Convert Jordan Reed to WR starting in 2016?

[SkinsGuy]

The more you make this about saving money, the more sick I feel in the stomach. What you're talking about is basically using him as a WR and not paying him like one. 

 

With all the time Reed has missed, I say that makes him and the team even.

[asnpcwiz]

Keeping him as a TE to pay him less is not a good reason not to do it. The only thing you need is a team going up to him during a contract year and saying 'hey, you run routes 75%+ and we will convert you to WR to get you paid more', and boom he's gone.

His size, build, and skillset match much closer to these next gen TE'S such as Gronk, Graham, etc. They run more routes but can be used to stack the box as well.

[skins island connection]

 I get what you're saying but Reed is better at TE than WR for the reasons mentioned in above threads.

 

 Now, there have been a few instances where I wondered about converting one of our WRs to TE to get that favorable mismatch, but most all of our WRs are too small to really be effective as TE. 

 

I hate to say it, but when Witten's time is up in Dallas, the perfect switchover would be Dez Bryant to TE; big, physical, fast, that would be a mismatch nightmare, but they'd have to find another top notch WR to replace that position with.  Actually, years ago I wanted to see Hankerson be converted to TE but still he was not big or tall enough; even going on a beer and donut diet wouldn't help.

[Audible_Red40]

I can't help but notice that three out of your last four threads are:

"Convert Jordan Reed to WR starting in 2016?"

"Should Redskins trade for Jimmy Graham?"

"Use RG3 as utility player (for 2015)"

I like that you think outside the box, and I think these kinds of ideas have a place in the appropriate threads...but maybe chill out on the threads for a bit. In every one of these threads you take an outlandish idea, pitch it, and then spend the entire thread getting annoyed that nobody else agrees with you while painting yourself as the open-minded revolutionary who dares to have a vision. Maybe when you find yourself in the vast minority it doesn't mean everyone else is crazy...it could mean you just had a brain fart and misinterpreted it as inspiration.

It's not personal, I'm just pointing out a pattern.

 

There was a guy a couple off seasons ago who would post insane trade ideas in every thread or make his own.  Like I mean insane.

 

At first I was interested to see what idea he came up with.

 

I forget his screen name and have no idea where he went. 

[goskins10]

If he's so average, how did Paul beat him out in camp?  Because Paul can catch, too, and Reed is a below average blocker.  He's already playing out of position and he's pretty much unguardable when we do that.

 

And to anyone thinking we can hide his price based on his position title, his agent is going to see right through that if he can stay healthy. 

 

 

I realize that for blink of an eye they had Paul "listed" as the #1 TE, there is no way he would actually beat out Reed for the TE position. Reed was still a little dinged up and they were giving Paul a lot of snaps. He was improving as a TE and is a great STs player, but there is no way straight up that he beats out Reed at TE. When healthy Reed is one of the best TEs in football.

 

I understand the idea of wanting to move players, but it's just not that easy. He is just not fast enough to be a WR to start with. More importantly, why take someone from a position where he excels? It just creates another opening.

 

We can get WRs. But a top level TE is not as easy to find. And look at he impact he has on the game. There is no way he would have the same impact at WR, if for no other reason than his targets would go down considerably.

[Bang]

No,,  New England and to a degree San Diego have revolutionized the TE position, and it has become an incredibly strong weapon, and i think much of it comes from where the TE is able to line up. It forces mismatches, especially with WRs outside in formations that command the attention of DBs and faster cover guys. 
Gronkowski in particular.. how often do you see him just wide open, completely alone?
Often he gets three to five steps after the reception to get up to full speed before a tackler gets near him,, by then he's a runaway truck mashing and crushing defenders who get in his way.
This is why.. the formations can set an athletic BIG pass catching TE up with a linebacker or a safety who HAS to keep an eye in the backfield, who has no choice but to bite on play action,  and who often can't run with such a versatile BIG target.

 

It ain't broke. Don't fix it.

 

~Bang

[Alexa]

If he's so average, how did Paul beat him out in camp?  Because Paul can catch, too, and Reed is a below average blocker.  He's already playing out of position and he's pretty much unguardable when we do that.

 

And to anyone thinking we can hide his price based on his position title, his agent is going to see right through that if he can stay healthy. 

Are you serious? Paul is a nice player and all, the type of player that every team needs, but he is not Jordan Reed. He simply does not have the skill set that Reed has. Not sure what the coaches were doing there, maybe a little frustrated with Reed's inability to stay healthy as he was missing time in camp. To me all that was the coaches just sending a message to Reed. But there is no reason to compare the two, or to split Reed out as a full time WR. Leave the kid alone and let the legend grow!

[DJD2]

No

 

I'll let Gruden explain why:

 

On what TE Jordan Reed brings to the offense:
“Well, he’s a great pass catcher obviously. You know, we line up in our two tight-end sets, keep them in their base personnel, it’s a matchup issue for the defense. He’s very good in zone coverage and he’s excellent after the catch. He’s also improving on his blocking skills, which is huge, so the defense just can’t count him as a receiver all the time. I think his game is coming a long way from training camp from last year to this year. I think he’s understanding the route concepts, his route discipline is getting much better. He means a lot to this offense. We get into formations, we get tells on what the coverages are with him. He’s a major weapon for this offense and obviously you can see the production that he has.”

[Brokenstriker]

if Reed doesn't play TE for us ... who would?  Until there is an option that is acceptable ... Reed is 'the' TE.  Only possible reason I'd support moving him to WR is a top tier TE on our roster who would play there when Reed goes WR.  Considering all the positions we still need to fix ... all this does is make the GM's job harder.

[Koolblue13]

Renegade, you got moxy and are full of steam kid and I dig you thinking outside of the box, but I have to agree with Conn on this one, again.

[grhqofb5]

Reed has an awesome skill set.  I believe he could play anywhere. Niles Paul, prior to his injury, looked like a solid tight end.  I don't see why we even need to give them a position designation, other than maybe for the franchise tag situation. And we know it isn't that simple anyway (see Jimmy Graham).

 

In any event, at this point Reed needs to show that he can remain healthy.  Otherwise, the conversation is sort of moot, or premature (not definitely not "mute").

[dwiley20]

silly question

[Mr. Sinister]

Hell no

[DJHJR86]

No way.  Best TE we've had in years.  Keep it that way and hope he stays healthy.  

[Peregrine]

Hes a prototypical TE.  If you have a guy who is playing RIDICULOUSLY well at a position, why would you seek to switch him to another position?  That makes no sense to me.  You only move a guy if hes not good at a position in hopes he will catch on at the other one.  QBs have no bigger friend than a big body over the middle who can turn and pick up yards.

[London Kev]

<Edit>

 

It ain't broke. Don't fix it.

This is my thoughts as well.

 

I think he's a fine TE right now and could improve to be one of the greats (with the obligatory "if he stays healthy" caveat). I don't really care what his position is actually called, as long as he keeps doing what he's doing.

[MartinC]

TEs already have hybridized, they can play anywhere from directly outside the tackle to wide out. There's no reason to formally make a position change, we can already do whatever we want with him. It's overthinking things to change him, it's the same player, there's no change in the balance of our roster to or away from WRs and/or TEs.

Just draft another TE that can block and carry 1 more TE. No big deal.

I think there might be 3 TEs in the NFL who can legitimately line up tight to the tackle and block worth a damn against linebackers and DEs. The vast majority are larger receivers who have the speed and athletic ability to expose linebackers in coverage and are a physical mismatch for most safeties. Reed is one of the latter breed and a very very good one when he stays healthy. As a flex TE he creates favourable match ups against linebacker and safety coverages and helps dictate coverages we see as defenses have to account for him.

If you move him to receiver (apart from the odd play) you change the match ups and lose some of the advantage he gives you.

Those concusions he gets are scary though. He might not have a long career.

[Riggo-toni]

Dog of War pretty much beat me to it. Forget labels - TE has largely become a hybrid position. Jimmy Graham plays more like a WR than a traditional TE, but the Seahawks' inflexibility has him underperforming. We've used double and even triple TE sets this year, so there's no reason Niles Paul and Reed can't both be on the field for a good number of snaps.

[PlayAction]

I don't know that Reed has gotten hurt during run blocking.  The concussions come from defenders taking head shots at him which happen while he's catching passes. 

 

Whether you classify him as a TE or a WR isn't so much of an issue if he's viewed primarily a pass catcher.  Skins can carry an extra TE at the expense of the WR group.  Four TEs means one less WR.  I'm not sold on Carrier though for the long-term.  Is he better than Paulson in any phase of the game? 

[wilco_holland]

So if you make him a fulltime WR you pay him twice the money to do the same. Lets just keep calling him a TE and safe some money.

[BleedBNG]

That was a quick and easy no. I didn't and still haven't (and won't) even read what the OP wrote.

[sportjunkie07]

I'm all for new ideas and creative thinking, but there really is no upside to this move.

I doubt his ability to avoid injury is greater at wr and we'd have to pay him more.

He is a weapon where he is currently positioned and he'll only get better there if he can stay healthy.

[walker77]

Possibly the worst pole and question posed in the forum. Ever. No, keep him at TE. Sorry OP for the backlash I'm just shocked this was ever asked.

[illone]

There would be no need to re-designate him as a WR.

 

Just put together a multiple TE package when Niles comes back, the Skins have already deployed that a few times this year.  When Niles and Paulsen come back the team will have even more flexibility there.

 

The team is already stacked at WR and thus would not be better served by doing this.

 

Djax, Pierre, Crowder, Paul, Reed.  Right there you have your 5 wide setup as well as the 2TE set if you mix and match with a RB.

 

2¢

[DogofWar1]

One thing worth mentioning, it actually might not COST more to designate him as a WR.  Looking at contracts, any TE who's anybody is getting at least 7M a year.  It's not unreasonable to assume that number will be 8M per year for when Reed needs a deal.  Health factors in but with how good he is some team might give him a good deal, better than ours if we low ball.  An 8M per year with injury clauses might be in order, or perhaps the market will be cool and we can have him for 6.5-7M.

 

Now, if we moved him to WR, his contract would be dependent on how he performs compared to WRs.  His 70 ypg suggests about 1120 yards over the year, but his injuries probably limit him to about 11 games a year (what he played last year, and he's at 5/7 games so far, which translates to 11.4 games this year).

 

At 11 games, he's likely to end up around 770 to 800 yards, which likely translates to WR2-3 numbers, which probably would net him between 3-6M on the market.

 

Where a TE is cheaper is in franchising costs.  But if we don't franchise, his level of production probably wouldn't warrant 8M as a WR.

 

That being said, if we try to outmaneuver Reed on costs by making him a WR, someone else will gladly hand him TE1 money.  In essence, we'd have ended up outmaneuvering ourselves.  So, just keep him a TE and pay him his market value, whatever that will be.