What I meant was how many starting TE's do we need.
Don't bother trying to explain, Brother Mayo ~ you're clearly wasting your time!!
But the devil in me is going to try one more time, even though it's probably futile. :deadhorse:
For starters, I doubt BB thinks in terms of "starters". "Playing time" and "snap participation" are much more meaningful than whether a player is a starter. As Nick Caserio has noted with respect to the draft and the "nickel" DB, the team thinks more in terms of the amount of time that a player is likely to get on the field and contribute in terms of their potential value, not whether they are termed a "starter". The question is what value a player with Winslow's kind of skill set could add, not whether he would be a "starter".
Now, I wasn't in favor of making a move for Winslow because of his combination of salary, injury history, and personality issues. But from a talent point of view, a player like Winslow would potentially add a lot (as could have a healthy Dallas Clark). This added value would probably consist of two things:
1. Depth for both Aaron Hernandez as a "movement TE" and for Rob Gronkowski as a "in line TE" - or "Wing Backs" and "Flex Ends", as OTG would term them. Winslow's size and skill set would allow him to play both roles, though he was probably better suited to a movement TE. Clark would pretty much have been limited to a movement TE kind of role.
2. Use in multiple TE sets along with Gronk and Hernandez. The Pats used 2 or more TEs 47% of the time in 2010 and 50% of the time in 2011. Aaron Hernandez' ability to line up all over the field - as an in-line TE, in the backfield (as either a RB or FB), in the slot, and as a wideout - makes opens up the possibility for plenty of sets using 2 additional TEs. If one of those TEs has movement skills as well, then the headaches for opposing defenses multiply.
Matt Bowen of the NFP and Doug Farrar of Yahoo Sports recently highlighed how Winslow could impact Seattle's offense:
One interesting stat brought up today by Doug Farrar of Yahoo! Sports is the amount of time the Seahawks bring their “Ace” personnel (2 WR, 2 TE, 1 RB) on the field (39%). That’s a big number and its something to look at when we talk route schemes and alignments with Winslow.
As Farrar points out, Zach Miller is the “Y” TE in this offense (TE that is attached to the core of the formation). The point man for the "Power O" running scheme (down block) and the TE that predominantly aligns to the closed (or strong) side of the formation. Where does that leave Winslow? We can call him an “H Back,” or as I like to say, the “move TE” (labeled the “U” TE in the playbook).
With Ace personnel on the field, the Seahawks can align Winslow as the open (or weak) side TE in a 2x2 set, as a wing to the closed side to create an inside stack, removed from the core as a slot receiver (both closed and open) or as the “X” receiver to the backside of a 3x1 set (think slant, fade, one-on-one matchup here).
Plus, it forces the defense to make adjustments to their personnel and scheme. Do you walk a SS down on Winslow in Cover 1 when he is removed from the core of the formation with your base defense on the field? Or are you forced to bring in your sub package to use a nickel corner in coverage. Remember, you can use “Ace” personnel in terms of alignments and formations just as you would with “Posse” (3 WR, 1 TE, 1 RB) on the field. This gives you options when you have a TE like Winslow that has the ability to run routes, create leverage and win vs. man-coverage.
Think 'Ace' personnel with Kellen Winslow in Seattle | National Football Post
Seahawks trade for Kellen Winslow; hope to make 2-TE sets more productive | Shutdown Corner - Yahoo! Sports
The first question to ask is, how is that different from what the Pats do with Gronk and Hernandez? And the answer is, in and of itself, not very much. But imagine now a 2-2-1 set with Welker and Lloyd at WR, Gronk as an ian-line TE and someone like Winslow or Clark as a "movement TE", and Hernandez in the backfield but able to move into the slot, move out wide, etc. With 2 movement TEs plus Gronk and the WRs, it would really be tough for opposing defenses to commit.
The second question to ask is, why can't Daniel Fells play that role, and what would a 4th TE with Winslow's kind of skill set add beyond Fells? Maybe Fells could play that role to some extent, but he's really not a movement TE. He's an in-line blocking TE. Fells started 15 games last year and had all of 256 yards receiving. He's never had over 391 yards receiving and 41 receptions in a season. He's a valuable depth guy and a good blocker, but he's not a movement TE/Wing Back. Guys like a healthy Winslow or Clark could have offered much more playmaking capability in combination with Gronk and Hernandez, with Fells playing more of a depth and blocking TE role.
The third question to ask is, would such a player offer more value than a 6th WR or 5th RB/FB? And I think the answer to that is "possibly". Which is why I favored a move like signing Dallas Clark on the cheap and bringing him into training camp for a look, as opposed to giving up draft choices and taking on a big (though non-guaranteed) salary for Winslow. It will all depend on how the various weapons sort out and how Josh McDaniels wants to run the offense. But I wouldn't rule it out. BB has been a big fan of multiple TE sets for a long, long time, and I think they will probably be a significant part of the offense for some time to come.
I don't question Fells' value. I do believe that there is potentially room for 4 TEs on the Pats roster if they found the right guy. I didn't believe that Winslow was that guy because of his injuries and personal baggage. I thought Dallas Clark was intriguing, but age and injury issues probably made that a long shot as well. But that was the basic reasoning behind considering the potential value add those kind of players could bring.
