in college which is where a TE makes his living in the NFL. To justify the pick, he needs to be an all time great at the position, while the WR or OT taken there would merely need to be a solid or better starter to be acceptable. 
 
And to be clear, I’m not one of the OL in the first round guys, but I do see that as a genuine option for JD, who has a lot riding on this season. Like you, I’d prefer one of the top WRs. If they’re not there, I’m hoping JD can find a partner to move down because analytics are my true passion and the more picks you have the better odds you have of finding something. If he’s stuck, I think Brian Thomas becomes an option before Bowers, too. I’m more concerned about the WR position than the OL. The line at least has a couple fourth rounders in reserve while the WRs have UDFAs. 

You're just saying the same things over and over again and I completely disagree w/ all these justifications you've created.   I've said what I have to say about the prospect, I've countered all your  points and it's quite clear, you dont actually care about having a conversation about the prospect or have any interest in listening to the other side of the coin, instead, just seems like you want to parrot and lol at omg how is this going to work and I have no interest in having this conversation w/ you anymore. 

Instead, lets do this;  The top 3 WR's are off the board, the top 4 QB's have been taken, and the best Tackles have been selected.   You're on the clock, Slats.  Who you taking at 10?  No.  You cant trade down.

[slats]

4 minutes ago, JustInFudge said:

The top 3 WR's are off the board, the top 4 QB's have been taken, and the best Tackles have been selected.   You're on the clock, Slats.  Who you taking at 10?  No.  You cant trade down.

Not realistic, though. If four QBs and three WRs are gone, most likely that only one OT will be off the board and it may not even be JD’s favorite. That would probably be the pick. 
 
Definitely think Brian Thomas will be in play over Bowers, though. 

[JustInFudge]

1 hour ago, LionelRichie said:

so much to unpack here it's probably not even worth it.   I don't think you are getting slats point on positional value.   The cost of a good OT or WR is $20-30M / year.   The cost of the BEST TE in the entire league is ~$15m.   Don't hate the player, hate the game.   The NFL GM's have determined that TE doesn't impact the game as much as other positions so when you have a chance to get a 3-4 year starter at $5M/year in a position that typically costs $20M+, you jump at it.  

we get that you love Bowers and I'm sure he's a fine player.   But the best anything in college doesn't always translate (see Eric Crouch, RG3, Ty Detmer, Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, Ricky Williams, Ron Dayne, Marcus Marriotta, Jameis Winston, Matt Leinart, etc...).   

 

Probably not worth responding because you clearly havent read the entire conversation but I fully understand the positional value and have called it out may times and addressed how the situation is different.  I've talked about how I'd take the top 3 WRs over Bowers.  I've talked about how I wouldnt select a back up T.  And I suggest you go asked Andy Reid about his opinion on how a TE impacts the game after he traded a HOF WR and rotates OL men in and out every year.

And those comparisons you made, are asinine.  Bowers catches a football, breaks tackles, runs fast, picks up 1st downs and TD's.  It's literally, the easiest of all skill sets to predict will translate successfully.  I mean, my god man, you have run first QB's on this list.  lmfao  Eric Crouch?  WTF?  He was a QB in the triple option, are you kidding?  Who the **** thought that was going to translate? lmfao 

 

[JustInFudge]

3 minutes ago, slats said:

Not realistic, though. If four QBs and three WRs are gone, most likely that only one OT will be off the board and it may not even be JD’s favorite. That would probably be the pick. 
 
Definitely think Brian Thomas will be in play over Bowers, though. 

Did you answer the question?  I dont see an answer here.

[Pac]

Please let the pick be Bowers.  I thrive on chaos. 

[slats]

2 minutes ago, JustInFudge said:

And those comparisons you made, are asinine.  Bowers catches a football, breaks tackles, runs fast, picks up 1st downs and TD's.  It's literally, the easiest of all skill sets to predict will translate successfully.

If this is the case, how come none of the TEs taken in the first round in the last 20 years or so have become all pros? How come most of them don’t re-sign with the team that drafts them? You’re trying to say it’s easy to say that the undersized Bowers will be this smash success in the NFL when guys like Pitts, Hockenson, Hurst, Howard, Enron, Eifort, etc., etc., etc., say it’s a very difficult position to scout and a very risky one to take in the first. 

[slats]

9 minutes ago, JustInFudge said:

Did you answer the question?  I dont see an answer here.

I don’t pretend to be a talent evaluator, I pretend to be a numbers guy. I’m not interested in my opinion as much as I am in JD’s, and I think he’d take the OT but that Thomas could definitely be in play. 

[JustInFudge]

5 minutes ago, slats said:

If this is the case, how come none of the TEs taken in the first round in the last 20 years or so have become all pros? How come most of them don’t re-sign with the team that drafts them? You’re trying to say it’s easy to say that the undersized Bowers will be this smash success in the NFL when guys like Pitts, Hockenson, Hurst, Howard, Enron, Eifort, etc., etc., etc., say it’s a very difficult position to scout and a very risky one to take in the first. 

What are these qualifiers?  lol  How come?  idk?  How many TE's make all-pro?  How many were going to make it over the HOF'ers that have been in the league that teams are probably trying to find when they take a TE?  ie; Gronk, Kelce, Gonzalez, Gates, Witten, etc.  Doesnt mean you werent worth the pick because you didnt beat those guys for all-pros.  What matters it the value you provide to your team.  

In regards to the draft, it's also sample size.  It feels more egregious because typically only 1 TE goes in the first round, if any at all.  Whereas, 5 WR's might go 1st and 3 bust but it's not like omg, you cant take a WR!!!! 

 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

45 minutes ago, slats said:

Then we’re back to positional value, where WRs destroy the TE position. The league pays the top TEs in the league $17M (Waller), $16.5M (Hockenson), $15M (Kittle), and $14.3M (Kelce). 
 
The top paid WR in the league makes twice as much as Kittle at $30M/year (Hill), and 20 WRs make more than Waller, with 17 of them making over $20M/year. The league is pretty clear on which position it values more presumably factoring in everything you might expect a TE to do (and plenty of WRs block, convert third downs, and are assets in the red zone, too, lol). 

Bowers should not even be a consideration at #10 unless somehow the big-3 WR, Alt, and Fashanu are all gone.

Even in that case, a QB is probably there at #10 so you trade back.

I like Fashanu at #10 for the same reasons I liked Sauce:

-- Top-10 pick.  You cannot afford to be cavalier or roll the dice.

-- Plays a premium position on the football field.  LT is the most premium non-QB position.

-- Blindside protector for your 40y old QB who says he wants to play "3 or 4 more years"

-- Flawless to near-flawless elite-level production consistently across multi-year college career against good competition

-- Elite tape and traits to pair with the production which gives you every reason to believe he will be able to step in on day 1 and deliver without having to rely on your OL coach (Keith Carter 😂) to "develop" him

-- The "versatility" argument for Fautanu, Latham, and Fuaga is overblown.  If that were the case, the Jets should cut Tyron Smith because he only plays LT. 

I don't need my LT to be able to play G or C.  I just need him to be good at LT.  Drafting a "guard who can play tackle" is a bit like preferring "an actor who can sing" (a gazillion actors can sing) over an actual singer like Whitney Houston or Pavarotti.

[slats]

1 minute ago, JustInFudge said:

What are these qualifiers?  lol  How come?  idk?  How many TE's make all-pro?  How many were going to make it over the HOF'ers that have been in the league that teams are probably trying to find when they take a TE?  ie; Gronk, Kelce, Gonzalez, Gates, Witten, etc.  Doesnt mean you werent worth the pick because you didnt beat those guys for all-pros.  What matters it the value you provide to your team.  

In regards to the draft, it's also sample size.  It feels more egregious because typically only 1 TE goes in the first round, if any at all.  Whereas, 5 WR's might go 1st and 3 bust but it's not like omg, you cant take a WR!!!! 

 

I’m saying that historically the TE position has been both very difficult to evaluate and also generally has one of the longer learning curves in the league. The positional value is low for a reason. I appreciate your opinion on the player but, imo, it’s borderline insane to draft a prospect with the expectation that he’ll be a HoF level player at his position - and that’s what you seem to be doing. Because if he’s merely a top ten prospect at his position, he’ll pretty much be a bust at #10 overall. Meanwhile, if you draft a top 25 level OT or WR, you’ll be thrilled. Positional value is a real thing. 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

It's also best to plan ahead and think about this logically.

If this season ends up being what everyone hopes it will be, the Jets will be picking towards the end of round 1 next year.

I'm not Mel Kiper so I have no idea what the "big board" will look like a year from now, but generally speaking, your odds of landing a legit elite-level LT prospect picking in the late twenties are not good.

OTOH, virtually every year TEs are taken on day 2 and even day 3 that prove to be good, productive players.  The talent is there to be mined if your scouts and GM know what they are looking at.

In fact the best TEs in the league right now were all day 2 and 3 picks:

Kelce

LaPorta

Kittle

Andrews

[SomebodytoAnybody47]

Edit: meant to post in rumor thread.

 

 

[JustInFudge]

16 minutes ago, slats said:

I don’t pretend to be a talent evaluator, I pretend to be a numbers guy. I’m not interested in my opinion as much as I am in JD’s, and I think he’d take the OT but that Thomas could definitely be in play. 

Wow, that's a risky pick.   Questionable hands.  Not a yac guy.  How's his shoulder?  He didnt run the 3 cone and there are concerns w/ his lateral quickness.  1 year wonder.  What's he going to do in the NFL?  How is he going to get the ball?  You're just going to ask him to run go routes all game long?  NFL defenders are a lot faster than college accountants.  What is he going to give you this year?  25 catches, 400 yards, 1 TD?   Jeez, not sure it's worth top 10 value.

[slats]

Just now, JustInFudge said:

Wow, that's a risky pick.   Questionable hands.  Not a yac guy.  How's his shoulder?  He didnt run the 3 cone and there are concerns w/ his lateral quickness.  1 year wonder.  What's he going to do in the NFL?  How is he going to get the ball?  You're just going to ask him to run go routes all game long?  NFL defenders are a lot faster than college accountants.  What is he going to give you this year?  25 catches, 400 yards, 1 TD?   Jeez, not sure it's worth top 10 value.

It is, but the ceiling is significantly higher than any TE. Like I said, in that scenario, it’s probably an OT who should compete for the starting LG or RT spot. 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

12 minutes ago, slats said:

I’m saying that historically the TE position has been both very difficult to evaluate and also generally has one of the longer learning curves in the league. The positional value is low for a reason. I appreciate your opinion on the player but, imo, it’s borderline insane to draft a prospect with the expectation that he’ll be a HoF level player at his position - and that’s what you seem to be doing. Because if he’s merely a top ten prospect at his position, he’ll pretty much be a bust at #10 overall. Meanwhile, if you draft a top 25 level OT or WR, you’ll be thrilled. Positional value is a real thing. 

yes 100%, it's a salary cap league.

If Zach Wilson had been a 7th round pick, nobody would have cared, as it wouldn't have impacted the franchise from a team-building perspective as they could have cut him and moved on with little to no financial fallout.

As it was though, his contract combined with his pisspoor play dragged the entire team into a pile of ashes.

[JustInFudge]

7 minutes ago, slats said:

I’m saying that historically the TE position has been both very difficult to evaluate and also generally has one of the longer learning curves in the league. The positional value is low for a reason. I appreciate your opinion on the player but, imo, it’s borderline insane to draft a prospect with the expectation that he’ll be a HoF level player at his position - and that’s what you seem to be doing. Because if he’s merely a top ten prospect at his position, he’ll pretty much be a bust at #10 overall. Meanwhile, if you draft a top 25 level OT or WR, you’ll be thrilled. Positional value is a real thing. 

Often times w/ TE, you're taking a guy based on traits vs. production.  Very rarely do you have a prospect like Bowers who has historic production at the highest level and traits.  And I'm saying to you that I get all your points and normally, I'd agree but because of situation and how I think the draft will fall and my opinion on Bowers vs. best remaining T (or any T for that matter) vs. not a top 3 WR vs. any other positoin at 10...is that Bowers is worth the "risk" and breaking the traditional logic of positional value. 

 

[slats]

1 minute ago, JustInFudge said:

Often times w/ TE, you're taking a guy based on traits vs. production.  Very rarely do you have a prospect like Bowers who has historic production at the highest level and traits.  And I'm saying to you that I get all your points and normally, I'd agree but because of situation and how I think the draft will fall and my opinion on Bowers vs. best remaining T (or any T for that matter) vs. not a top 3 WR vs. any other positoin at 10...is that Bowers is worth the "risk" and breaking the traditional logic of positional value. 

 

I’m more than happy to agree to disagree there.  

We’ll find out soon enough. 

[JustInFudge]

6 minutes ago, slats said:

It is, but the ceiling is significantly higher than any TE. Like I said, in that scenario, it’s probably an OT who should compete for the starting LG or RT spot. 

Cool.  I'm glad you feel that way and who knows, maybe JD is leaning that way too. Personally, I'd prefer the play making TE.

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

31 minutes ago, JustInFudge said:

Cool.  I'm glad you feel that way and who knows, maybe JD is leaning that way too. Personally, I'd prefer the play making TE.

Everybody wants the sexy "yeah, but this time, it's different" pick until they get burned.

There were even fans begging the Jets to trade up in '06 from #4 for Reggie Bush 🤣

They settled for Brick at #4 and Mangold at #29.  That turned out ok.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NFL_draft#Player_selections

Even in a best-case type scenario where Bowers turns out to be as good as LaPorta, I still want Fashanu over him. 

A franchise LT like Tunsil costs 25M per on the open market, and they never become available unless you're willing to part with premium draft capital to acquire and then you still have to pay him.

[Greenseed4]

1 hour ago, slats said:

Then we’re back to positional value, where WRs destroy the TE position. The league pays the top TEs in the league $17M (Waller), $16.5M (Hockenson), $15M (Kittle), and $14.3M (Kelce). 
 
The top paid WR in the league makes twice as much as Kittle at $30M/year (Hill), and 20 WRs make more than Waller, with 17 of them making over $20M/year. The league is pretty clear on which position it values more presumably factoring in everything you might expect a TE to do (and plenty of WRs block, convert third downs, and are assets in the red zone, too, lol). 

Well played, but we aren't comparing positions as a whole.  We are comparing specific players who play two different positions. 

Specifically, we are comparing players who will be available at the 10-spot. Again, If one of the top-3 WRs is there, take him, debate over. Those are the guys that make your top-20 list.  And as you pointed out WR1s make a lot of money for a reason.  

 

But lets face it, if we are drafting Brian Thomas Jr,. he is our toolsy WR3, so lets compare the price tags of WRs in the top 64-96 range.  That range of WR is only making $1.4-$3.2M, Kinda hurts your argument, doesn't it? 

But lets take salary out of it.  Let's take positional pissing match out of it.  Take away the stats.  Let's look at the actual player.  You know, the person who will be drafted. 

Who would you rather have on this team for the next 4 years: DJ Chark or Sam LaPorta?

Who helps this team win more games?

[slats]

4 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

Well played, but we aren't comparing positions as a whole.  We are comparing specific players who play two different positions. 

Specifically, we are comparing players who will be available at the 10-spot. Again, If one of the top-3 WRs is there, take him, debate over. Those are the guys that make your top-20 list.  And as you pointed out WR1s make a lot of money for a reason.  

 

But lets face it, if we are drafting Brian Thomas Jr,. he is our toolsy WR3, so lets compare the price tags of WRs in the top 64-96 range.  That range of WR is only making $1.4-$3.2M, Kinda hurts your argument, doesn't it? 

But lets take salary out of it.  Let's take positional pissing match out of it.  Take away the stats.  Let's look at the actual player.  You know, the person who will be drafted. 

Who would you rather have on this team for the next 4 years: DJ Chark or Sam LaPorta?

Who helps this team win more games?

The WR has far more potential value. If Thomas were to be the pick, I’d expect him to swallow up most of Lazard/Gipson’s reps in his rookie year, much like I’d expect with Bowers. However, by year two, I would expect Thomas to be my starting X. I’m thinking more along the lines of Tee Higgins. 
 
I’d like to not get to the point where I’m pimping Thomas here, though. My personal pick #10 progression goes Odunze/Nabers, trade down, then gun to my head with the #2 OT vs. Thomas. 

[#27TheDominator]

I can't wait until his 5th consecutive all-pro because I feel a lot more Denzel Mims from Thomas than Tee Higgins.  Surely I am wrong.  Steve Smith seems to really like him.

[JoJoTownsell1]

1 hour ago, Augustiniak said:

Another issue with taking bowers is that you need to keep throwing him the ball.  He’s a volume guy, but most TEs are.  We already have 2 volume guys in breece and garrett and now we also have williams.  And there’s still Conklin who is decent.  So if you take bowers, you have to make a point to keep getting him the ball.  Georgia ran their offense through him.  The jets won’t.  

That's a pretty odd take. He is a volume guy because he was so dominant the Georgia coaching staff fed him the ball. The fact that an elite college football program that has elite level WR talent decides that their best receiving option for 3 straight years was Bowers is a great sign of how great this kid is. And he wasn't just a kid that started to dominate when he got older, he came in as a freshmen and immediately took over as the #1 receiving option for a national title team. 

Obviously, we aren't used to having offensive talent so the thought of taking an elite offensive weapon and him not being a #1 target is a little confusing for some, but that is how great offenses are built. It's ok to have multiple really high end options for a QB. It's also a long season and it's good to know that if Wilson or Mike Williams gets hurt, we have an elite talent at TE that can carry the offense. 

Could you imagine the Lions not drafting Sam Laporta last year because they already had Amon Ra and Jameson Williams and Gibbs. 

 

[Greenseed4]

10 minutes ago, slats said:

The WR has far more potential value. If Thomas were to be the pick, I’d expect him to swallow up most of Lazard/Gipson’s reps in his rookie year, much like I’d expect with Bowers. However, by year two, I would expect Thomas to be my starting X. I’m thinking more along the lines of Tee Higgins. 
 
I’d like to not get to the point where I’m pimping Thomas here, though. My personal pick #10 progression goes Odunze/Nabers, trade down, then gun to my head with the #2 OT vs. Thomas. 

That's cool, but BTJ isn't Tee Higgins 

Brian Thomas Jr: 6'3, 209 (4.33 forty) is closer to 

DJ Chark: 6'3, 200 (4.34 forty), than

Tee Higgins: 6'4, 216 (4.59 forty)

 

Would you rather have DJ Chark on this team or Sam LaPorta?

[Sperm Edwards]

31 minutes ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

Everybody wants the sexy "yeah, but this time, it's different" pick until they get burned.

There were even Jet fans were begging the Jets to trade up in '06 from #4 for Reggie Bush 🤣

They settled for Brick at #4 and Mangold at #29.  That turned out ok.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NFL_draft#Player_selections

Even in a best-case type scenario where Bowers turns out to be as good as LaPorta, I still want Fashanu over him. 

A franchise LT like Tunsil costs 25M per on the open market, and they never become available unless you're willing to part with premium draft capital to acquire and then you still have to pay him.

This is where I'm at, without knowing much about the players individually, other than what I read here from some others.

Tunsil cost two 1st rounders plus a 2nd rounder to acquire as a veteran -- AND a new $22MM/year contract extension.

Laremy Tunsil Trade Details

The Dolphins received:

• 2020 first-round pick
• 2021 first-round pick
• 2021 second-round pick
• OT Julien Davenport
• CB Johnson Bademosi

The Texans received:

• OT Laremy Tunsil
• WR Kenny Stills
• 2020 fourth-round pick
• 2021 sixth-round pick

 

For comparison, acquiring a 50-60 yard/game, 25 year-old probowl TE cost downgrading a low-2nd to a 4th, plus then a 3rd to a 4th the following year, and a $16MM/year extension:

T.J. Hockenson Trade Details

The Vikings received:

• Tight end T.J. Hockenson
• 2023 fourth-round pick, No. 119 overall (S Chamarri Conner)
• 2024 fourth-round pick (would have been a 2024 fifth-round pick if the Vikings had won a 2022 playoff game)

The Lions received:

• 2023 (low) second-round pick, No. 55 overall (WR Rashee Rice)
• 2024 third-round pick

[slats]

2 minutes ago, Greenseed4 said:

That's cool, but BTJ isn't Tee Higgins 

Brian Thomas Jr: 6'3, 209 (4.33 forty) is closer to 

DJ Chark: 6'3, 200 (4.34 forty), than

Tee Higgins: 6'4, 216 (4.59 forty)

 

Would you rather have DJ Chark on this team or Sam LaPorta?

If that’s the type of comp they’re going with, then I’d go with neither and take my favorite OT.