Pick #32

[Ivan]

I understand that Fant's blocking is improving. However, I think it misguided to compare his blocking skills to that Hock. While he obviously is not as good, Hock would step right in for Gronk when he leaves, filling the same role. I wouldn't have the same expectation for Fant.

So, sure I overstated some. But, I would trade a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for Hock. I wouldn't trade up very far, if at all, for Fant. I might even draft a DL at 32, even with Fant available. How about you?

If Hockenson was Gronk I’d give that up for him, but I don’t believe he’s going to be the greatest TR in history. I think he will be good, and I would go #32 and a 3rd to move up a few spots to get him, but I wouldn’t give up 3 picks for him. I would sit still for Fant, and I wouldn’t go DL unless a prospect dropped out of the top 15 to them. And I wouldn’t touch Simmons.

 

[Patriot Missile]

More of a Dexter Lawrance fan, but if he’s gone and miraculously Fant or Hockenson were there, I’d be ok with one of them. Not so sure about Irv Smith. Think I’d be ok with Simmons too if they wanted to wait for the recovery. However it comes with some risk like the other player they gambled on and lost a few years ago. D Easley.

 

[mgteich]

Hock will likely take 3 picks. Fant will likely take two picks, needing to use a 3rd or more likely 2nd to move up.

You can wait for Fant at 32. That simply means that he won't play for us.

2019 is an exceptional year. We have a great NEED at TE. It will likely take a year for a player to really work his way into our offense. I don't expect Gronk to be here in 2020; he could be gone for part or all of this year.

If Hockenson was Gronk I’d give that up for him, but I don’t believe he’s going to be the greatest TR in history. I think he will be good, and I would go #32 and a 3rd to move up a few spots to get him, but I wouldn’t give up 3 picks for him. I would sit still for Fant, and I wouldn’t go DL unless a prospect dropped out of the top 15 to them. And I wouldn’t touch Simmons.

 

[Zuma]

But, I would trade a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for Hock. I wouldn't trade up very far, if at all, for Fant. I might even draft a DL at 32, even with Fant available. How about you?

That's a lot to give up to move 16 or so spots...but I agree it would take that many to do it. Is Hock worth it? Maybe. I prefer to give up 1 extra pick and move up 10 or so and shoot for Fant or stand Pat and hope Smith makes it to 32. Smith is 1st round talent but after those 3...I think their is a big drop off at TE and better to work on other team needs at that point.

 

[Zuma]

Some comparisons for fun...

Hockenson 6-5, 251lb

Fant 6-4, 249lb

Smith 6-2, 242lb

 

[oldrover]

But, oldrover, at least you openly state that you don't really have any insight. A lot of people are in your boat but instead of saying it outright they quickly skim some mock drafts and then fake it.

Good for you.

Hey...

https://imgflip.com/gif-maker

 

[Ochmed Jones]

If a DT of value falls to 32, Simmons, Lawrence or Tillery, bb needs to run the card up to the table!

Other than that or j Williams, he needs to trade 32 to the very embattled Gettleman for 37 and 108!

 

[zipster9]

Some comparisons for fun...

Hockenson 6-5, 251lb

Fant 6-4, 249lb

Smith 6-2, 242lb

You need a good blocking TE. As indicated late last season, we want to run more.

 

[captain stone]

Hockenson & Fant will be long gone by 32, but Irv Smith Jr might not be. If he's still available, then Smith will likely be the only player on offense that I would take there. The pick at 32 might therefore very well become Irv Smith or one of the following DLman: 0-tech Dexter Lawrence, 3-tech Jeff Simmons, 5-tech Jerry Tillery or DE Jaylon Ferguson.

 

[Bourne Again Christian]

Hockenson & Fant will be long gone by 32, but Irv Smith Jr might not be. If he's still available, then Smith will likely be the only player on offense that I would take there. The pick at 32 might therefore very well become Irv Smith or one of the following DLman: 0-tech Dexter Lawrence, 3-tech Jeff Simmons, 5-tech Jerry Tillery or DE Jaylon Ferguson.

Lawrence Simmons or trade down or into the next draft for me?
Honestly I'm not 100 percent against making sure we get Isabella in that spot.

 

[NG Pats Fan]

Lol at people wanting defense...

Our 42 year old QB has no weapons to throw too

 

[manxman2601]

Lol at people wanting defense...

Our 42 year old QB has no weapons to throw too

There is more than one pick and the most likely candidates for weapons for Brady, namely the two Iowa TEs, could be long gone by 32.

 

[captain stone]

Lol at people wanting defense...

Our 42 year old QB has no weapons to throw to.

Both Mississippi WRs (DK Metcalf & AJ Brown) will almost certainly be gone by 32.

The other WR receiving the most 1st-round consideration - Marquise Brown - will probably be gone before 32 also; but even if he isn't I want nothing whatsoever to do with him at that spot.

The next level of WRs - Parris Campbell, Deebo Samuel, N'Keal Harry, Riley Ridley etc - are simply unworthy of 32, though Campbell comes the closest.

I am not drafting a RB at 32 under ANY circumstances whatsoever.

The above scenarios are the reason why defense, especially DL, has to be a consideration at 32, even when our combined TE/WR group is now quite possibly the very Worst in the entire league.

 

[BelichickFan]

Our leading receiving TE in 2007 & 2008 combined (both years) for under 600 yards. Those were McDaniels' last two years before leaving. If we can draft a really good TE, awesome. If not, McDaniels has run that type of offense. The O'Brien years brought the two receiving TE offense.

The "top" WR in this draft suck (relative to normal top WR) but the depth is good. We'll have options on Day 2.

 

[manxman2601]

Our leading receiving TE in 2007 & 2008 combined (both years) for under 600 yards. Those were McDaniels' last two years before leaving. If we can draft a really good TE, awesome. If not, McDaniels has run that type of offense. The O'Brien years brought the two receiving TE offense.

The "top" WR in this draft suck (relative to normal top WR) but the depth is good. We'll have options on Day 2.

I was wondering about this. Instead of an offense largely centred around a TE, go with a WR orientated offense. My issue with that strategy is that we're developing into a run first offense and that requires Tight End's in the offense and we already tend to signal when we're running or passing. If we don't have an effective TE in that offense, it's harder to disguise when we're running or passing. That, after all, is the advantage of a TE1 that plays inline.

 

[BelichickFan]

I was wondering about this. Instead of an offense largely centred around a TE, go with a WR orientated offense. My issue with that strategy is that we're developing into a run first offense and that requires Tight End's in the offense and we already tend to signal when we're running or passing. If we don't have an effective TE in that offense.

Valid point, the counterpoint being that if we have more speed on the field the defense would be more spread out making run blocking easier.

Ironically when McDaniels came back I wondered how he would do with the more TE based personnel after becoming more of a spread coach in 2007 and 2008.

 

[manxman2601]

Valid point, the counterpoint being that if we have more speed on the field the defense would be more spread out making run blocking easier.

Ironically when McDaniels came back I wondered how he would do with the more TE based personnel after becoming more of a spread coach in 2007 and 2008.

Well if we go more spread (and I take your point about spreading the D), then we need WRs and we're almost as weak there as we are at TE, Edelman aside. It's going to be interesting to see how BB fixes either/both WR and TE over the coming month or so.

 

[supafly]

If we don't have an effective TE in that offense, it's harder to disguise when we're running or passing. That, after all, is the advantage of a TE1 that plays inline.

That, and the fact that our previous TE was able to knock 280 lb guys into next Tuesday.

 

[manxman2601]

That, and the fact that our previous TE was able to knock 280 lb guys into next Tuesday.

Michel will certainly miss Gronk. The problem is, we've now lost two TEs that could do that.

 

[BelichickFan]

Well if we go more spread (and I take your point about spreading the D), then we need WRs and we're almost as weak there as we are at TE, Edelman aside.

Definitely But I think it's easier to find a viable WR or 2 than an all around TE.