Case against first round TEs

[cba fan]

19 hours ago, Reed83HOF said:

Outside of the quarterback position, tight ends have the steepest learning curve when transitioning to the NFL. The reason it can take years for a player to acclimate to an offense and develop into a starter is that the position demands a player to be a dependable piece in both the running and passing game. That means understanding the blocking scheme and how to read defenses from a blocking and passing game perspective. It's also a time for these 21-22-year olds, who are competing against the most athletic and skilled players they've ever faced, to continue to fill out their frame and learn technique because there is zero room for error in the trenches. Then there is always the time it takes to polish your route running, possibly expanding your route tree and gaining rapport with your quarterback. Until a player can develop an all-around game they'll be pigeonholed into a limited role.

 

Drafting and developing a tight end is the ultimate patience play and it can understandably be uncomfortable and difficult to hold strong when you see other first-rounders become instant impact players. The Lions are a perfect example of this. They drafted Eric Ebron 10th overall in 2014 and low and behold the next seven picks would make a Pro Bowl while still on their rookie deal.  Those players selected would include the likes of Aaron Donald and Odell Beckham. Last offseason, Detroit decided to move on from Ebron as they determined that he wasn't worth the price tag of his 5th-year option ($8.25M). 

 

Both the franchise and the player are in a tough spot. Eric Ebron arguably wasn't worth paying $8.25M but he also was progressing like the majority of successful tight ends do. And that's exactly the point! It is really worth investing your most important draft asset into a player who may take years to develop and you may not see the benefit until four years down the road or until their second contract? Is there a better use of your resources?

 

Greg Olsen has a similar story to Ebron. He was taken 31st overall in the 2007 draft by the Chicago Bears. He put up respectable production his first four years and heading into his 5th season he was shipped off to Carolina where he continued to grow and later became a Pro Bowler and All-Pro on his 2nd and 3rd contracts.

 

http://www.optimumscouting.com/news/replacing-gronkowski

I agree however they would be drafting an IOWA TE and Iowa is a TE factory. Iowa TE's develop faster like Dallas Clark. Kittle in SF last year and a couple others.

 

Personally I would let someone else develop them and try and get them on 2nd contract like you mentioned is when they show better results.

[HeHateMe]

Anti TE guys are ignoring that first year players are usually not studs right off the bat and there is a learning curve for all rookies no matter the position.. Because we think production may not be as high in year 1 and 2 as it is in their prime, we probably shouldn't draft anybody by that logic..

[Nihilarian]

Historic Success Chart

The numbers show us the following outline for finding consistent starters:

1st Round - OL (83%) LB (70%) TE (67%) DB (64%) QB (63%) WR (58%) RB (58%) DL (58%)

2nd Round - OL (70%) LB (55%) TE (50%) WR (49%) DB (46%) QB (27%) DL (26%) RB (25%)

3rd Round - OL (40%) TE (39%) LB (34%) DL (27%) WR (25%) DB (24%) QB (17%) RB (16%)

4th Round - DL (37%) TE (33%) OL (29%) LB (16%) WR(12%) DB (11%) RB (11%) QB (8%)

5th Round - TE (32%) DB (17%) WR (16%) OL (16%) DL (13%) RB (9%) LB (4%) QB (0%)

6th Round - TE (26%) OL (16%) DL (13%) WR (9%) DB (8%) RB (6%) LB (5%) QB (0%)

7th Round - DB (11%) OL (9%) QB (6%) WR (5%) DL (3%) LB (2%) RB (0%) TE (0%)

 

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

 

• If you want a safe first round pick, OL (83%), LB (70%) and TE (67%) have the lowest "bust" rates.
• TEs have a pretty reasonable chance of turning out in most rounds.

[Chicken Boo]

It is foolish to take a tight end inside of the top 10.

 

Remember how awesome Coby Fleener was supposed to be?  Exactly.

[Wayne Cubed]

10 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

The point of this thread was to say that history indicates tight ends shouldn't be selected in the 1st round. That argument is a non-starter as there is absolutely no correlation between the history of drafting tight ends (in any round) and where Hockenson should be selected or how successful he will be. All the rest is pure speculation, such as your assertion he " he probably won't light the league up next year." 

 

People are welcome to their opinions; however, trying to wrap them up in some sort of scientific/statistical confirmation is, IMO, ridiculous.

 

And you are completely missing the point. No one is trying to correlate the round a player is selected and whether they will be successful or not. It's about positional value. I think coaches/GMs understand which positions transition better to the NFL and where that value is. 

 

4 minutes ago, HeHateMe said:

Anti TE guys are ignoring that first year players are usually not studs right off the bat and there is a learning curve for all rookies no matter the position.. Because we think production may not be as high in year 1 and 2 as it is in their prime, we probably shouldn't draft anybody by that logic..

 

I can show you a player taken from a premier position(QB, OT, EDGE, CB) that WAS a stud right away. Multiple players in fact.

3 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:

Historic Success Chart

The numbers show us the following outline for finding consistent starters:

1st Round - OL (83%) LB (70%) TE (67%) DB (64%) QB (63%) WR (58%) RB (58%) DL (58%)

2nd Round - OL (70%) LB (55%) TE (50%) WR (49%) DB (46%) QB (27%) DL (26%) RB (25%)

3rd Round - OL (40%) TE (39%) LB (34%) DL (27%) WR (25%) DB (24%) QB (17%) RB (16%)

4th Round - DL (37%) TE (33%) OL (29%) LB (16%) WR(12%) DB (11%) RB (11%) QB (8%)

5th Round - TE (32%) DB (17%) WR (16%) OL (16%) DL (13%) RB (9%) LB (4%) QB (0%)

6th Round - TE (26%) OL (16%) DL (13%) WR (9%) DB (8%) RB (6%) LB (5%) QB (0%)

7th Round - DB (11%) OL (9%) QB (6%) WR (5%) DL (3%) LB (2%) RB (0%) TE (0%)

 

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

 

• If you want a safe first round pick, OL (83%), LB (70%) and TE (67%) have the lowest "bust" rates.
• TEs have a pretty reasonable chance of turning out in most rounds.

 

So now we only care if our number 9 pick is a bust or not?  I mean come on, that's ridiculous.

[MJS]

TE's are also among the lowest paid positions in the NFL. I view them as a luxury, not a necessity. I'd totally be fine with Hockenson if Beane and McDermott want him, but let's not pretend that TE's are an important element for an offense. You have a couple elites who ARE focal points in their respective offenses, and then the rest are just guys. I've been against taking TE's in the top 10 in the past and probably will in the future as well. I would accept an exception to that opinion in the case of Hockenson because he is one of those rare complete TE's who can be effective as a blocker and as a receiver, but I would rather trade down into the teens and take him if possible.

 

For those who play fantasy football, you know how barren the field is for point producing TE's. They don't provide the impact that a RB or WR does.

Edited April 24, 2019 by MJS

[Reed83HOF]

18 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

90 catches and 1300 yards 17 tds  is pretty darn good for a second year right end. Over 70 catches for Ertz in years 3-4.

 

kelce years 2-4 are outstanding. 

 

I guess I can go as far as to say if they do draft a TE in Rd 1 he better be more like gronk or Kelce than shockey 

 

 

Kelce seems to be the anomaly - crap I forgot to paste his #s in. How much of that falls to Andy Reid and such? Great example though and the only one who really stands out quickly. 

 

The issue is it seems looking across to broad spectrum of TEs that it takes somewhere between 2-4 years if they become that player everyone wants for a TE. The names everyone wants rarely are the first rounders when they were drafted. These teams appears to be following the premise of positional valuation and knowing that you can take a shot at someone who has 90% of the first round guys potential and allowing them time to grow over that 2-4 period, whereas the RD1 guys are generally expected to contribute right away.

 

There is a difference between drafting in the top half of RD1 and the bottom half. The teams on the bottom half should at least have better talent and had a better season, you can assume that they have more skill players and well-wounded out rosters and they need for the first RD1 guy to contribute at a high level right away is not there. The teams on the top half of the draft have less elite talent and that is where the TE becomes a luxury pick that the team can't afford. 

[maryland-bills-fan]

34 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:

Historic Success Chart

The numbers show us the following outline for finding consistent starters:

1st Round - OL (83%) LB (70%) TE (67%) DB (64%) QB (63%) WR (58%) RB (58%) DL (58%)

2nd Round - OL (70%) LB (55%) TE (50%) WR (49%) DB (46%) QB (27%) DL (26%) RB (25%)

3rd Round - OL (40%) TE (39%) LB (34%) DL (27%) WR (25%) DB (24%) QB (17%) RB (16%)

4th Round - DL (37%) TE (33%) OL (29%) LB (16%) WR(12%) DB (11%) RB (11%) QB (8%)

5th Round - TE (32%) DB (17%) WR (16%) OL (16%) DL (13%) RB (9%) LB (4%) QB (0%)

6th Round - TE (26%) OL (16%) DL (13%) WR (9%) DB (8%) RB (6%) LB (5%) QB (0%)

7th Round - DB (11%) OL (9%) QB (6%) WR (5%) DL (3%) LB (2%) RB (0%) TE (0%)

 

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round

 

• If you want a safe first round pick, OL (83%), LB (70%) and TE (67%) have the lowest "bust" rates.
• TEs have a pretty reasonable chance of turning out in most rounds.

 

Here is that same data plotted up a different way.    There is a saying from Mark Twain. "There are lies, damned lies and statistics".    This chart is about WHAT PERCENTAGE of players drafted at a position became starters.   IT DOES NOT SHOW HOW MANY,  players were drafted at that position in each round.   I don't have that data but I'll just use the % success rate and make some observations on that.

 

So, if 3 tight ends were drafted in the first round, 2 became starters and 1 didn't. (67% success)   If 9 were drafted in the 4th and 9 in the 5th rounds, then one third of them became starters. That is, SIX starters.  OR.. to get 2 starters, you would expect to use 6 draft picks in the 4th & 5th.

 

Now let us use some business sense and see how we get the biggest bang for our draft value buck. 

        Cost for a starting TE in the first round?  (I'll give you a break and ignore picks 1 to 10,  just using the average cost / pick from 11 to 32).

 

1st round.    Spend an average 632 points x 3 and get 2 starters:

632 x 3 /2=   948 points

 

4th round.   Spend an average 71 points x 3 tries and get 1 starter:

71 x 3 /1=    213 points

 

5th round.  Spend an average of 34 points x 3 tries and get 1 starter:

34 x 3 /1 =  102 points.

 

So it is five to ten times more expensive to draft a TE in the first rather than the lower rounds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by maryland-bills-fan

[Reed83HOF]

12 minutes ago, maryland-bills-fan said:

 

Here is that same data plotted up a different way.    There is a saying from Mark Twain. "There are lies, damned lies and statistics".    This chart is about WHAT PERCENTAGE of players drafted at a position became starters.   IT DOES NOT SHOW HOW MANY,  players were drafted at that position in each round.   I don't have that data but I'll just use the % success rate and make some observations on that.

 

So, if 3 tight ends were drafted in the first round, 2 became starters and 1 didn't. (67% success)   If 9 were drafted in the 4th and 9 in the 5th rounds, then one third of them became starters. That is, SIX starters.  OR.. to get 2 starters, you would expect to use 6 draft picks in the 4th & 5th.

 

Now let us use some business sense and see how we get the biggest bang for our draft value buck. 

        Cost for a starting TE in the first round?  (I'll give you a break and ignore picks 1 to 10,  just using the average cost / pick from 11 to 32).

 

1st round.    Spend an average 632 points x 3 and get 2 starters:

632 x 3 /2=   948 points

 

4th round.   Spend an average 71 points x 3 tries and get 1 starter:

71 x 3 /1=    213 points

 

5th round.  Spend an average of 34 points x 3 tries and get 1 starter:

34 x 3 /1 =  102 points.

 

So it is five to ten times more expensive to draft a TE in the first rather than the lower rounds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't forget, that if you spend a first round pick on the player; that guy is playing regardless of talent at times (depending on GM/owner dynamics). You see it time and time again in the league.

[The Jokeman]

20 hours ago, Cornette's Commentary said:

I don't care.  Hockenson will be the next Gronkowski.  Take him at 9!
- JM57

Gronk is once in a generation type. I think the Hock comparisons to Witten more legit and would still take that at #9 as long as Oliver off the board 

[billsfan1959]

1 hour ago, Wayne Cubed said:

And you are completely missing the point. No one is trying to correlate the round a player is selected and whether they will be successful or not. It's about positional value. I think coaches/GMs understand which positions transition better to the NFL and where that value is. 

I'm not missing the point at all. The title of the thread is "Case against first round TEs" and is from an article that essentially gives a history of the success of tight ends and what rounds they were drafted in. Also, I am absolutely certain that coaches and GMs have a good understanding of which positions present a greater challenge in transitioning from college to the NFL.

 

My point is that none of that has any bearing at all on drafting any specific tight end. The only things that matter are those variables unique to that specific tight end. Hockenson, for example, may not have near the learning curve that another tight end might have (or it may be greater). The point is that he is a unique, individual athlete that may warrant being selected in the 1st round based on those variables unique to him - regardless of what other tight ends have done or what GMs think about the tight end position in general.

[JM57]

21 hours ago, Cornette's Commentary said:

I agree with you, Reed.  I was just pointing out that some posters (e.g. JM57) don't care and still want Hockenson at 9, regardless.

 

21 hours ago, Cornette's Commentary said:

I don't care.  Hockenson will be the next Gronkowski.  Take him at 9!
- JM57

I can see that I've really got your panties in a bunch, troll, but I've never said these things explicitly. At least have the stones to tag me if you're going to mention me, baby boy.

Edited April 24, 2019 by JM57

[Nihilarian]

I find it humorous that some Bills fans don't like the idea of a TE with the first pick at #9. I think the same could be said for drafting an offensive guard at that position too.

 

What's great is we Bills fans have absolutely no say in who gets drafted and that is a good thing otherwise the Bills would have given up the farm to move up to the #2 spot last year to draft Josh Rosen.

 

Like when the Bills drafted Josh Allen, Bills fans should be prepared to get behind the pick should the Bills draft TJ Hockenson! Or a LT and (god forbid) move him to offensive guard at #9.

 

Personally, I think the Bills will do their best to find a pass rusher with that #9 pick. Could be DK Metcalf as the Bills did have interest in trading for Antonio Brown. Could be a DT. Or they could trade back and get more than one of those needs. Whoever it is, I'll get behind it. 

[without a drought]

At 9, I just want the Bills to get a play maker or game changer. I don't care what position, getting a solid long term starter is hardly exciting and can be found elsewhere.

 

 

[JM57]

7 minutes ago, Nihilarian said:

I find it humorous that some Bills fans don't like the idea of a TE with the first pick at #9. I think the same could be said for drafting an offensive guard at that position too.

 

What's great is we Bills fans have absolutely no say in who gets drafted and that is a good thing otherwise the Bills would have given up the farm to move up to the #2 spot last year to draft Josh Rosen.

 

Like when the Bills drafted Josh Allen, Bills fans should be prepared to get behind the pick should the Bills draft TJ Hockenson! Or a LT and (god forbid) move him to offensive guard at #9.

 

Personally, I think the Bills will do their best to find a pass rusher with that #9 pick. Could be DK Metcalf as the Bills did have interest in trading for Antonio Brown. Could be a DT. Or they could trade back and get more than one of those needs. Whoever it is, I'll get behind it. 

BuT tHe PoSiTiOnAl VaLuE ?

[stinky finger]

12 hours ago, maryland-bills-fan said:

   The OP cautioned that it might take 2-5 years before the TE understands the pro game and develops the instinctive smarts to be good at blocking edge rushers, blitzing (or not blitzing) linebackers, finding the soft spots in zones and analyzing what defense is actually being played (versus 'shown'), so they can find the seam and not screw their QB.

    Are you willing to wait 3 or more years for this?   College offenses are usually spread offenses and the defenses are built to stop them.  The TE has a whole new learning curve.  Might it be better to use more mature players here? 

 

Yes you can.  Draft a good guy in a later round and get him trained. Also, substitue TE's who have different performance envelopes and run plays that use their best abilities.  You get a mismatch because the LB/safeties have to be generalists because they have to defend against run/short pass/ bump for long pass on every play.

 

IF you get a great DE/DT/LB  who is better.

 

Not buying the 2-5 year TE timeline. Maybe some, not Hock.

[WideNine]

7 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

If the Bills take Hock at 9, I'll be delighted, because it will mean that the Bills see all the things you see, and they have validated their conclusion with investigation of all the other factors that they value and can evaluate.   If they take Hock at 9, I'm pretty certain that he will be starting by the time he gets to the middle of his rookie season.  And I'll be fine with that.  

 

I just think the Bills' BPA is much more likely to be a lineman.  I think it's hard for any TE to BPA at 9.   Maybe Hock is the exception. 

 

We have had our share of offensive and defensive linemen taken in the 1st that have not panned out, RBs, QBs, and WRs too. What this organization historically has a penchant for finding is decent defensive backs and safeties with some semi-recent exceptions - McKelvin comes to mind ....that kid used to frustrate the heck out of me.

 

Just to be clear, I don't think the Bills will take Hockenson. Would be solid proof that this season is all about surrounding Allen with talent, but I don't see it happening unless the blue chip talent at DT (Williams, Oliver, etc.) is gone or none of the premium edge guys like Bosa, Allen, maybe Sweat (heart medical - probably not) are available. I believe those positions have a higher rating and can either fill that penetrating DT need that the Bills have or someone who can get to the QB off the edge.

 

I am not convinced they go LT in this draft unless there is someone that has really shot up the boards for good reason (Dillard seems to be getting a lot of attention) - not completely sold on the kid from Bama and I think that Dawkins could recover his previous form with new coaching and a fire under him after seeing all the FAs the Bills brought in. Interior guys - no one stands out to me, but good depth on guards and RTs. 

 

All I am saying is that it is a possibility and the sky is not falling if they do as I have always thought a good TE is something you can craft your game plans around and is a difference-maker on teams that have one whereas good receivers are pretty one-dimensional in what they bring. If they don't take Hock in the 1st, or he goes before we pick I wont be crushed as I think there are good TEs to be had later that have the foundation to be good in the passing game AND good blockers with time.

 

I think this is a really interesting draft and the Bills at 9 are just on the edge of being able to go in about any direction. Beane has shown that he is willing to wheel and deal for someone he has high on his board, but that does not mean he will do that every year. I think this is a good FO, we will see how it all pans out soon enough.

 

 

 

 

 

[maryland-bills-fan]

8 minutes ago, inaugural balls said:

 

Not buying the 2-5 year TE timeline. Maybe some, not Hock.

Oh boy.   Does that come from Divine Revelation?       Idea #1.  On offense, keep your QB from being knocked on his keister.  #2  give him a variety of WR to throw to. #3  get some experienced RB who can hurt the other team if they stack things to stop the pass.  ... #4, 5 or 6  Get a TE who  can take advantage of all the space that the above have created to break the other teams defense.   We are not at that later stage yet.  Capisci?

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by maryland-bills-fan

[Nihilarian]

From Joe B,

 

"And in Hockenson, they are getting a player that has the potential to make an instant impact. Spending a first-round selection on a tight end used to be a bit of a non-starter for NFL teams, but it's hard to ignore how advanced Hockenson is in a couple of areas. His blocking ability is far superior to any of the 'receiving' tight ends available in this draft, which turns him into a three-down player early in his career. As a receiver, Hockenson shows poise and technique in his route-running, along with an understanding of where to find the space -- and not to mention, the athleticism to make teams pay for losing track of him. I love Hockenson as a prospect, and for Brian Daboll's offensive scheme, I think he's a perfect fit and could quickly become the best tight end in the division now that Rob Gronkowski has retired."

 

https://www.wkbw.com/sports/bills/joe-b-2019-nfl-mock-draft-no-6

[Simon Says]

What kind of data, if any,did you analyze,to assert tight ends develop slowly? I think you are way off,although the study I read was a couple years old.