2025 Patriot WR Discussion

astrozombie

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2022
819
Mildly hot taek - maybe a new HC/OC helps fix Polk. Boutte seemed like he was always a bubble candidate who spent the start of his career in Bill's doghouse, but came on as at least serviceable when he got some opportunities. The team still needs a real WR 1 (FWIW, I would like them to draft Tet) and probably a better WR 2, but I am at least willing to see if Polk can demonstrate something in year 2.
Maybe he becomes another victim of the Pat's inability to get good WR in round 2. Maybe he was always bad and a reach (I don't think he is bad as he was last year, I do think he was a reach). I am at least curious to see if the incoming group can maybe develop him a bit.
 
Oct 12, 2023
1,562
Mildly hot taek - maybe a new HC/OC helps fix Polk. Boutte seemed like he was always a bubble candidate who spent the start of his career in Bill's doghouse, but came on as at least serviceable when he got some opportunities. The team still needs a real WR 1 (FWIW, I would like them to draft Tet) and probably a better WR 2, but I am at least willing to see if Polk can demonstrate something in year 2.
Maybe he becomes another victim of the Pat's inability to get good WR in round 2. Maybe he was always bad and a reach (I don't think he is bad as he was last year, I do think he was a reach). I am at least curious to see if the incoming group can maybe develop him a bit.
I think a good OC and better supporting WR corps could elevate Polk

If they landed a Higgins and McDaniels for example, and let Polk be the #3 and scheme him open a la Amendola, it could work.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
Burton was a complete disaster in every way - he's unlikely to even be on the team next year after this DV incident, never mind be Higgins' replacement. All words and actions the last month indicate the Bengals will certainly try to keep Higgins - at the very least, they need to franchise him again and work out a trade if talks go south. I'd be very surprised if he hit free agency.
Ah, didn't realize that. I'll be interested to see what happens with Higgins. Obviously I'd love if he could come to the Patriots, but certainly if I were the Bengals I would want to figure out how to retain him, Burrow, and Chase for a while.

I think a good OC and better supporting WR corps could elevate Polk

If they landed a Higgins and McDaniels for example, and let Polk be the #3 and scheme him open a la Amendola, it could work.
My problem there is Polk, as far as I can tell, needs to show a ton of improvement to remain active on an NFL roster next season, let alone earn a starting spot as a WR3 in a competent offense. I'm not writing him off completely, but I'm trying to think of historical comparison -- how many NFL WRs have ever had as utterly disastrous a 1st season as Polk (12 catches on 33 targets, 12% drop rate, average of 1 YAC/reception) and recovered to have good careers?

As far as a "Z" / slot / WR3, Pop Douglas is the only guy on the roster I feel okay penciling into that role in 2025, and Brady, Gronk, Edelman, and James White aren't walking through that door to open up lanes. Douglas has shown he can be a relatively solid "Z" / WR3, but at 5'8" with a lengthy concussion history at this point, I'm not counting on him to be much more than that.

And sure, Boutte is cheap and decent depth at the back end of the roster, but that's about it.

Edit:

I realize Phil Perry is saying many of the same things I am here, including that I could see them moving on from Bourne. He looked like he'd lost a step post injury.

"I think you're bringing back Pop Douglas," Perry said. "He's still on that rookie contract. He's still a relatively productive player in a room that completely lacks production.

"I think you probably bring back Kayshon Boutte. I think you like, for the most part, what he's brought to the table. It's not perfect, and I think you're always going to be managing him in some way, shape, or form. But as a fourth receiver, not bad to have."
...
"I'm not sure Javon Baker is long for this roster," Perry said. "He's a fourth-round pick. You'd like to see him stick around; he is showing you nothing as a rookie. Ja'Lynn Polk, to me, based on the way this year has gone, has to be sort of a roster bubble guy for next year.

"I also would look at Kendrick Bourne. I know people love Kendrick Bourne; I love Kendrick Bourne's personality and I think he's in some ways really good for that locker room. But he has an issue with being in the right place at the right time and doing so consistently.

"He's still under contract, but you could get out of it. You can actually save yourself some cap dollars. I wouldn't be surprised if that ended up being what happens next year."

Parting ways with both Polk and Baker in 2025 would be a massive admission of guilt by Eliot Wolf and the Patriots' front office after using second- and fourth-round picks, respectively, on the young wideouts. But if New England brings in new talent and neither player shows significant development during training camp and the preseason, the Patriots may be forced to cut their losses.
https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/kendrick-bourne-jalynn-polk-wide-receivers-2025/678274/
 
Last edited:

soxpatscelts1524

New Member
Apr 26, 2024
87
My general thought is that people way over focus on the "X, Y, Z" receiver distinction and what really matters is just having good receivers. Most NFL teams do not actually pigeonhole guys into the classic X, Y, Z spots and most receivers move around quite a bit and fill all major roles.

Diontae Johnson is a classic "X" while Amon Ra St. Brown typically lines up in the slot. If we had to add one to the team, it'd easily be St. Brown
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
My general thought is that people way over focus on the "X, Y, Z" receiver distinction and what really matters is just having good receivers. Most NFL teams do not actually pigeonhole guys into the classic X, Y, Z spots and most receivers move around quite a bit and fill all major roles.

Diontae Johnson is a classic "X" while Amon Ra St. Brown typically lines up in the slot. If we had to add one to the team, it'd easily be St. Brown
This discussion deserves to be moved to a new WR Corps thread.

In the meantime, I'll just say I'd like people with better Xs and Os thoughts to weigh in here, but there's been a lot written on this subject (I.e. on PFF here is an article I found https://www.pff.com/news/fantasy-football-studying-wide-receiver-utilization) I think it also depends upon the OC and personnel. Shanahan & the Niners seem to move guys like Deebo all over the field, etc.

Still, I think the style of offense, run blocking, and throws you can run are impacted if your WR room is filled with 5'8" Pop Douglas types vs. 6'1", 220 lb AJ Brown types.
 

Eric Fernsten's Disco Mustache

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
My general thought is that people way over focus on the "X, Y, Z" receiver distinction and what really matters is just having good receivers. Most NFL teams do not actually pigeonhole guys into the classic X, Y, Z spots and most receivers move around quite a bit and fill all major roles.

Diontae Johnson is a classic "X" while Amon Ra St. Brown typically lines up in the slot. If we had to add one to the team, it'd easily be St. Brown
It's a great point

I don't know if other people do this, but I've found I tend to label receivers (in my head) based on the effect they have on the defense, regardless of where they line up. So, as a general rule of thumb...
  • A 'z' receiver needs to have the speed/separation/etc. to get far enough downfield on five-step drop that other teams play two-deep on that receivers side of the field. If the downfield threat of a receiver is not keeping the defense from stacking the box, they're not a 'z' receiver
  • An 'x' receiver needs to be able to catch contested balls in the air, especially those that are thrown high, and especially in the red zone/on 3rd down. If a receiver gets swallowed up in traffic, can be out-leapt by a weak-side linebacker, or otherwise struggles to move the chains on short-medium routes against man coverage, they're not an 'x' receiver
  • A 'slot' receiver can't do the things a 'z' or an 'x' needs to do (above), but none-the-less is worth giving snaps to on 3-WR sets, because they do good things out there.
That's not a very scientific way to think about it, I grant you. But that's the muddle that my mind has come through to.

By the above criteria, I saw the Pats this last year having two decent 'slot' receivers (Pops, Bourne) and then a bunch of practice squad or bench slots (everyone else). But they didn't have an NFL quality Z or X on the squad.

(Henry and Hooper were yTEs; which is different)
 
Oct 12, 2023
1,562
It's a great point

I don't know if other people do this, but I've found I tend to label receivers (in my head) based on the effect they have on the defense, regardless of where they line up. So, as a general rule of thumb...
  • A 'z' receiver needs to have the speed/separation/etc. to get far enough downfield on five-step drop that other teams play two-deep on that receivers side of the field. If the downfield threat of a receiver is not keeping the defense from stacking the box, they're not a 'z' receiver
  • An 'x' receiver needs to be able to catch contested balls in the air, especially those that are thrown high, and especially in the red zone/on 3rd down. If a receiver gets swallowed up in traffic, can be out-leapt by a weak-side linebacker, or otherwise struggles to move the chains on short-medium routes against man coverage, they're not an 'x' receiver
  • A 'slot' receiver can't do the things a 'z' or an 'x' needs to do (above), but none-the-less is worth giving snaps to on 3-WR sets, because they do good things out there.
That's not a very scientific way to think about it, I grant you. But that's the muddle that my mind has come through to.

By the above criteria, I saw the Pats this last year having two decent 'slot' receivers (Pops, Bourne) and then a bunch of practice squad or bench slots (everyone else). But they didn't have an NFL quality Z or X on the squad.

(Henry and Hooper were yTEs; which is different)
I’d say Boutte proved he belongs in the NFL and is more than a practice squad or bench guy. He looked pretty good as the season went on.
 
Oct 12, 2023
1,562
Ah, didn't realize that. I'll be interested to see what happens with Higgins. Obviously I'd love if he could come to the Patriots, but certainly if I were the Bengals I would want to figure out how to retain him, Burrow, and Chase for a while.



My problem there is Polk, as far as I can tell, needs to show a ton of improvement to remain active on an NFL roster next season, let alone earn a starting spot as a WR3 in a competent offense. I'm not writing him off completely, but I'm trying to think of historical comparison -- how many NFL WRs have ever had as utterly disastrous a 1st season as Polk (12 catches on 33 targets, 12% drop rate, average of 1 YAC/reception) and recovered to have good careers?

As far as a "Z" / slot / WR3, Pop Douglas is the only guy on the roster I feel okay penciling into that role in 2025, and Brady, Gronk, Edelman, and James White aren't walking through that door to open up lanes. Douglas has shown he can be a relatively solid "Z" / WR3, but at 5'8" with a lengthy concussion history at this point, I'm not counting on him to be much more than that.

And sure, Boutte is cheap and decent depth at the back end of the roster, but that's about it.

Edit:

I realize Phil Perry is saying many of the same things I am here, including that I could see them moving on from Bourne. He looked like he'd lost a step post injury.



https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/nfl/new-england-patriots/kendrick-bourne-jalynn-polk-wide-receivers-2025/678274/
Polk sucked and I think he’s a terrible fit for the current roster and last year’s coaching staff

That said, it would be almost unheard for a GM to dump such a high pick in year 2.

If he was a 3rd or 4th rounder, yeah he’d be on the bubble. But a top 40 pick seems unlikely to get cut before opening day next year. Especially if Wolf is still around.

Whether or not he deserves to be around is fairly irrelevant as far as opening day roster 2025 goes
 

soxpatscelts1524

New Member
Apr 26, 2024
87
Polk sucked and I think he’s a terrible fit for the current roster and last year’s coaching staff

That said, it would be almost unheard for a GM to dump such a high pick in year 2.

If he was a 3rd or 4th rounder, yeah he’d be on the bubble. But a top 40 pick seems unlikely to get cut before opening day next year. Especially if Wolf is still around.

Whether or not he deserves to be around is fairly irrelevant as far as opening day roster 2025 goes
Emmanuel Forbes, a first rounder picked one pick ahead of Christian Gonzalez, was cut this year. I agree Polk will get another shot but it's not unheard of
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
It's a great point

I don't know if other people do this, but I've found I tend to label receivers (in my head) based on the effect they have on the defense, regardless of where they line up. So, as a general rule of thumb...
  • A 'z' receiver needs to have the speed/separation/etc. to get far enough downfield on five-step drop that other teams play two-deep on that receivers side of the field. If the downfield threat of a receiver is not keeping the defense from stacking the box, they're not a 'z' receiver
  • An 'x' receiver needs to be able to catch contested balls in the air, especially those that are thrown high, and especially in the red zone/on 3rd down. If a receiver gets swallowed up in traffic, can be out-leapt by a weak-side linebacker, or otherwise struggles to move the chains on short-medium routes against man coverage, they're not an 'x' receiver
  • A 'slot' receiver can't do the things a 'z' or an 'x' needs to do (above), but none-the-less is worth giving snaps to on 3-WR sets, because they do good things out there.
Ultimately, I think the point remains -- as your post illustrates -- different receivers offer different things on a football field. Whether you call them X/Y/Z or refuse to use the common terminology, I find that it's a useful way to think about different strengths and weaknesses and vaguely categorize players, even if we all agree there's no one size fits all blueprint, and many players defy easy categorization.

Polk sucked and I think he’s a terrible fit for the current roster and last year’s coaching staff

That said, it would be almost unheard for a GM to dump such a high pick in year 2.

If he was a 3rd or 4th rounder, yeah he’d be on the bubble. But a top 40 pick seems unlikely to get cut before opening day next year. Especially if Wolf is still around.

Whether or not he deserves to be around is fairly irrelevant as far as opening day roster 2025 goes
It's a fair point.

This 2014 post from a Broncos blog breaks it down by round and likelihood of remaining on the roster by various years: https://www.milehighreport.com/2014/5/13/5713996/how-long-does-the-average-draft-pick-stick-around

So, to your point, 96.1% of 2nd round picks are on the team's active roster heading into Year 2 (it's only 93.5% for 1st rounders in their sample, interestingly). Still, I'd argue Polk's season this year makes him a legitimate candidate for that 4%, and not a fairly irrelevant question. Vrabel isn't going to keep someone on his roster just to prevent Wolf from looking bad, although obviously that will depend upon how Polk spends his offseason, how Vrabel and others feel he looks at OTAs and in camp, etc.



Edit: Here's a list of the top 20ish WR in free agency by prior AAV.

94679

Edit2:

At this stage of the offseason, I will say I'm very interested in Chris Godwin depending on his injury recovery.

He's only 28, and was on pace for the best season of his career (50 catches, 576 yards, 5 TDs) when he went down with an ankle injury in Week 7. If he really had put up a 1,100 yard, 10 TD season he would probably be demanding a (even more) massive contract this offseason.

At 6'1", 210 lbs he's a big target with a reputation as an outstanding run blocker (although I haven't seen a detailed film breakdown of this).

As a SB winning WR who played with the GOAT (and a very good QB in Baker), I think he'd be a great veteran talent to add to the WR room and mentor the younger guys on the offense, while giving Maye a rock solid target and connection for the next few years.

Here's an old breakdown of Godwin game tape from a college coach who seems to run a WR academy?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Fr1lY9v3ac&ab_channel=TheSidelineHustle
 
Last edited:
Oct 12, 2023
1,562
Ultimately, I think the point remains -- as your post illustrates -- different receivers offer different things on a football field. Whether you call them X/Y/Z or refuse to use the common terminology, I find that it's a useful way to think about different strengths and weaknesses and vaguely categorize players, even if we all agree there's no one size fits all blueprint, and many players defy easy categorization.



It's a fair point.

This 2014 post from a Broncos blog breaks it down by round and likelihood of remaining on the roster by various years: https://www.milehighreport.com/2014/5/13/5713996/how-long-does-the-average-draft-pick-stick-around

So, to your point, 96.1% of 2nd round picks are on the team's active roster heading into Year 2 (it's only 93.5% for 1st rounders in their sample, interestingly). Still, I'd argue Polk's season this year makes him a legitimate candidate for that 4%, and not a fairly irrelevant question. Vrabel isn't going to keep someone on his roster just to prevent Wolf from looking bad, although obviously that will depend upon how Polk spends his offseason, how Vrabel and others feel he looks at OTAs and in camp, etc.



Edit: Here's a list of the top 20ish WR in free agency by prior AAV.

View attachment 94679
As far as high draft picks go, I think the vast majority of those 1st and 2nd rounder picks who don’t stick are because of legal issues or medical issues (including death in the case of Leon Bender). In recent times, Senquez Golson (injury) and Malik McDowell (injury and legal) would fit those categories. Christian Hackenburg didn’t stick but kind of a different situation with QB. Demetrius Underwood (mental health).

Old friend Obi Melifonu and Stanley Jean Baptiste were among the rare 2nd round performance related cuts (albeit lower picks than Polk)

Regardless, I think we agree. Polk was so bad it’s possible he’s one of the very few exceptions but given the Pats WR corps is likely to be thin anyway and it’s likely to be the same front office, I would think Polk is close to a lock.

For the free agents, it seems like Higgins/Godwin or bust and I just can’t see either of those guys leaving their current situation. The rest is uninspiring although maybe a reunion with Cooks for a year or two would work. I don’t think a likely double digit loss team like the Pats should bother sniffing around the Mike Williams, Hopkins types (clearly washed up).

Dyami Brown, Josh Palmer, Olamide Zaccheus or Nick Westbrook might be worth a look but I don’t see any of those guys as significant upgrades over Boutte/Douglas and none of them seem like guys who could be a #1.
 
Apr 24, 2019
1,408
Does anyone here know why Brian Hartline isn't getting talked about much as a potential WR coach/Offensive Asst option for the Patriots? I may have seen him on one list somewhere - Lazar? Barth? - but I'm just wondering if he's ever indicated a reluctance to leave Ohio State or if he's just considered too inexperienced to make the leap. The guy seems to be spitting out excellent playmaking WR after excellent playmaking WR from THE Ohio State University and I wouldn't mind finding out if his fairy dust is possibly transferable to One Patriot Place. Especially with Vrabel here now.

EDIT TYPOS.
 
Oct 12, 2023
1,562
Does anyone here know why Brian Hartline isn't getting talked about much as a potential WR coach/Offensive Asst option for the Patriots? I may have seen him on one list somewhere - Lazar? Barth? - but I'm just wondering if he's ever indicated a reluctance to leave Ohio State or if he's just considered too inexperienced to make the leap. The guy seems to be spitting out excellent playmaking WR after excellent playmaking WR from THE Ohio State University and I wouldn't mind finding out if his fairy dust is possibly transferable to One Patriot Place. Especially with Vrabel here now.

EDIT TYPOS.
I think he wants the OC gig at Ohio State and I imagine they’d do almost anything it takes to keep him

He has no connection to Vrabel that I’m aware of, other than being Ohio State alumni. So I doubt the Pats would have any sort of inside track, were he thinking of going to the pros.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,589
I wonder if ATL would have any interest in moving on from Kyle Pitts, they did pick up his 5th yr option but have largely phased him out of the offense in ATL and he was drafted under a different regime. While it would take significantly more than just Polk, perhaps he could be a sweetener to pair back with his college QB. Polk + a 3rd for PItts and a 4th might be something ATL picks up the phone for.

Pitts would instantly be the best athlete in NE. He has proven in the past he can be an effective receiver going for over 1K yards as a rookie in 21. He hasn't eclipsed 700yds in the 3 seasons since. NE is devoid of playmakers so he could be a nice buy low candidate with a guaranteed 10M cap hit. ATL has negative cap space going into 25 and a Pitts trade is probably the easiest way they can free up 10M in cap space.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
96,483
Oregon
I wonder if ATL would have any interest in moving on from Kyle Pitts
This has been making the rounds
ESPN’s Ben Solak is predicting a blockbuster Falcons trade this offseason, one that sends Pitts to the Bengals for a measly Day 3 pick. ... Big prediction for the offseason: Tight end Kyle Pitts is due $10.8 million on the final year of his deal in 2025. Can the Falcons get more for him in a trade than they would in a compensatory pick after he leaves in free agency? I think they could, as he has a rosier future on an offense that actually fits his skill set. My prediction: Pitts will get dealt to the Bengals for a Day 3 pick.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
3,631
I wonder if ATL would have any interest in moving on from Kyle Pitts, they did pick up his 5th yr option but have largely phased him out of the offense in ATL and he was drafted under a different regime. While it would take significantly more than just Polk, perhaps he could be a sweetener to pair back with his college QB. Polk + a 3rd for PItts and a 4th might be something ATL picks up the phone for.

Pitts would instantly be the best athlete in NE. He has proven in the past he can be an effective receiver going for over 1K yards as a rookie in 21. He hasn't eclipsed 700yds in the 3 seasons since. NE is devoid of playmakers so he could be a nice buy low candidate with a guaranteed 10M cap hit. ATL has negative cap space going into 25 and a Pitts trade is probably the easiest way they can free up 10M in cap space.
I hope they take a few swings at contracts like this. Potentially not great value but not crippling by any messages. What's the risk to them? Very minimal. Short money. Potentially a high reward. With the Higgins and Chase deals, not sure Bengals will have the room or need more weapons on offense.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,529
I’d love to look at moves for players like that, but would not give up more than a 6th for Pitts. He’s shown very occasional flashes to be worth a look on a new team, but if his career ended today he’s basically tight end Trent Richardson. I know the Falcons have done some funky stuff the past few years as far as underutilizing their best athletes, but with Pitts not doing anything even this year I’m skeptical the light is ever gonna fully turn on for his play.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,089
Mansfield MA
I’d love to look at moves for players like that, but would not give up more than a 6th for Pitts. He’s shown very occasional flashes to be worth a look on a new team, but if his career ended today he’s basically tight end Trent Richardson. I know the Falcons have done some funky stuff the past few years as far as underutilizing their best athletes, but with Pitts not doing anything even this year I’m skeptical the light is ever gonna fully turn on for his play.
Pitts hasn't come close to living up to his draft stock, but he had 600 receiving yards this year, which only two Patriots did. He's a disappointment, but he's useful.

(Richardson, on the other hand, was out of the league by year four)
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,523
Boston
Pitts hasn't come close to living up to his draft stock, but he had 600 receiving yards this year, which only two Patriots did. He's a disappointment, but he's useful.
(Richardson, on the other hand, was out of the league by year four)
I took the comparison as to how they were successful as rookies and got progressively worse. I was attributing Pitts performance to QB play and he got better this year but 600 yards with Kirk Cousins is disappointing. Still, he did not get very many targets and his per target performance was much better this year.

To your point, if he’s inexpensive to acquire and thus can be released, I’d be interested as he has skills the current roster doesn’t.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
39,027
I have little interest in Pitts. I get the idea... he's big and fast.....

The problems are...
1. He's not really a TE... he can't block in the run game at all.... he makes Hunter Henry and Jonnu Smith look like Marcedes Lewis.
2. He's a shit route runner... lazy, sloppy, through 2 OCs he hasn't shown improvement.
3. He's just not able to make catches in traffic, won't be physical with LBs.

Maybe somebody schemes him up as a big WR and he's awesome, but right now, 4 years in, he's an untrustworthy seam route guy given his explosiveness isn't great, he's more a long strider.

There's a reason noted TE guy Arthur Smith started replacing him with Jonnu Smith, and why Zac Robinson gave it a year and now is happy to move him.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,589
Pitts is a similar player to TJ Hockenson when he was traded to MN. Hock a marginally better blocker with Pitts an edge as rec. Hock fetched a 23 2nd and 24 3rd with MN sending back a 23 4th and 24 conditional pick. I wouldn't pay that but a 3rd for 4th and a little extra seems to be a reasonable price. Doubt a 6th gets it done for a former 4th overall pick who's 24 with a 1k season under his belt.

Perhaps a better comp is Jerry Jeudy who cost a 5th and 6th last year. Jeudy was largely a career underachiever with a lot of potential in DEN.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,529
Jeudy is a great comp and why I’d ultimately be interested - I do think you have to give most heavily hyped skill position prospects the chance to at least flop on a second team before calling them legitimate busts.

The rookie season factor is a big part of the TRich comp for me - he just hasn’t done much since to live up to top of rd 1 status. Still shocking to me that Trent didn’t even make it to a second contract, I agree that Pitts has earned more of a right to stick around the league than that.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
39,027
Honestly the Guy Pitts reminds me of.... and probably why Solak picked CIN, considering how they used him is..... Mike Gesicki.
 

BaseballJones

slappy happy
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
27,717
Draft Oronde Gadsen from Syracuse. 6'5", 223 lbs, probably would get up to 235, but he's fast for a guy his size, has great hands, and is a playmaker. Should be able to snag him in like round 3 or so. He wouldn't be the best blocker ever at the position, and he's listed in the PFN mock draft as a WR, but he's a pass-catching TE and would give LBs fits.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,589
Honestly the Guy Pitts reminds me of.... and probably why Solak picked CIN, considering how they used him is..... Mike Gesicki.
Pitts is more of a vertical threat than Gesicki. Gesicki has a better feel for getting open and route running and moving the chains but he is a lower adot receiver than Pitts. Pitts can work intermediate to deep areas of the field much more effectively whereas Gesicki thrives in the short to intermediate areas. Gesicki had a bounce back year because he played with Chase and occasionally Higgins. Wouldn't be surprised if Gesicki went back to CIN, seemed to be a great fit there, doubt he comes close to matching what he produced last year elsewhere.
 
Apr 24, 2019
1,408
Javon Baker seems like a guy who Vrabel will sit down with and explain in no uncertain terms what is expected of him, accountability-wise, tell him he "has all the talent in the world, you just need to grow up and harness it, and we can help you with that," then give him a fair shot...and cut him at the end of training camp.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
Javon Baker seems like a guy who Vrabel will sit down with and explain in no uncertain terms what is expected of him, accountability-wise, tell him he "has all the talent in the world, you just need to grow up and harness it, and we can help you with that," then give him a fair shot...and cut him at the end of training camp.
What about Baker? Seems like he is a talented guy who is going to need work. Might be a better candidate for a breakout under a new coach than Polk.
Right, Baker is a total unknown, on top of being a 4th rounder. Given that he was in the worst WR room in the NFL and still couldn't get on the field for more than ~80 snaps, that's not a great sign.

There was that one game when he had an impressive 45-yard kickoff return and then muffed the next one and got benched.

He also was out for a bit after he got a concussion in a car accident. And there was this weird report that he had a disciplinary "hiccup" on the trip to London, with no clarity.

So I think @Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt's prediction is the closest to accurate... but as much as I want to completely restock the entire WR room apart from Douglas and Boutte, that might not be possible in one offseason.
 
Apr 24, 2019
1,408
He also was out for a bit after he got a concussion in a car accident. And there was this weird report that he had a disciplinary "hiccup" on the trip to London, with no clarity.
I heard something on either Patriots Unfiltered or the Tom Curran Patriots podcast that suggested Baker was late for curfew and was kind of baffled that he didn't get credit for having "tried to get back in time," only to not be able to. Sounds like a pretty immature kid. Hoping he'll be a success story turn-around once Vrabes gets his hands on him.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
7,121
Cultural hub of the universe
So just watched Baltimore and the Bills, and I've gotta say there really wasn't a WR in that game who stood out as a #1 type guy. Does KC have one? If the top teams in the conference don't, do we need one? What they do have is good OL's and QB's who can make plays.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
49,875
So just watched Baltimore and the Bills, and I've gotta say there really wasn't a WR in that game who stood out as a #1 type guy. Does KC have one? If the top teams in the conference don't, do we need one? What they do have is good OL's and QB's who can make plays.
Mahomes, Lamar, and Allen are all MVP or MVP calibre QBs that can hide a lot of flaws. Maye isn’t in their stratosphere so I would say that a strong #1 is probably a definite need for this Pats team but clearly the lines are a bigger need.

I will say that watching Daniels gives me real hope. The Commanders aren’t exactly loaded with talent (they definitely have more than Pats) and they’re in the NFCCG.
 
Oct 12, 2023
1,562
So just watched Baltimore and the Bills, and I've gotta say there really wasn't a WR in that game who stood out as a #1 type guy. Does KC have one? If the top teams in the conference don't, do we need one? What they do have is good OL's and QB's who can make plays.
The takeaway to the playoffs thus far to me has been the game is still usually won in the trenches.

Pats have a bottom 3 OL and (especially without Barmore) a bottom 3 front 7. They have a lot of work to do that is far more important than finding a WR (which they also need)
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
48,481
Melrose, MA
Mildly hot taek - maybe a new HC/OC helps fix Polk. Boutte seemed like he was always a bubble candidate who spent the start of his career in Bill's doghouse, but came on as at least serviceable when he got some opportunities. The team still needs a real WR 1 (FWIW, I would like them to draft Tet) and probably a better WR 2, but I am at least willing to see if Polk can demonstrate something in year 2.
Maybe he becomes another victim of the Pat's inability to get good WR in round 2. Maybe he was always bad and a reach (I don't think he is bad as he was last year, I do think he was a reach). I am at least curious to see if the incoming group can maybe develop him a bit.
My problem there is Polk, as far as I can tell, needs to show a ton of improvement to remain active on an NFL roster next season, let alone earn a starting spot as a WR3 in a competent offense. I'm not writing him off completely, but I'm trying to think of historical comparison -- how many NFL WRs have ever had as utterly disastrous a 1st season as Polk (12 catches on 33 targets, 12% drop rate, average of 1 YAC/reception) and recovered to have good careers?
I think the best (though still very weak) case for Polk being recoverable is that his former teammate, KJ Osborn, was basically every bit as bad with the Pats as Polk was, despite having averaged 53 catches, 600 yards, 5 TDs for the previous 3 seasons. I assume it is very rare for a second round pick to have numbers as bad as Polk's with the number of snaps Polk got. But I assume it is equally rare for a productive 3 year receiver (even if he tops out as a #3 like Osborn) to crater the way Osborn did. So, maybe something about the Pats offense. Boutte's numbers from his rookie year were also awful, at a glance, but in his case he barely played, which is different from Polk.

As far as a "Z" / slot / WR3, Pop Douglas is the only guy on the roster I feel okay penciling into that role in 2025, and Brady, Gronk, Edelman, and James White aren't walking through that door to open up lanes. Douglas has shown he can be a relatively solid "Z" / WR3, but at 5'8" with a lengthy concussion history at this point, I'm not counting on him to be much more than that.

And sure, Boutte is cheap and decent depth at the back end of the roster, but that's about it.
I don't know what to make of either of them, given the mess that has been the Pats offense over the past couple of years. The safest assumption is probably that Douglas is a WR3 caliber player and Boutte a WR4. Maybe there is some upside potential given what a mess the Pats offense was.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
9,744
Listening to 98.5 yesterday they were going on and on about how the Pats need to give up a first rounder (not this year) or a 2nd and 3rd rounder to trade for an established WR. I just don’t agree. The team has so many holes, they need all those draft picks (and of course pick better people) to repopulate the roster. I don’t think one WR is going to make all that much of a difference. I get that FA is not a good place to get WRs. So, maybe they spend their money on OL and maybe DL, and draft Tet McMillan and have that be step one of the rebuild. Watching the playoffs has for sure shown the value of a good line.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
20,618
The conditions this weekend, in particular in Philly and Buffalo, did not exactly help the causes of the WRs. Still, Shakir, Coleman, and Bateman are all miles better than anyone on the Pats receiving corps. As is Zay Flowers, whose absence was felt by the Ravens early on. And of course the TE's and RB's are much better than anyone on the Pats roster. Agree that these games did show the importance of a competent OL (Pats were probably bottom of the league bad in that area); just noting that the Pats ultimately need to fix both.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
17,012
So just watched Baltimore and the Bills, and I've gotta say there really wasn't a WR in that game who stood out as a #1 type guy. Does KC have one? If the top teams in the conference don't, do we need one? What they do have is good OL's and QB's who can make plays.
Flowers is really good and him being out was a huge loss for Baltimore.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
14,152
São Paulo - Brazil
So just watched Baltimore and the Bills, and I've gotta say there really wasn't a WR in that game who stood out as a #1 type guy. Does KC have one? If the top teams in the conference don't, do we need one? What they do have is good OL's and QB's who can make plays.
If Drake Maye is going to be Mahomes, Allen or Lamar starting next year, no we don't. But Mahomes has Kelce and had Tyreek as he grew up in the league and became "WR proof", Allen had Diggs until he went through a similar process and Lamar is such a specific player I wouldn't use the Ravens as a barometer for what works and doesn't work offensively.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,589
Boutte's numbers from his rookie year were also awful, at a glance, but in his case he barely played, which is different from Polk.
According to this guys rookie WR predictability model, which is the best I've seen anywhere, not only is Polk bad, he is historically bad for rookie WR who played at least 250 snaps his rookie yr.
Granted Polk just barely passed his threshold which is 250 snaps, Polk got 253. His methodology is heavily influenced by YPRR combined with minimum usage and the 250 snap threshold along with a bonus for TDs. Best to read the article if you want the full details.
Regardless he has been charting this back to 2006 and Polk comes in... dead last behind the likes of JJ Arcega Whiteside, Terrace Marshall, James Washington. Only glimpse of a silver lining is that Cedric Tillman is not too far away from Polk and was having a productive season until severe concussion knocked him out this season.
According to this Polk has a near 0 chance at becoming a productive WR.
https://www.footballguys.com/article/2025-dynasty-in-theory-evaluating-rookie-receivers
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
39,027
According to this guys rookie WR predictability model, which is the best I've seen anywhere, not only is Polk bad, he is historically bad for rookie WR who played at least 250 snaps his rookie yr.
Granted Polk just barely passed his threshold which is 250 snaps, Polk got 253. His methodology is heavily influenced by YPRR combined with minimum usage and the 250 snap threshold along with a bonus for TDs. Best to read the article if you want the full details.
Regardless he has been charting this back to 2006 and Polk comes in... dead last behind the likes of JJ Arcega Whiteside, Terrace Marshall, James Washington. Only glimpse of a silver lining is that Cedric Tillman is not too far away from Polk and was having a productive season until severe concussion knocked him out this season.
According to this Polk has a near 0 chance at becoming a productive WR.
https://www.footballguys.com/article/2025-dynasty-in-theory-evaluating-rookie-receivers
Other potential silver linings.
The following guys all are in his bottom tier (from lowest score to highest) of terrible bets... Jakobi Meyers, Nelson Agholor, Jordy Nelson, Quentin Johnston, Ted Ginn, Davante Adams, Nico Collins
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
20,618
Polk seems like he will need a strong training camp in order to have a spot with the team next year. Interestingly, he received good reviews from the local beat guys during the camp practices, and had 7 catches on 9 targets for 53 yards during the preseason games. But the quality of defensive competition is obviously highly suspect in those situations.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
39,027
Polk seems like he will need a strong training camp in order to have a spot with the team next year. Interestingly, he received good reviews from the local beat guys during the camp practices, and had 7 catches on 9 targets for 53 yards during the preseason games. But the quality of defensive competition is obviously highly suspect in those situations.
I think he'd have to have a terrible camp not to make the roster... it would be an extra $5M cap hit to cut him, they invested a 2nd round pick on him, and the rest of the WRs on the roster are not very good either. Baker is the guy who is going to have a real battle to make the roster. Also a decent chance Bourne is traded or cut (saves $5M)
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
48,481
Melrose, MA
According to this guys rookie WR predictability model, which is the best I've seen anywhere, not only is Polk bad, he is historically bad for rookie WR who played at least 250 snaps his rookie yr.
Granted Polk just barely passed his threshold which is 250 snaps, Polk got 253. His methodology is heavily influenced by YPRR combined with minimum usage and the 250 snap threshold along with a bonus for TDs. Best to read the article if you want the full details.
Regardless he has been charting this back to 2006 and Polk comes in... dead last behind the likes of JJ Arcega Whiteside, Terrace Marshall, James Washington. Only glimpse of a silver lining is that Cedric Tillman is not too far away from Polk and was having a productive season until severe concussion knocked him out this season.
According to this Polk has a near 0 chance at becoming a productive WR.
https://www.footballguys.com/article/2025-dynasty-in-theory-evaluating-rookie-receivers
I'd give him significantly better than zero even though I am still pessimistic. Maybe 20%. Polk got 436 snaps, BTW - maybe the model is looking at passing snaps.

Edit: It is hard to see in the shambolic overall numbers, but his season took a weird turn.

Through his first 4 games, he had 8 catches on 13 targets, for 61 yards and 1 TD (a 5 yard pass from Brissett that was one of only 2 TD passes thrown by Brissett) in 155 snaps. That's quite bad, but over a full season it would have worked out to 34 catches for 259 yards and 4 TDs, and after game 4 there was maybe some hope for improvement. But he went hard the other way. In his final 11 games, he had 4 catches on 20 targets for 26 yards and one TD (a 2 yard pass from Maye where he was basically schemed open) in 277 snaps.
 
Last edited:

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,589
I'd give him significantly better than zero even though I am still pessimistic. Maybe 20%. Polk got 436 snaps, BTW - maybe the model is looking at passing snaps.

Edit: It is hard to see in the shambolic overall numbers, but his season took a weird turn.

Through his first 4 games, he had 8 catches on 13 targets, for 61 yards and 1 TD (a 5 yard pass from Brissett that was one of only 2 TD passes thrown by Brissett) in 155 snaps. That's quite bad, but over a full season it would have worked out to 34 catches for 259 yards and 4 TDs, and after game 4 there was maybe some hope for improvement. But he went hard the other way. In his final 11 games, he had 4 catches on 20 targets for 26 yards and one TD (a 2 yard pass from Maye where he was basically schemed open) in 277 snaps.
The model is 250 routes not snaps, that was my mistake but the point remains Polk got 253 routes last year and did less with them than any rookie WR in the last 18yrs.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
39,027
I'd give him significantly better than zero even though I am still pessimistic. Maybe 20%. Polk got 436 snaps, BTW - maybe the model is looking at passing snaps.

Edit: It is hard to see in the shambolic overall numbers, but his season took a weird turn.

Through his first 4 games, he had 8 catches on 13 targets, for 61 yards and 1 TD (a 5 yard pass from Brissett that was one of only 2 TD passes thrown by Brissett) in 155 snaps. That's quite bad, but over a full season it would have worked out to 34 catches for 259 yards and 4 TDs, and after game 4 there was maybe some hope for improvement. But he went hard the other way. In his final 11 games, he had 4 catches on 20 targets for 26 yards and one TD (a 2 yard pass from Maye where he was basically schemed open) in 277 snaps.
His early season was weird, average separation score loved him (could have been SSS issues) the charting said he had caught every single catchable target (he was the "target" on a lot of Brissett throwaways)... Then he doesn't get the 2 foot in on that TD, then the drops started, he gets concussed.. Whole thing falls apart.
 

Eric Fernsten's Disco Mustache

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
According to this guys rookie WR predictability model, which is the best I've seen anywhere, not only is Polk bad, he is historically bad for rookie WR who played at least 250 snaps his rookie yr.
You gotta be a little careful with how you interpret models like that one, for reasons that this group is already pretty savvy about...
  • That model is built to inform what players you roster and trade for in dynasty fantasy football leagues. What you care about in fantasy and what you care about in the real world are... not the same
  • The model evaluates receivers to each other based on "yards per route run". So, if you assume that all the players evaluated worked in functionally-identical conditions on teams with functionally-identical passing attacks than something close to 100% of the variance between receivers would be a result of things the receivers were doing. But we know the receivers the model evaluated were not working in those conditions. In fantasy you might not care. But in the real world, and since we're hoping the conditions on the Pats are about to change significantly, it matters more.
  • The model is accurate "on average, overall", as the line goes. That means that it is going to be more informative about the performance of receivers who are operating in situations closer to the league-average. It's going to be way less informative for receivers operating in weird, outlying situations. Again, if you're using this to evaluate fantasy trades, you kinda don't care. It doesn't matter whether the receivers would actually be good in different circumstances.
Coming back to Polk...

The weird thing about his case is that a large number of NFL teams saw him as a 'plug and play' receiver who would perform well from the jump as at least a 3rd/4th option in the NFL. And the scouting report on him was that he was great at competing for and winning catchable balls, with his hands as something like his biggest asset. Then he came to New England, things started off rough, and he cratered.

Did this happen because lots of NFL teams were wrong in their assessment? Maybe. That sort of thing happens, more often than you'd like.

Did this happen because this last season was a bizarre mess in New England, with a coaching staff that was over their head and too-often bad at their jobs, Brissett at QB for the first ~40% of the season, and really sub-optimal conditions for a rookie whose hit a rough patch to right the ship? Maybe. That sort of thing also happens.

This has come up in the other thread, but I sometimes get in a mood where the coach I want Vrabel to poach/hire more than any other is Brian Hartline, the co-OC and receivers coach at Ohio State. And both because I think Hartline might really improve the Pats track record of drafting receivers. And also because an offensive staff with Hartline and a strong OC would get the most out of Polk/et al. Whatever that 'most' is.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,589
You gotta be a little careful with how you interpret models like that one, for reasons that this group is already pretty savvy about...
  • That model is built to inform what players you roster and trade for in dynasty fantasy football leagues. What you care about in fantasy and what you care about in the real world are... not the same
  • The model evaluates receivers to each other based on "yards per route run". So, if you assume that all the players evaluated worked in functionally-identical conditions on teams with functionally-identical passing attacks than something close to 100% of the variance between receivers would be a result of things the receivers were doing. But we know the receivers the model evaluated were not working in those conditions. In fantasy you might not care. But in the real world, and since we're hoping the conditions on the Pats are about to change significantly, it matters more.
  • The model is accurate "on average, overall", as the line goes. That means that it is going to be more informative about the performance of receivers who are operating in situations closer to the league-average. It's going to be way less informative for receivers operating in weird, outlying situations. Again, if you're using this to evaluate fantasy trades, you kinda don't care. It doesn't matter whether the receivers would actually be good in different circumstances.
Coming back to Polk...

The weird thing about his case is that a large number of NFL teams saw him as a 'plug and play' receiver who would perform well from the jump as at least a 3rd/4th option in the NFL. And the scouting report on him was that he was great at competing for and winning catchable balls, with his hands as something like his biggest asset. Then he came to New England, things started off rough, and he cratered.

Did this happen because lots of NFL teams were wrong in their assessment? Maybe. That sort of thing happens, more often than you'd like.

Did this happen because this last season was a bizarre mess in New England, with a coaching staff that was over their head and too-often bad at their jobs, Brissett at QB for the first ~40% of the season, and really sub-optimal conditions for a rookie whose hit a rough patch to right the ship? Maybe. That sort of thing also happens.

This has come up in the other thread, but I sometimes get in a mood where the coach I want Vrabel to poach/hire more than any other is Brian Hartline, the co-OC and receivers coach at Ohio State. And both because I think Hartline might really improve the Pats track record of drafting receivers. And also because an offensive staff with Hartline and a strong OC would get the most out of Polk/et al. Whatever that 'most' is.
I think there is an extremely strong correlation between successful fantasy WRs and real world WR especially as it relates to the type of performance you anticipate receiving from a high 2nd rd pick.

If Boutte had also struggled and it was exclusively Bourne/Osborn getting all the run in NE I could perhaps see a reason to put the majority of the blame on the coaching staff since only experienced vets had any success in that scenario.
The fact Boutte was the defacto #1 towards the end of the season leads me to believe that at least some of Polk's issues are due to the player not the coaching.
I don't think anyone besides Wolf has called Polk "plug and play".
I'm rooting for Polk to be the outlier and become a productive WR for NE I just wouldn't bet my $$ on that happening.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
13,191
around the way
So just watched Baltimore and the Bills, and I've gotta say there really wasn't a WR in that game who stood out as a #1 type guy. Does KC have one? If the top teams in the conference don't, do we need one? What they do have is good OL's and QB's who can make plays.
If I took anything from this weekend's games, it was the pleasure of watching good offensive lines at work. I'll avoid the obvious "we could have had him" remarks about Rosengarten and others who made the playoffs. OL play has been huge in this postseason. Yes, also mobile QBs with bags, but still.

Having an impact, top 10 WR is awesome and also not necessary. Having time to go through more than one read without being strip-sacked and to be able to run on 3rd and 2...that's gold.