Gronk to retire

[supafly]

@supafly rated Witten over Gronk?

No, I effing didn’t.

Longtime scout Gil Brandt did, and I can respect his thoughts because Witten has almost 2x the number of catches and a much longer career.

 

[Patjew]

Gronk is the Randy Moss of TEs in terms of being clearly the best talent to ever play, but he doesn't have the negatives that keep Moss at #2 behind Rice instead of #1 overall.

Couldn’t agree more. Just a shame that we couldn’t seen him do it longer. Feels like a Barry Sanders kind of career.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Shaq is another good comp (though Gronk would be Shaq without the shooting and free throw limitations). Nice call.

How about we go Wilt then ........... he was also a man among boys in his era.

 

[Deus Irae]

@supafly rated Witten over Gronk?

No, Brandt did that. But Supa has to see that and immediately disqualify that list from consideration. Whenever you look for "best ever" lists, you always look for the insane. If the list doesn't have one, it's worth looking at. If it's there (Manning > Brady, for example), you laugh at the list, realize that you should never take the list maker seriously on that subject, and move on.

 

[primetime]

"Now I'm the undisputed best TE in the NFL!"

Ertz might dispute that, though frankly neither of them bother to block. Kittle isn't as dominant a receiver as those two guys but he's one of the best blocking tight ends in the league.

 

[PatsWSB47]

That’s your opinion and I respect that, but it is a debatable subject. If you’re honestly looking at the history of the NFL, he’s neither tops in stats or tops in blocking, so how can he be considered the best at both?

That's not meaning to discredit his top 3 accomplishments. He was great. I just think that his career was cut 3-4 yrs too early to be considered the best TE to ever play in 100 yrs of football.

In terms of stats.............Goats aren't fantasy football creations.

 

[Kontradiction]

Agreed, except that most judge TEs based on stats and Witten has almost 2x the number of catches and a much longer career. Of course he wasn’t as dominant as a blocker.

In terms of scouts though, Brandt should have your respect. It’s not like I quoted a list from a member of the media. If you don’t like that one, there are other lists who don’t have him as #1, too.

Brandt is a Cowboys homer.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

No, I did not suspect you.

I like you and only asked because your were one of the powers that be here. 51% of my content is meant to be humorous and 49% truth.Truthfully, I knew you could not answer even if you knew.

Forum is a more interesting place with your posts.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Interesting article from Curran. Suspects lack of help for Gronk so far this offseason played a role in this decision.
Curran: Gronk had nothing more to give

 

[TheRainMaker]

No, Brandt did that. But Supa has to see that and immediately disqualify that list from consideration. Whenever you look for "best ever" lists, you always look for the insane. If the list doesn't have one, it's worth looking at. If it's there (Manning > Brady, for example), you laugh at the list, realize that you should never take the list maker seriously on that subject, and move on.

No, I effing didn’t.

Longtime scout Gil Brandt did, and I can respect his thoughts because Witten has almost 2x the number of catches and a much longer career.

I misread @Deus Irae previous post.

Witten was good early in his career, but I feel like he’s hung around just to pad his stats. He’s also been as soft as Charmin for years. And he’s awful at YAC as he was the pioneer of catch the ball and the fall to the ground.

 

[Deus Irae]

Couldn’t agree more. Just a shame that we couldn’t seen him do it longer. Feels like a Barry Sanders kind of career.

I hear you, and Sanders is a good comp for this. Sanders walked away before it was a necessity, too. He put in 10 years, and is probably the #2 RB of all time. James Brown put in 9, like Gronk, and he's the #1 RB of all time.

As for the TEs on Brandt's list, John Mackey put in 10 years, and his last two were just time killers (no longer really a starter, just 11 catches each year). Gates now has a couple of time killing years padding his resume. Casper's first 2 years were nothing years, and he was a non-issue in his last two years. Etc...

And Jason Whitten? Brandt should be strung up by the balls for even thinking of putting him ahead of Gronk, much less actually doing it.

 

[Joey007]

Whoa

Link ?

I think he just falls short of the hof

I have never seen such a wrong take.

 

[primetime]

How about we go Wilt then ........... he was also a man among boys in his era.

Except that other man Russell.

I do think Shaq is a good comparison for Gronk. I think Shaq is probably the most uniquely dominant player in the history of his sport, and I think that's true of Gronk too. Obviously Shaq lasted longer, but his last decade or so was severely hobbled by nagging foot injuries that slowed him down (people forget how fleet of foot Shaq was in his early years), and by the way he could be defended with Hack a Shaq. Similarly, Gronk was a victim of his own dominance - the only way to stop him was to launch yourself bodily at his few weak points, and those points only got weaker over the year.

Gronk's the best tight end I ever saw. I'm not sure it's close. Admittedly, I never saw Ditka, Casper, Mackey, or Newsome, but he was unique. Gonzalez was great as both blocker and receiver, but was never as dominant at his height. Sharpe didn't block, and Gates learned to block only after he turned 30.

Witten was good, sometimes great, for a long time as both blocker and receiver but never particularly amazing; I don't think he was ever the best tight end in the NFL, let alone the best of all-time. For much of his career, Gonzalez and Gates were better and later you have Gronk and at times Graham, Kelce, Olsen, etc. Being the 2nd to 4th best tight end for the better part of two decades isn't anything to scoff at (Drew Brees did this as a QB!) but he's not the best of all-time and I'm not sure he's even in the top 5. Gronk is number 1. Of the ones I saw, give me Gonzalez second, then Gates, Witten, Sharpe, Bavaro, Coates, Novacek, and Olsen. Hernandez, Graham, Kelce, and Ertz all deserve mention but their heights were either too short or its too soon to evaluate.

 

[supafly]

In terms of stats.............Goats aren't fantasy football creations.

Well, the debate was whether or not he was the clear cut number one, so when there are people on there who had 1,300+ catches, it certainly matters to the conversation.

Ultimately, I think people are just feeling salty and want to over analyze some really basic comments.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I have never seen such a wrong take.

I'm hoping it was just 1 bad ball from dropkick.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Except that other man Russell.

I do think Shaq is a good comparison for Gronk. I think Shaq is probably the most uniquely dominant player in the history of his sport, and I think that's true of Gronk too. Obviously Shaq lasted longer, but his last decade or so was severely hobbled by nagging foot injuries that slowed him down (people forget how fleet of foot Shaq was in his early years). Similarly, Gronk was a victim of his own dominance - the only way to stop him was to launch yourself bodily at his few weak points, and those points only got weaker over the year.

Gronk's the best tight end I ever saw. Admittedly, I never saw Ditka, Casper, Mackey, or Newsome, but he was unique. Gonzalez was great as both blocker and receiver, but was never as dominant at his height. Sharpe didn't block, and Gates learned to block only after he turned 30.

Witten was good, sometimes great, for a long time as both blocker and receiver but never particularly amazing; I don't think he was ever the best tight end in the NFL, let alone the best of all-time. For much of his career, Gonzalez and Gates were better and later you have Gronk and at times Graham, Kelce, Olsen, etc. Being the 2nd to 4th best tight end for the better part of two decades isn't anything to scoff at (Drew Brees did this as a QB!) but he's not the best of all-time and I'm not sure he's even in the top 5. Gronk is number 1.

I thought of Russell but he was mostly a defensive presence ...
Wilt scored at will - Gronk when healthy scored at will also.

 

[Deus Irae]

Ignoring Gronk's blocking for just a moment, think about this:

As a TE, Gronk had a catch percentage of 65.6%, while averaging 15.1 yards per catch.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

Happy for Gronk.

Sucks for us fans and the team. Hoping he stays in shape, misses the game and comes back for the final 8+ games.

Either way i’ve Loved having the big guy as ours.

 

[supafly]

No, Brandt did that. But Supa has to see that and immediately disqualify that list from consideration. Whenever you look for "best ever" lists, you always look for the insane. If the list doesn't have one, it's worth looking at. If it's there (Manning > Brady, for example), you laugh at the list, realize that you should never take the list maker seriously on that subject, and move on.

It’s probably not the best time for someone on a Patriots related forum to claim that Gronk’s career was cut a bit short to consider him the best to ever play the position, so I’m moving on, Deus.

For the record, I’m not debating Brandt’s placement of Witten as much as I’m giving some examples of who is in the conversation. I don’t believe that it’s clear cut, and that’s my point.

 

[Deus Irae]

Except that other man Russell....

Casper was great, but not on Gronk's level. And Gonzalez was a terrible blocker.