JoshAllenHasBigHands

If this were an "all things being equal" situation, you might be right that Nsekhe would win the job. But sometimes you also have to look to the future. Even if Nsekhe is better this year, at his age, he will not be the guy moving forward. You have a better chance of Dawkins being the guy. Now, sure, you can let him sit for a year, and that might work. It might also obliterate his relationship with the Bills. But it would definitely take reps away from the guy that could be your future franchise LT.

This is what I see happening. That and some special teams WRs, if any. WR was always all set going into this draft.

I walked into the draft thinking WR was a super low need. I just think everyone is so obsessed with having this "WR1," as if that is a thing in the NFL, and not a fantasy football driven creation. Its about how he WR corps, as a whole, looks. And, they look really good. On top of that, despite how much hate Zay gets, he is obviously developing quite nicely. Cutting (or trading) him was never on the table. He has always been in their plans moving forward.

This won the message board today.

I mean, he is right...

In 15 years, Fitz had Warner for five years and Palmer for two years (Palmer was injured the other two years). That leaves 8 years of terrible QB play. Beyond that, even when he had Warner throwing to him, he didn't have the benefit of the spread systems beings used by guys like Hill. I understand your point, and I don't think its unreasonable. I just think longevity is as important, if not more important, as accomplishments in single seasons. That is why "flash in the pan" guys are not remembered like perennial pro-bowlers. Lots of guys can have a good season or two. Generational talents can do it over the course of a decade.

I don't know, he has the second most yards for any WR in NFL history. Its not just the single year performances, its the prolonged period of success.

I've just never heard anyone suggest that Lary Fitz is not one of the greatest WRs in NFL history. I have also never seen someone use all-pro selections as a metric for measuring greatness. That's the thing. Fitz had terrible QBs for the overwhelming majority of his career. There were exceptions of course, but it is amazing that he was able to get the production he did with the guys throwing him the ball.

I feel like I am arguing with a flat earth-er. This is one of the wildest takes I have ever read on this board.

I mean that's true, but the fact that the pros is different than college is true of every skill. I guess I don't know what he will be in the NFL, but that fact that he wasn't jammed in college is the strongest indicator he won't be jammed in the NFL.

This, and his speed, were DKs biggest strengths coming out. If he fails, it will not be because he got jammed at the line.

I hate the term "generational" talent. That said, Larry Fitz is a generational talent. He has a produced at a high level for a prolonged period of time, under incredibly tough circumstances, like almost no one before him has. Tyreek Hill is a one hit wonder and about to be out of the NFL. While Larry is getting inducted into the hall of fame, Hill will be an afterthought on KC message boards.

I mean, you already know my answer...It was in the quote you responded to. Your comment isn't responsive.

Larry Fitz would have been a better rebuttal to my point, but he is also a generational talent whereas Tyreek Hill is not. There are exceptions to every rule. And there is nothing that says Hill plays as well in a different system, but on the whole, WRs are only as good as their QBs.

That is an entirely different discussion than what I challenged you on. But since this is where we are now: It is a philosophy thing. TE is the most over rated position in all of sports. I really don't care if we get anything more than minimum production (500 yards, 4-5 TDs) from my TE, so long as he can block. The concept of a WR1 is a product of the media, videogames, and fantasy football. I do not care if we have an all-pro WR if the passing game, on the whole, suffers. I care how the entire unit plays and looks. In the end, the WRs only matter so far as the QB throwing them football is good. If we get great production from Allen, the WRs will look like stars. If we don't, they will look terrible. That is just how it goes. WRs get all the credit for the QBs accomplishments.

I mean, you haven't provided any numbers; I am not sure why I would counter... But ok, last year Brown was on pace for 1000 yards before Lamar Jackson (a QB notorious for being a terrible passer) was brought in. Once that happened, the entire Baltimore passing offense shut down. That production is 100% good enough for better than the "3" label. Before injury, in 2017, Kroft had like 7 or 8 TDs. Even by stats alone, he is obviously good enough to be called, at least, a "2" TE.

He strikes me as a Madden superstar

Yeah, see, thing is I am footfall fan. Not a fantasy fan, or a Madden fan. Numbers only matter in context. In context, Brown and Kroft deserve better than to be called "3s"

It appears you think you are being clever....

What are you a 15 year old girl? Super catty for no reason. Kroft is not a "3" TE, nor is Brown a "3" WR. That is just silly.

Fire response, Glazeduck. I don't mind the chart. It is a lot of fun to imagine. But it isn't gospel, and passing judgment on a GM based on the chart is absolute garbage. The true value is what the market dictates. Period. That 5th pick is worth different amounts in different years, depending on the talent available and league needs. I suspect picks will be worth less, this year, because there isn't a ton of QB needs across the NFL like there usually is. Teams won't be willing to give up as much to move up for a DT, like they would for a QB.

They exist to contextualize a process fans do not, and cannot, begin to understand.

I have a dumb question. How does one quantify hamstring strength?

This?cannot?be said?enough!!! Sort of like how half the players projected in the first round are "generational" talents?

J. Hughes is for sure a play maker.