2021 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[NFC Beast1987]

11 hours ago, max21 said:

Javontae Williams

I said it yesterday in a different thread... Best RB I've ever seen at UNC. Not really all that close either. His combination of power and elusiveness is unmatched in college football this year. He's also a solid receiver out of the backfield and he's a great person and teammate which Rivera would obviously value. I normally don't like drafting rb's in the first few rounds but I will be thrilled if he somehow ends up in burgundy and gold.

[Panninho]

12 hours ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

Because this is a draft pick we're talking about, not a position.  

 

1.  We have to look at how a player is going to be used to the best of their ability.  If we look at Pitts and his top quality is the ability to play receiver out of the slot, then you have to look at the WRs in the draft that play slot and compare them to eachother, because while they dont have the same designated position, they're playing the same ROLE.  If you believe Pitts is the receiver that he is AND he can block... then that changes thing.  Me personally, I have zero faith in turning Pitts into a RT2 like I would other TEs in this draft. 

2.  You have to look at our draft position and ask yourself, is this TEAM better with Pitts or a different player, regardless of position.  Hes likely TE1 in this draft because of his ability to score... but is this TEAM better off with OT3 / WR5 / TE1 / MLB2 when we are on the board?  The argument can be made that the team (because of Pitts lack of blocking development at this point) would be better off taking WR5 who can play in that slot position, be more effective in that particular role, while neither are being asked to block.  

3. Is Logan Thomas going to play more downs than Pitts simply because of his blocking ability?  If the answer is yes, then I have to take a hard look at the board when talking about a 1st round pick.  Thomas is not an all pro blocker either, so if you have little faith that Pitts ability to block can force you to put him on the field more frequently then Thomas, then you're using a 1st round pick on a 'role player' (I hate that term but not sure how else to explain it) who is going to be used situationally instead of picking a player that can play the majority of the offensive snaps. 

1. Well so you made this post to confirm exactly what I was saying? I said evaluating him solely against the other slot WRs makes only sense if you have zero confidence in his blocking ability. While I think that is an overreaction because a) he is a very willing blocker and b) he has improved quite noticable in that regard you can obviously do that. But only then does it make sense to have him slotted as a WR and not a TE.

 

2. Um, no one said anything different? I have never said we should take Pitts over anyone, I just said he should not be solely evaluated against the other WRs based on his receiving skills alone. Never said he should be taken over e.g. Rondale Moore if both are there when we pick. So I have no idea why you felt the necessity to point that out.

 

3. Again, not once did I say we should take Pitts over anyone else. The whole argument was about the evaluation in general.

 

[Koolblue13]

If you're able  to draft Pitts, then there's probably a ton of other high end talent there, but you have to look at the next ten years.

 

The best TEs don't hit FA too often. WRs can be had. 

 

Smith is hopefully our QB next year and then a groomed rookie comes in and nothing is better than an established TE.

 

We need offensive weapons at every position. 

 

If you're looking at our roster, we aren't looking for a WR1, we have that. We have an excellent TE2. If we draft a TE who is more of a WR2 or 3 on the team, that's fine. If we're passing on a WR that would be a better WR2 than Pitts, that's fine also, because that WR2 doesn't have TE1 upside.

 

If we add Ju Ju and draft Pitts, we're set up well.

[OVCChairman]

1 hour ago, Panninho said:

1. Well so you made this post to confirm exactly what I was saying? I said evaluating him solely against the other slot WRs makes only sense if you have zero confidence in his blocking ability. While I think that is an overreaction because a) he is a very willing blocker and b) he has improved quite noticable in that regard you can obviously do that. But only then does it make sense to have him slotted as a WR and not a TE.

 

2. Um, no one said anything different? I have never said we should take Pitts over anyone, I just said he should not be solely evaluated against the other WRs based on his receiving skills alone. Never said he should be taken over e.g. Rondale Moore if both are there when we pick. So I have no idea why you felt the necessity to point that out.

 

3. Again, not once did I say we should take Pitts over anyone else. The whole argument was about the evaluation in general.

 

 

 

Fair enough

[KDawg]

I have him slotted as a slot. Not as a pure wide receiver. A Y. 
 

That point continues to be lost.

[Anselmheifer]

6 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I have him slotted as a slot. Not as a pure wide receiver. A Y. 
 

That point continues to be lost.

You definitely know more about football than me, but this seems silly.
 

A TE isn’t a TE just because they like up in line. Part of the usefulness of Pitts as a TE is that, as a receiver, he will be a size mismatch against every single CB, but, he’s also too explosive to be covered by LB’s and safeties. 
 

Also, you’ve listed Freiermuth as an in-line guy, and he definitely has the size for it. But they line him up as an H back and split him out super regularly from what I’ve seen. I agree he can be an in-line guy. But I also think he’s more than that. 

[KDawg]

15 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

You definitely know more about football than me, but this seems silly.
 

A TE isn’t a TE just because they like up in line. Part of the usefulness of Pitts as a TE is that, as a receiver, he will be a size mismatch against every single CB, but, he’s also too explosive to be covered by LB’s and safeties. 
 

Also, you’ve listed Freiermuth as an in-line guy, and he definitely has the size for it. But they line him up as an H back and split him out super regularly from what I’ve seen. I agree he can be an in-line guy. But I also think he’s more than that. 

You made my point. And reiterated everything I’ve said. So the problem that all of you have is I look at his position differently than you guys do? 
 

Really?

 

This started because I said you’d have to look at other receivers to see who gives you more value because I look at him as more of a slot.

 

No one has proved me wrong on that front. 
 

Just a bunch of people saying “No! He’s a TE!”

 

And I don’t think some of you have even read my posts. 
 

 

[Anselmheifer]

KDawg, I’d also say the argument of resource utilization applies here. There are extremely good WR’s changing teams every offseason. How often do you see an elite TE traded or hit FA? If Pitts is available, can get a WR elsewhere, but we are unlikely to have a shot at a Pitts caliber player, unless we draft them. 
 

Not that that means we have to choose him. He’s one of my top 5-6 players for us, but I’d rather get our QB of the future. I wish I trusted Lance. 

[KDawg]

3 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

KDawg, I’d also say the argument of resource utilization applies here. There are extremely good WR’s changing teams every offseason. How often do you see an elite TE traded or hit FA? If Pitts is available, can get a WR elsewhere, but we are unlikely to have a shot at a Pitts caliber player, unless we draft them. 
 

Not that that means we have to choose him. He’s one of my top 5-6 players for us, but I’d rather get our QB of the future. I wish I trusted Lance. 

Tight ends don’t move around as much because the good ones are rare. You don’t see great receivers leave teams unless there is cap concerns, either. Same with a lot of positions. I guarantee that if we could we’d keep every single one of our DL. I’m not sure how we can with McLaurin coming up and others. 
 

I have zero problem taking Pitts. 
 

In fact, I think him in the slot is a tremendous boon for this roster. He’d change a lot... and you could have him and Thomas on the field and still be an 11 personnel look with him detached and in space. He’d eat defenses alive with McLaurin out there, too. And that’s where a guy like Cam Sims shines. No attention at all. 
 

Thomas is still the safety valve along with McKissick and Gibson. As a weapon he’d be a ridiculous get for us. 

[bowhunter]

Watching the UVa-Tech game last night we saw 2 very different types of Tight ends. Both very good at what they do. I'd love to add a blocker and dependable catch type TE like Poljan later in the draft

[Panninho]

29 minutes ago, KDawg said:

You made my point. And reiterated everything I’ve said. So the problem that all of you have is I look at his position differently than you guys do? 
 

Really?

 

This started because I said you’d have to look at other receivers to see who gives you more value because I look at him as more of a slot.

 

No one has proved me wrong on that front. 
 

Just a bunch of people saying “No! He’s a TE!”

 

And I don’t think some of you have even read my posts. 
 

 

Can only speak for myself but I just found it strange and short-sighted to say that to make a decision on Pitts you really need to ask yourself only one question and that is - I quote you here: "Is Pitts better than the other receivers on the board... that will be the question". From a general perspective that makes sense because you need to ask yourself that with every prospect and against every position but this was specifically after you said that you see him as WR - so following this logic this question should be answered purely on his skills as a receiver.

And I just don't think it's that simple because everything else that Pitts is willing and might be capable to do from the TE position is excluded if you solely look for an answer to that question. I mean you can see it that way. But I just think that someone who is 19-20, is willing to block, wants to be coached up and has a massive frame to work with can develop into more than just a receiver.

 

So for me it's not so much about the actual designation or the role he will play here to begin with but about the potential going forward. And I just don't think that you draft a guy like Pitts to use him the same way as e.g. Rondale Moore 3 years from now. I see both of them with potentially very different career trajectories, so I just don't think you evaluate them the same. But hey, everyone can see that different and has a different approach. You for sure understand more about the game than I do, I just don't agree with you on Pitts as a prospect.

[Anselmheifer]

What’s the name of that giant, maybe 260 pound, multi positional, smaller school defender that people were posting videos about a while back? Like an ILB, OLB, edge type guy? We looked like a great potential SAM to me. 

[OVCChairman]

1 hour ago, Anselmheifer said:

KDawg, I’d also say the argument of resource utilization applies here. There are extremely good WR’s changing teams every offseason. How often do you see an elite TE traded or hit FA? If Pitts is available, can get a WR elsewhere, but we are unlikely to have a shot at a Pitts caliber player, unless we draft them. 
 

Not that that means we have to choose him. He’s one of my top 5-6 players for us, but I’d rather get our QB of the future. I wish I trusted Lance. 

 

 

I think we are still getting hung up on position title.  An elite recieving TE that excells in the slot does not mean they are more valuable than a really good slot receiver that can get the same production simply because they're listed as a TE.  It looks great at the pro bowl or the all pro team, but what does it provide the team?  Production out of the slot position is the benefit, whether you get it from a TE, WR, or RB... 

 

Me, I don't care how we get that production.  

[Skinsinparadise]

I got to go back and study Pitts 2020 games, I've watched him in real time plenty.  But I noticed when I watched Trask some that Pitts has improved as a blocker at least from when i noticed him but I need to just zone in on him for a few games to land on an opinion on it.  Based on what I've read, I know he's determined to improve as a blocker which is a key start.  Jordan Reed for example wasn't just a bad blocker but also wasn't a willing blocker and seemed to have no interest in becoming a good blocker. 

 

Brevin Jordan looked good yesterday.  It's the first time i watched him this season.  I watched his 2019 games and I thought he was a poor man's Pitts.  He's a dynamic receiver and a meh blocker. 

 

I like Jake Ferugson as I've mentioned here multple times.  I've tried to watch Hunter Long but can only find highlights which don't show him as a blocker.  As a receiver he reminds me of Trautman.  He's tall, lanky, not fast but has long legs and can pick up steam that way, he seems to be able to find the seam and get open, decent hands but not perfect, big catch radius because of his size.  I read his blocking can be shaky.  If so I am more of a Ferguson guy because I think he's a good blocker. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

I think the Pitts discussion might end up being a waste of time, if we win the division I think we got no shot at him.  If we go 1-3, I think he could be within the range of our pick.   Maybe 2-2.  I think there is an outside shot in that case if there is an early run on tackles where Slater, Darrisaw, Vera-Tucker, etc are grabbed early.

[Skinsinparadise]

51 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said:

What’s the name of that giant, maybe 260 pound, multi positional, smaller school defender that people were posting videos about a while back? Like an ILB, OLB, edge type guy? We looked like a great potential SAM to me. 

 

 

 

 

[KDawg]

1 hour ago, Panninho said:

Can only speak for myself but I just found it strange and short-sighted to say that to make a decision on Pitts you really need to ask yourself only one question and that is - I quote you here: "Is Pitts better than the other receivers on the board... that will be the question". From a general perspective that makes sense because you need to ask yourself that with every prospect and against every position but this was specifically after you said that you see him as WR - so following this logic this question should be answered purely on his skills as a receiver.

And I just don't think it's that simple because everything else that Pitts is willing and might be capable to do from the TE position is excluded if you solely look for an answer to that question. I mean you can see it that way. But I just think that someone who is 19-20, is willing to block, wants to be coached up and has a massive frame to work with can develop into more than just a receiver.

 

So for me it's not so much about the actual designation or the role he will play here to begin with but about the potential going forward. And I just don't think that you draft a guy like Pitts to use him the same way as e.g. Rondale Moore 3 years from now. I see both of them with potentially very different career trajectories, so I just don't think you evaluate them the same. But hey, everyone can see that different and has a different approach. You for sure understand more about the game than I do, I just don't agree with you on Pitts as a prospect.

I don’t think you understand my take on Pitts as a prospect.

 

To make it short and simple:

 

You draft him for his ability in the slot, if he develops into an in-line tight end that’s a bonus. And you certainly attempt that. But his value currently stands in the slot and for long term he will not lose that value in the slot. He may or may not develop in-line.

[KDawg]

23 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I think the Pitts discussion might end up being a waste of time, if we win the division I think we got no shot at him.  If we go 1-3, I think he could be within the range of our pick.   Maybe 2-2.  I think there is an outside shot in that case if there is an early run on tackles where Slater, Darrisaw, Vera-Tucker, etc are grabbed early.

I think you’re right, depending where we finish as you state.

 

I think we’re going to find ourselves staring a top 2 corner, top 2 LB, top 5 tackle, top safety in the face...

[Going Commando]

56 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

I think we are still getting hung up on position title.  An elite recieving TE that excells in the slot does not mean they are more valuable than a really good slot receiver that can get the same production simply because they're listed as a TE.  It looks great at the pro bowl or the all pro team, but what does it provide the team?  Production out of the slot position is the benefit, whether you get it from a TE, WR, or RB... 

 

Me, I don't care how we get that production.  

 

I take your point, but let's say you've got two slot receivers who are both big time weapons where one is like Kyle Pitts and one is like Rondale Moore.  Perhaps they are evenly graded with respect to their position, but you can do mire with the guy who is 6'6.  You can be much more physical with him.  That's where the value of Pitts would beat Moore even if they have the exact same grade.

[Skinsinparadise]

Just did a mock, guaranteed SB if it plays out like this:  

 

Just about all of our needs met, overdid it at receiver but the board played out that way, got @KDawg's dude in the last round.  

 

if the draft plays out anywhere near the way Draft Networks play out, you almost have to ignore receiver in round 1 because good players just keep popping up at that position througout the draft.   I think if you need a LT you almost always have to grab one early. 

 

 

[KDawg]

I think the Draft Network draft gadget is busted...

 

Moore in the second, Ford in the third... Dyami in the 7th. 

12 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I take your point, but let's say you've got two slot receivers who are both big time weapons where one is like Kyle Pitts and one is like Rondale Moore.  Perhaps they are evenly graded with respect to their position, but you can do mire with the guy who is 6'6.  You can be much more physical with him.  That's where the value of Pitts would beat Moore even if they have the exact same grade.

 

Correct. Though I’d argue that the size, and specifically the way he uses it, would put Pitts ahead of Moore.

 

There should always be a premium on versatility... and whether Pitts develops as a long term in-line guy or he is only used there sparingly... He can move around a lot more and be used in different ways with blocking than Moore could. And Moore isn't dynamic enough as a receiver to edge out Pitts. 

 

I understand you were using those as examples, but I just wanted to build on that a little. 

[Skinsinparadise]

19 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I think the Draft Network draft gadget is busted...

 

Moore in the second, Ford in the third... Dyami in the 7th. 

 

 

Ford I noticed is all over the place in mocks, I've seen him in the last first, I've seen him in the 4th.   Weird.   As for Moore, considering the glut at that position in the draft, it wouldn't shock me if he slips to the late first.   I think he's one dude who will almost for sure be there where we pick. 

 

The one thing that is striking about the Draft Network mocks is that receiver is the lets have a party position, since they have good ones at every round just about.  I ended up with 3 but if I really went pure BPA every round, I probably would have ended up with 5.   

[Voice_of_Reason]

27 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Just did a mock, guaranteed SB if it plays out like this: 

All of this is wrong because we're going to be picking 31st after we lose to the Chiefs in the SB.   

[Skinsinparadise]

5 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

All of this is wrong because we're going to be picking 31st after we lose to the Chiefs in the SB.   

 

I already booked my tickets, just a short drive for me. 😀

[OVCChairman]

55 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I take your point, but let's say you've got two slot receivers who are both big time weapons where one is like Kyle Pitts and one is like Rondale Moore.  Perhaps they are evenly graded with respect to their position, but you can do mire with the guy who is 6'6.  You can be much more physical with him.  That's where the value of Pitts would beat Moore even if they have the exact same grade.

 

 

True, but you could equally argue that you can do more with Moore.  Jet sweeps for instance.  You're not going to use Pitts in that role.  The other factor is that Moore is a threat to make a house call any time he touches the ball where the 6'6" guy likely isnt going to outrun CBs on the same level.  

 

 

There is an evaluation involved on both sides, and the argument both ways are fair.  Again, I'm not saying hard pass on Pitts by any means, the dude is a talent.  Just want to make sure the talent is used correctly and gives us the best chance to win if were gonna use a 1st round pick on him.