YoHo's Early Draft Thoughts

[BF004]

Guys Kincaid isn’t a poor blocker. He’s a NON-blocker. He’s not a TE, he’s old, and he has a BROKEN BACK.

From what I understand, Dr. Watkins is a pretty big deal in the world of back surgeons. Just sayin'...

Good, maybe he should run his 40 and do jumping and COD drills now.

[Yoop]

I don't get it. What's the difference "non-blocking" as opposed to poor blocking, did the guy say something indicating that he will refuse to execute blocking assignments for his pro team? Unless I am missing something, I highly doubt the guy is *not* going to block at the next level.

Neither am I seeing anything to indicate that his present back injury will be a long-term issue. I saw at least two reports claiming that he is passing teams' physicals. I get being like "players like X are bad value, ergo I hate X" but these takes range from hyperbolic to outright false.

Btw, he wasn't a one year wonder. He had two years above 800 receiving yards, one with over 500 (still pretty solid for a TE), one wiped by Covid, and his worst year was 300-odd yards... that was his first season as a college player, having played only one year of HS 'ball. 'Better than Musgrave's best season (barely 300, once), not far behind Washington's best (400-odd yards, once).

And look at what this style of offense did to Gesicki’s usage. That’s what Kincaid would be for us.

That does not make him a bad prospect, it just means his value is comparably less for our team, and I admitted as much.

I looked up Gesicki's stats out of curiosity and before that offense was installed, he went above 700 yards in his two most recent seasons, almost 800 in the second of those, 5 and 6 TDs respectively. That's pretty respectable production at TE, especially with the lousy offense and QB play they had up to that point. Apart from that, you're not gonna feature your receiving TE in an offense with Tyreek Hill and Jalen Waddle; lol it's just not gonna happen.

I wouldn't take him at slot 15, but slide back into early to mid 20's and I might, and I would use him more as just a receiving TE, hell take two, KIncaid and Musgrave , now your probably set at the position till Love retires

KIncaid wasn't asked to be a blocker, probably wouldn't know a blocking sled from his sisters ta ta, but that doesn't mean he can't learn to do it.

of all these TE's the most ready to play seem to be KIncaid, Laporta, and Mayer

[YoHoChecko]

The difference between non-blocking and poor blocking is whether or not you can even line them up inside the box. He will only block like a WR does--in space. And he is poor at that. He is less good of a blocking WR than Lazard or Corey Davis. But he is someone you simply can't line up inside the formation and ask to block at all. This is a guy who gets knocked over by BLITZERS. Not LB blitzers, DB blitzers. He is worse at pass protection than many RBs.

A TE that is a poor blocker can still get in there and wall a guy off within the formation. If Kincaid comes in contact with a LB or DL, more often than not, he is a liability--someone the defender moves through--rather than just someone who doesn't get a + on the play. He simply does not count as a TE in any recognizable measure of the word.

Yes, plenty of guys have made a career like that. I mentioned Gesicki because of USAGE not as a comp because Gesicki had sick athleticism, but yeah, you think of guys like Graham and Gesicki and Pitts. All of those guys were 4.4 or 4.5 kind of guys. All of those guys were real mismatches from a size/athletics point of view.

Kincaid is someone who, fully cleared or not, couldn't work out at the combine or pro day but was presumed to be around a 4.7 guy by most estimates I have seen. But we get no workouts. So we can only guess. He's not some athletic freak. He's a guy who wins in the receiving game, certainly. He's a point-of-catch champ; his route running for his size is great.

But when you're looking at a guy who was in college for 5 years, was TE2 for his team before TE1 got injured, and he's already recovering from two fractures in his spine (back problems are massive red flags for big men in high-level competitions) he just isn't a guy I would DRAFT. He's a guy whose skillset is almost entirely replaced by a big WR with good body control that you can draft on Day Three.

If a 6'4 WR weighed in at 220 and ran a 4.7, you'd be like "get of here" and take a flier on him in round 6.
But if he weighs in at 240, they label him a TE for no on-feild purpose whatsoever, you call him an elite TE prospect and a top-50 guy?

Absolutely not. I'll draft Justin Shorter or Shaq Davis in rounds 6/7 and get 80% of the production at 20% of the cost

[Labrev]

The difference between non-blocking and poor blocking is whether or not you can even line them up inside the box. He will only block like a WR does--in space. And he is poor at that. He is less good of a blocking WR than Lazard or Corey Davis. But he is someone you simply can't line up inside the formation and ask to block at all. This is a guy who gets knocked over by BLITZERS. Not LB blitzers, DB blitzers. He is worse at pass protection than many RBs.

A TE that is a poor blocker can still get in there and wall a guy off within the formation. If Kincaid comes in contact with a LB or DL, more often than not, he is a liability--someone the defender moves through--rather than just someone who doesn't get a + on the play. He simply does not count as a TE in any recognizable measure of the word.

Ah ok, well that settles it, guys who are a liability at blocking in college not only have no hope of becoming good at it, they will whiff on every single block they are asked to make in the pros; God set their Madden blocking attributes to 0 for life!

Kincaid is someone who, fully cleared or not, couldn't work out at the combine or pro day but was presumed to be around a 4.7 guy by most estimates I have seen. But we get no workouts. So we can only guess. He's not some athletic freak. He's a guy who wins in the receiving game, certainly. He's a point-of-catch champ; his route running for his size is great.

Finley ran 4.8 and was an awesome weapon on O, albeit for an offense that looks different from this one.

A move-TE does not have to be an elite athlete to be a legit threat; there have been many athletic freaks at TE that did not amount to anything. They simply have to have a set of skills that make them difficult for DBs and LBs to match-up against. That was why Finley was a weapon for us.

He's a guy whose skillset is almost entirely replaced by a big WR with good body control that you can draft on Day Three.

If a 6'4 WR weighed in at 220 and ran a 4.7, you'd be like "get of here" and take a flier on him in round 6.
But if he weighs in at 240, they label him a TE for no on-feild purpose whatsoever, you call him an elite TE prospect and a top-50 guy?

Absolutely not. I'll draft Justin Shorter or Shaq Davis in rounds 6/7 and get 80% of the production at 20% of the cost

You mean like EQ and Jeff Janis gave us that production?

On the one hand I think you being hyperbolic on the hopelessness of Kincaid's blocking, yet on the other you are to an even greater extreme treating receiving like it's a piece of cake to coach up late-round/UDFA WRs to produce like quality move-TEs, when those guys often don't produce better than blocking-TEs.

Guys like Lazard are not the norm, most UDFAs do not sign for what he just did, much less produce anywhere close. If it were that simple, we would see guys like Janis and Chaz Shillens or whoever else stick around way longer than they do.

[Labrev]

The reality is NFL receiving is a highly nuanced trade which, at some level, you just have to have an "it" for. If nothing else, Kincaid has "it" in spades as a receiving target, and that's the thing that teams pay a premium for at TE.

Compare the money of Gesicki's "prove it"-deal to the deals we gave Lewis to be OL6, as highly as our team regarded him in that role.

Sure, a guy like Musgrave has the tools to end up being a way better player, but he is way riskier, because if it does not click for him as a receiver, you're left with an athletic blocking TE with the occasional decoy play ala Virgil Green, and that mold of player actually *is* a dime-a-dozen in late rounds and UDFA.

[bud fox]

Mayer is the clear number 1 TE in this year's group. Athleticism, size, tape.

Agree with Yoho on Kincaid - Tonyan type player.

[YoHoChecko]

Look, man; that's fine if you want to be the one to take the gamble on the older prospect with no discernable skill-or-interest in blocking, recovering from a broken back to be a legit receiving weapon as a big slot option.

You're perfectly welcome to that opinion.

But the draft is about risk tolerance and risk:reward ratios. TEs, particularly, are HUGELY uncertain players to draft. The list of first round TEs is littered with regret.

So I look at the risk factors involved with Kincaid, the fit on our team, and the weaknesses he's shown on film, and I rule him out entirely. My risk tolerance says the cost of drafting this player is not at ALL worth the risks he presents.

You can talk and get all opinionated about the guys who defy the odds and get good outcomes until you're blue in the face, but the team we root for has a long, long history of having measurable thresholds and stylistic preferences in terms of who they take risks on; now Kincaid is in for a visit (which makes sense because there are a LOT of questions about him that need to be answered) so maybe their risk:reward assessment of him is different than mine. One thing that has frustrated me for quite some time is the team's interest in these guys, from Sternberger to Jimmy Graham to yeah, Tonyan, though he showed some want-to and promise before his injury in developing into a more well-rounded guy. It feels like a disconnect between the front office and coaching staff because they never work out for us. Like, we need guys who are two-way players whether it be H-back types or Y-TEs. Receiving-only TEs just don't have a good role for this offense.

But there is nothing inconsistent or weird or unacceptable about my decision that this guy has too many red flags for me. There's no reason to insist that he's a good prospect when the things I'm talking about literally can't be assigned to opinions of him as a player so much as simple factors that make him more or less likely to pan out. He will turn 24 in October. He is recovering from two fractures in his back. His athletic traits are not special. And one part of his role as a TE in this league is woefully underdeveloped or deficient, however you want to view it.

Taking a 24 year old rookie with a broken back and regular athleticism off a draft board--or reducing his value significantly to account for those factors--is a perfectly rational decision. I bet handfuls of teams have done it.

[lupedafiasco]

The only thing worse than taking a 24 year old rookie is taking a 24 year old rookie and not playing him the entire year.

[Labrev]

Look, man; that's fine if you want to be the one to take the gamble on the older prospect with no discernable skill-or-interest in blocking, recovering from a broken back to be a legit receiving weapon as a big slot option.

You're perfectly welcome to that opinion.

But the draft is about risk tolerance and risk:reward ratios. TEs, particularly, are HUGELY uncertain players to draft.

I think we are arguing a bit past each other on this. My position from the outset has been, Kincaid as a prospect straight-up is a quality move-TE, so say numerous people who know what they are talking about. I don't think I've seen a scouting report that values him lower than where he is projected to go: Late 20s/Early 30s.

But also, as a fringe Day 1-2 guy, that he probably doesn't make a whole lot of sense for this team (although I also question the wisdom of the team on this one). Note that I never actually disputed what you said about scheme fit, and I generally agree that that's very important.

But there is nothing inconsistent or weird or unacceptable about my decision that this guy has too many red flags for me. There's no reason to insist that he's a good prospect when the things I'm talking about literally can't be assigned to opinions of him as a player so much as simple factors that make him more or less likely to pan out. He will turn 24 in October. He is recovering from two fractures in his back. His athletic traits are not special. And one part of his role as a TE in this league is woefully underdeveloped or deficient, however you want to view it.

Taking a 24 year old rookie with a broken back and regular athleticism off a draft board--or reducing his value significantly to account for those factors--is a perfectly rational decision. I bet handfuls of teams have done it.

I mean come on, it is a little weird, isn't it? You had some hyperbole in your initial post, that you have had to walk back, and at least one claim that was false (one-year wonder). I'd say that's a bit weird tbh.

Or when saying you have him as a Day 3 guy (not just for us, but apparently in general), when guys like Daniel Jeremiah have him as a Top-15 guy (borderline Top 10), and you even go as far as to say he is un-draftable... those are some HOT takes, my friend!

Which is fine, you know. Embrace it: often times the guys who were way ahead of their time were seen as crazy at the time!

Then again, often times those people are, in fact, just crazy.

[Labrev]

One thing that has frustrated me for quite some time is the team's interest in these guys, from Sternberger to Jimmy Graham to yeah, Tonyan, though he showed some want-to and promise before his injury in developing into a more well-rounded guy. It feels like a disconnect between the front office and coaching staff because they never work out for us. Like, we need guys who are two-way players whether it be H-back types or Y-TEs. Receiving-only TEs just don't have a good role for this offense.

Graham and Tonyan pre-dated the MLF offense.

In the MLF era, we have only invested a pick at TE in Deguara, who seems to fit the scheme well as an Hback type ala Juszcyk for SF, and Sternberger, who didn't work out, but I haven't seen them keep trying to make that kind of TE a thing. We also brought back Lewis multiple times. I think they have actually been pretty close to your position on this.

As for whether interest in move-TEs in general is sensible or not.... there's a reason why Packers fans to this day still pine for Jermichael Finley, and look back at a very short stretch of quality play from Jared Cook with awe. And as you dismiss those examples saying (in not so many words) ~'well those are just the ones that worked out, but what about the many more who DON'T work out?", you miss the point.

Point is, when you DO have a Finley or a Cook, it's a revelation to your offense. So yes, I keep bringing those examples up, because they are exactly what justifies going back to the well over and over, knowing full well that it's risky.

Or, think of it like trying to land that elusive rangy FS, but for offense!

[LombardiTime]

The only thing worse than taking a 24 year old rookie is taking a 24 year old rookie and not playing him the entire year.

Is that actually worse than playing a 24 year old rookie limited snaps, having the rookie look good playing those limited snaps, but still not letting the rookie play instead of a JAG who was never going to be on the team in 2023 named Dean Lowry?

Asking for an esteemed defensive coordinator.

[Yoop]

One thing that has frustrated me for quite some time is the team's interest in these guys, from Sternberger to Jimmy Graham to yeah, Tonyan, though he showed some want-to and promise before his injury in developing into a more well-rounded guy. It feels like a disconnect between the front office and coaching staff because they never work out for us. Like, we need guys who are two-way players whether it be H-back types or Y-TEs. Receiving-only TEs just don't have a good role for this offense.

Graham and Tonyan pre-dated the MLF offense.

In the MLF era, we have only invested a pick at TE in Deguara, who seems to fit the scheme well as an Hback type ala Juszcyk for SF, and Sternberger, who didn't work out, but I haven't seen them keep trying to make that kind of TE a thing. We also brought back Lewis multiple times. I think they have actually been pretty close to your position on this.

As for whether interest in move-TEs in general is sensible or not.... there's a reason why Packers fans to this day still pine for Jermichael Finley, and look back at a very short stretch of quality play from Jared Cook with awe. And as you dismiss those examples saying (in not so many words) ~'well those are just the ones that worked out, but what about the many more who DON'T work out?", you miss the point.

Point is, when you DO have a Finley or a Cook, it's a revelation to your offense. So yes, I keep bringing those examples up, because they are exactly what justifies going back to the well over and over, knowing full well that it's risky.

Or, think of it like trying to land that elusive rangy FS, but for offense!

I just brought a article from Bleacher report, dated july 2022, and it explains the huge value of a move TE in todays contract value and evolution of the position through the years, in 2021 6 TE's had over 100 targeted throws, compared to the cost of WR TE's earn half as much, it leads me to believe both Meyer and Kincaid will be off the boards top 25.

[TheSkeptic]

The only thing worse than taking a 24 year old rookie is taking a 24 year old rookie and not playing him the entire year.

Is that actually worse than playing a 24 year old rookie limited snaps, having the rookie look good playing those limited snaps, but still not letting the rookie play instead of a JAG who was never going to be on the team in 2023 named Dean Lowry?

Asking for an esteemed defensive coordinator.

Dean Lowry signed a 2 year, $8,500,000 contract with the Minnesota Vikings, including a $3,000,000 signing bonus, $7,900,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $4,250,000.

Does not sound to me like Lowry is a JAG.

[YoHoChecko]

[mention]Labrev[/mention]

Ok but here’s the thing. Guys like Daniel Jeremiah and every follower of the NFL draft will also tell you, very openly, that team by team opinion varies widely on prospects and how these guys are stacked.

They’ll tell you that some teams have thresholds. They’ll caveat things like “assuming the medicals check out.” They’ll acknowledge that the draft rarely follows media consensus opinions.

So when the media consensus says something, it’s not reflective of where every team in the NFL is. You know that.

Teams often have “red dot” systems where regardless of player evaluation, a medical issue or a character issue or a measurable threshold takes someone off the board.

It has been reported that, for instance, Bellichick will have 25-40 guys on his draft board and will maneuver his picks to line up with where he thinks he can acquire those guys at value. 25-40 guys!

I’m not that extreme. But Dalton Kincaid would not be on my draft board. If I were a GM I simply would not draft him.

And if I hadn’t eliminated him from contention, I would view him in relation to big slot receivers and not in relation to TEs in this class. Maybe this guy is Cooper Kupp, who ran a 4.62 but is the best big slot in the league. A lot of evaluators think Kincaid is the best receiving option out there this year. But I’m someone who trusts and relies on the percentages. And the percentages tell me that a big man with back problems at an advanced age is a high risk prospect, even if he’s on your board. And Kupp was a third round pick for a reason.

And while scheme fit is important, I’m not only talking about for our team, which is why my examples of guys not working out don’t matter if they pre-dated MLF. I think MOST schemes benefit from utilizing TEs as 2-way players. I personally value blocking acumen at the position more than most observers, from what I can tell. That’s why I love Washington.

The reason packers fans look back so fondly on Finley is that they have so few TE examples to feel good about. He was never a top TE in the league. He was always more potential than performance. He mattered, but he isn’t this GUY, this ENTITY, that packers fans seem to think he is. That’s why the other guy they like was a journeyman on a mid level contract (Cook). We’re just deprived of anything good at the position so we overrate the good and think they’re great.

I want to stop swinging for high risk players at the position and just get a guy who can fundamentally play football. I want to trade for Ruckert. I want to draft Washington or LaPorta or Schoonmaker or Kraft. There is still upside to those players.

But in my opinion, on a team run by me, singularly receiving TEs aren’t on my priority list. And Kincaid’s specific draft prospect resume is untouchable. I promise you that’s less weird than you’re trying to paint it. Don’t be so taken in by the illusion of consensus. Not even scouts on the same team in the same system scouting for the same scheme agree on how to rank, grade, and stack players. They argue about it. They debate it.

Disagreement and striking guys from draft boards is incredibly commonplace.

[BF004]

The only thing worse than taking a 24 year old rookie is taking a 24 year old rookie and not playing him the entire year.

Is that actually worse than playing a 24 year old rookie limited snaps, having the rookie look good playing those limited snaps, but still not letting the rookie play instead of a JAG who was never going to be on the team in 2023 named Dean Lowry?

Asking for an esteemed defensive coordinator.

Dean Lowry signed a 2 year, $8,500,000 contract with the Minnesota Vikings, including a $3,000,000 signing bonus, $7,900,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $4,250,000.

Does not sound to me like Lowry is a JAG.

But it does too, right?

Jarran Reed got $9 over 2 as well. Wish we could have brought him back for a little less, but sounds like he was very interested in going back to Seattle.

[YoHoChecko]

I didn’t like/love the Wyatt pick; for a variety of reasons. Age and character concerns among them.

But rookies often aren’t immediately ready. The other Georgia DT, more heralded Jordan Davis, also barely played, and his tan went to the Super Bowl. Granted, he was behind an elite group. But the point is that putting guys on the field before they’re ready isn’t always useful. Sometimes it hastens development, sometimes it stifles it. It’s a risk.

So I’m not too concerned about rookies getting immediate playtime.


That said, what about the history of TEs in this league makes anyone think a rookie TE isn’t going to be sitting behind some JAGs for us this season? Whoever they end up being

[Yoop]

@ Yoho: Mike McCarthy built his offensive schemes around Finley, then Finley was hurt and Mike had to revise his plans, I think we are capable of knowing a good player when we see one, and when 6 teams target over 100 throws a season towards there TE it's time we should try and emulate that.

your right we have rarely had a move TE, Tonyan was the only one since Finley, and we only targeted him 58 times a couple years ago, if ya want to call Kincaid a big slot receiver, whatever, who cares, he could be a huge boost for this offense.

as to age, most players rarely play over 5 to 7 years for the team that drafted them anyway, plus the DR has said Kincaid is fully recovered.

I expect our staff to do a thorough check up on all visiting prospects, if they clear him I'am on board, more so I think though with Meyer.

[lupedafiasco]

I’ve been obsessed with that Pats scheme that had Gronk and Hernandez for years. I truly believe that offense would work very well in todays game. It forces defensive personnel and from there you can pick and choose mismatches. Gronk was this huge vertical threat who could block his ass off. Hernandez could get open short and make plays after the catch in a different way. If teams came out in nickel they would just run in down the field and do a lot of work with their TEs. If the defense came out in base they would look to target LBs in coverage.

I think you can do that if you get a Washington and LaPorta in this class. Both block extremely well for TEs and both offer something different in the receiving game.

[YoHoChecko]

I’ve been obsessed with that Pats scheme that had Gronk and Hernandez for years. I truly believe that offense would work very well in todays game. It forces defensive personnel and from there you can pick and choose mismatches. Gronk was this huge vertical threat who could block his ass off. Hernandez could get open short and make plays after the catch in a different way. If teams came out in nickel they would just run in down the field and do a lot of work with their TEs. If the defense came out in base they would look to target LBs in coverage.

I think you can do that if you get a Washington and LaPorta in this class. Both block extremely well for TEs and both offer something different in the receiving game.

Washington and LaPorta would be hella fun. Would love.

[YoHoChecko]

Looking at Dane Brugler's EGE rankings an I gotta say, I love the whole top 18. Every single one of them. There's not a single guy in the top EIGHTEEN that I wouldn't gladly welcome to our team with open arms (depending on the value acquired of course).

When they say this is a deep EDGE class, like this is a DEEP edge class

image.png (235.92 KiB) Viewed 1714 times