lets_go_bills Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I don't see Pettigrew falling that far. But in Kirwan's latest mock draft, it is a dream scenario for this Bills fan. Landing Brown and Pettigrew, 1 and 2 would be awesome in my books.
Thurman#1 Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 In Pat Kirwain's most recent mock draft, he has Pettigrew falling to the bills in round 2. I' m not sure if that will happen, but it does mean the tight end is not an option at number 11. Trading down is a possibility, but most teams would like to trade down, and finding a partner could be difficult. I think the bills should go either defensive end (maybe Brown or Maybin) or lb in round 1. The question is what do we do in round 2. Do the bills maintain their position, and take the best player available. Or should the bills trade up to the late first or early second and target Pettigrew? I say they stand pat. Even if Pettigrew is gone, one of the other top ends or interior lineman will be there. I did see Kirwan said this. But a huge majority of pundits has Pettigrew going #28 or before. He's just not going to fall to us in the second, or even close. I have sympathy for folks who say we need a DE, an OLB, or a C or LG at #11. But we also desperately need a TE, and a TE who can't block is basically a WR. We've got a lot of WRs. We need a guy who is unpredictable, who can either block or catch on any given play. That's what makes TEs dangerous. And Pettigrew is the only TE in this draft who has both skills or even any likelihood of developing both skills to NFL levels. There are a lot of 230 pound TEs who'll be available in the second to fourth rounds. But try to get them to block and they look more like a speed bump, a small one, than a blocker.
Thurman#1 Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Chase Coffman had 90 catches for 987 yards and 10 TDs in 2008.http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=177294 Pettigrew had 42 for 472 yards and 0 TDs in 2008. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=158483 I'm not sure Pettigrew qualifies as the best pass catching tight end. Many reports have Pettigrew as the best blocking TE. Either player would be worth a 2nd round pick IMO. Coffman CAN'T BLOCK! If he's a full-time player, on running plays, he will be a liability. If he's a part-time player, he will essentially be a red flag, saying "Hey, defense, it's a pass, in case you weren't sure." Pettigrew can do both. It's true that he's not the best receiving TE in the draft, but he is far and away the best overall TE, a sensational blocker and a very fine reciever. Will we pick him? Who knows. Would he be a much better pick than any of the other TEs in this draft? Yup.
Thurman#1 Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Pettigrew is not a pass catching TE that they need to stretch the field. He runs slower that many OL He may be a force as blocker - but don't think he will be an impact offensive weapon. The Bills would be better offf drafting Ingram in the 2nd round - he has the speed and athleticism to run the seam and be a playmaker. You're right that he's not a burner. But, please ... "He runs slower than many OL." Oh, really? At the combine, he ran a 4.85. In what universe do many OLs run that fast, the Bizarro world? The guy just had a bad day. He will have another workout this week and if cleared will run another 40. Scouts have widely said that he plays much faster than his run at the combine would indicate. Ingram would indeed be faster. And unable to block, which is half of the work that a TE is supposed to do. Look, ideally you would like to have a guy who is big enough, tough enough and good enough to block at the NFL level as well as fast enough to run a seam route. How many of those guys are there in this draft? Zero. Hell, there about two guys in the NFL who have showed that kind of freakish athletic ability. If you want a tall guy who can run pass patterns but can't block, just wait for James Hardy to develop. Or draft a tall WR. Tight ends have two types of duties and Ingram and the other later TEs can't do half of what they are expected to do. Jason Witten is also not very fast. He's a very effective blocker and a terrific reciever at short and medium depth. He can't run the seam route. But he simply makes Romo's life a whole ton easier. That's what Pettigrew can do. He won't stretch the field, but will be a fantastic guy to throw to when Trent is running for his life or needs eight or twelve yards for a drive-saving first down.
COACH85 Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Far and away the best pass catching TE in this draft? Far and away the slowest pass catching TE in the draft is more like it. #1 Blocker but not a guy who will stretch the field from the position. When was the last time we had a TE that could do that? I say we pick a TE with our second round pick with a good chance Cook, Ingram, AND Casey will all be there to choose from and at least they can help open up the passing game. Pettigrew is far and away NOT the best pass catching TE in this draft.
Thurman#1 Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Far and away the best pass catching TE in this draft?Far and away the slowest pass catching TE in the draft is more like it. #1 Blocker but not a guy who will stretch the field from the position. When was the last time we had a TE that could do that? I say we pick a TE with our second round pick with a good chance Cook, Ingram, AND Casey will all be there to choose from and at least they can help open up the passing game. Cook, Ingram and Casey can't block.
auburnbillsbacker Posted March 30, 2009 Author Posted March 30, 2009 Most people believe that the bills need a tight end, and it would be nice. I am beginning to wonder however, if any receiver would work. Let's say a top rated wr falls to buffalo in rounds 2 or 3. Or what if the bills love Harvin in round 1.
OklahomaBill Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I agree with this for the most part. If the bills like him it does not matter what Kirwain thinks. The point of the post however, is that Pettigrew's stock is dropping, so what does that mean for the Buffalo Bills. It could be an opportunity. I have always liked Kirwain's thoughts. He does a ton of research, and is in touch with so many people through his radio show. Not sure if he knows what he is talking about but this former Bill doesn't think his stock is dropping. He actually thinks the opposite. National Football Post In the end I don't think it matters unless there is a trade. Pettigrew probably won't be taken at 11 and he won't be around in the 2nd round. I do think it is funny that some want to not take Pettigrew because they think he is too one dimensional but think the solution to our TE would be taken a more one dimensional TE in the second or third.
Canadian Bills Fan Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I dont care what TE we draft. Are any of the TE prospects in this years draft worse than the TE's we currently have on our roster?
freester Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Who were those 5 starters? The five starters were Brooking LB, Boley LB, Grady Jackson DT, Dominique Foxworth CB, Milloy S
freester Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 You're right that he's not a burner. But, please ... "He runs slower than many OL." Oh, really? At the combine, he ran a 4.85. In what universe do many OLs run that fast, the Bizarro world? The guy just had a bad day. He will have another workout this week and if cleared will run another 40. Scouts have widely said that he plays much faster than his run at the combine would indicate. Ingram would indeed be faster. And unable to block, which is half of the work that a TE is supposed to do. Look, ideally you would like to have a guy who is big enough, tough enough and good enough to block at the NFL level as well as fast enough to run a seam route. How many of those guys are there in this draft? Zero. Hell, there about two guys in the NFL who have showed that kind of freakish athletic ability. If you want a tall guy who can run pass patterns but can't block, just wait for James Hardy to develop. Or draft a tall WR. Tight ends have two types of duties and Ingram and the other later TEs can't do half of what they are expected to do. Jason Witten is also not very fast. He's a very effective blocker and a terrific reciever at short and medium depth. He can't run the seam route. But he simply makes Romo's life a whole ton easier. That's what Pettigrew can do. He won't stretch the field, but will be a fantastic guy to throw to when Trent is running for his life or needs eight or twelve yards for a drive-saving first down. You are absolutely correct. Pettigrew is exactly what we need. He is an every down player that creates mismatches. He is the next Jason Witten. He will be a better blocker than Witten.
stuckincincy Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 You are absolutely correct. Pettigrew is exactly what we need. He is an every down player that creates mismatches. He is the next Jason Witten. He will be a better blocker than Witten. He's sure to get at least a couple of chances every game or two or three, to show his stuff, what with all the grinding possessions opposing offenses traditionally subject us to...
Lofton80 Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 I am not doubting Pettigrew is a good player. My view is that another weapon in the passing game is a waste without addressing the interior line. Can a northeastern team get by with second rate talent at OG and an above avg talent at TE ? My preference would be a starting caliber OG and add a TE after that. If they landed Brian Waters in a trade, then I can live with Pettigrew at 11.
Magox Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 If we can't draft Curry, Raji or Brown, then Pettigrew is the next best player on my wish list. He is the most NFL ready player in the draft in my view. He's the best all around TE, great hands, big body, very agile for his size and a devestating blocker both in the passing and running game. He will allow our receivers more time to get open when he drops back to block, he will allow our rushers more of an opportunity to have successful rushes when we decide to run the ball, and he will be a good option for our QB in the short to intermediate passing game. If one of the other non blocking TE's are drafted, we will have to be realistic here. Anyone who knows anything about football will know that coaches will not allow their TE's to play that often until they know how to block and protect the QB. Right? So in best case scenario, if we were to draft one of the other TE's who are not known for their blocking, they will be used as a situational TE, who most likely will be used in a passing situation. Remember, the game is about running and passing. We run and pass approximately %50/50. Pettigrew seems as if he is the most equipped to help out a team on both of these fronts. He would definitely keep defenses more unbalanced because you know that he can do both, where as if you draft a player like Travis Beckum or Jared Cook (which I would hate this pick btw), then you pretty much know that we would be passing the ball most of the time with these players out on the field. It would be more telegraphed. I don't care if it is considered a reach. I believe if we draft Pettigrew, in a couple years from now, Pettigrew will be considered a damn good pro, and we will be glad to have drafted him. Meanwhile players like Jared Cook will be buried on some team fighting for a roster spot, and Maybin could be another player in the long line of Penn State Busts.
Deadstroke Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 If we can't draft Curry, Raji or Brown, then Pettigrew is the next best player on my wish list. He is the most NFL ready player in the draft in my view. He's the best all around TE, great hands, big body, very agile for his size and a devestating blocker both in the passing and running game. He will allow our receivers more time to get open when he drops back to block, he will allow our rushers more of an opportunity to have successful rushes when we decide to run the ball, and he will be a good option for our QB in the short to intermediate passing game. If one of the other non blocking TE's are drafted, we will have to be realistic here. Anyone who knows anything about football will know that coaches will not allow their TE's to play that often until they know how to block and protect the QB. Right? So in best case scenario, if we were to draft one of the other TE's who are not known for their blocking, they will be used as a situational TE, who most likely will be used in a passing situation. Remember, the game is about running and passing. We run and pass approximately %50/50. Pettigrew seems as if he is the most equipped to help out a team on both of these fronts. He would definitely keep defenses more unbalanced because you know that he can do both, where as if you draft a player like Travis Beckum or Jared Cook (which I would hate this pick btw), then you pretty much know that we would be passing the ball most of the time with these players out on the field. It would be more telegraphed. I don't care if it is considered a reach. I believe if we draft Pettigrew, in a couple years from now, Pettigrew will be considered a damn good pro, and we will be glad to have drafted him. Meanwhile players like Jared Cook will be buried on some team fighting for a roster spot, and Maybin could be another player in the long line of Penn State Busts. Gee, you may have a point there, fella!!
Beerball Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 This is a great draft. I really want us to trade down, as there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need. Sorry, late to the party. Can you splain your logic? If there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need doesn't that mean that trading down for extra picks is the way to go?
Magox Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 Sorry, late to the party. Can you splain your logic? If there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need doesn't that mean that trading down for extra picks is the way to go? you are having a tough time comprehending English today aren't you?
Beerball Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 you are having a tough time comprehending English today aren't you? No, this is actually a serious type question. If there "is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need" (OPs words, not mine) you would assume that the Bills could grab one of many players and be happy. Just wonderin why he thinks this would not be the time to trade down.
Magox Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 No, this is actually a serious type question. If there "is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need" (OPs words, not mine) you would assume that the Bills could grab one of many players and be happy. Just wonderin why he thinks this would not be the time to trade down. This is what Fingon posted: QUOTE (Fingon @ Mar 29 2009, 05:34 PM) This is a great draft. I really want us to trade down, as there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need. Then this is what you posted in response to Fingon: Sorry, late to the party. Can you splain your logic? If there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need doesn't that mean that trading down for extra picks is the way to go? not to mention your lack of comprehension of the Gaughan thread regarding the Waters possible trade. 0 for 2 within half hour
Beerball Posted March 30, 2009 Posted March 30, 2009 This is what Fingon posted: QUOTE (Fingon @ Mar 29 2009, 05:34 PM) This is a great draft. I really want us to trade down, as there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need. Then this is what you posted in response to Fingon: Sorry, late to the party. Can you splain your logic? If there is a ridiculous amount of depth at our positions of need doesn't that mean that trading down for extra picks is the way to go? not to mention your lack of comprehension of the Gaughan thread regarding the Waters possible trade. 0 for 2 within half hour OK, for this i deserve for the rediculous Simmons/Waters thread I offer no apologies.
Recommended Posts