Gronk v. Graham. The return of the Ding

Rick Burlesons Yam Bag

Internet Cowboy, Turbo Accelerator, tOSU Denier
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with Barnwell's conclusion; I just think his argument is fatally flawed. He's basically saying that all things that are more expensive are more valuable, otherwise they wouldn't be more expensive. He's begging the question.

Let's assume that WR, on the whole as a positional category, are more valuable than the league wide TE group. How much of that is simply due to positional scarcity at TE? I think part of the reason the Pats spend more time seeking out TEs vs WRs is that there simply are more quality WRs to go around. There are only so many human beings on this planet with the unique combination of size and athleticism to be dominant tight ends. One would think that would drive up the price of the top TEs, due to supply and demand. But the demand doesn't seem to really be there. At least, not as high as it is for WRs. A ton of teams are much more likely to seek out the sexier acquisition of a top tier WR instead of a top tier TE.
The flaw in that argument is the hypothesis that the Patriots and a small handful of others are the only ones able to understand the value of TEs vs WRs. I am not sure that their draft history or FA approach reflects that. In truth, Gronk was available to them because of his injury history and Hernandez was available because his draft interviews came back as "We're not saying he will DEFINITELY kill a guy at some point, but we can't rule it out" for most teams. Since Gronk - and it has only been 5 seasons - it isn't like the Patriots haven't been tying to acquire WRs vs. TEs similar to how other teams have. More teams than not have spent a 2nd or first round pick on a TE in the last 5-6 seasons (I will openly admit....I am not 100 percent certain of this. I know that at least 7 have....but I am not sure whether some guys were 3rd or 2nd rounders for the other teams and I am feeling lazy). And a number of other teams have drafted basketball players late in the draft to try and capture the next Graham or Gates.

i don't think that the market inefficiency is all that significant, but I could certainly be wrong.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
The flaw in that argument is the hypothesis that the Patriots and a small handful of others are the only ones able to understand the value of TEs vs WRs. I am not sure that their draft history or FA approach reflects that. In truth, Gronk was available to them because of his injury history and Hernandez was available because his draft interviews came back as "We're not saying he will DEFINITELY kill a guy at some point, but we can't rule it out" for most teams. Since Gronk - and it has only been 5 seasons - it isn't like the Patriots haven't been tying to acquire WRs vs. TEs similar to how other teams have.
You're right about Hernandez and Gronkowski slipping (though Gronk was still a high pick for a TE), and obviously with Gronk already in the fold, the Pats haven't thrown a high pick at the position since. But they used two firsts on TEs prior to that (Graham and Watson). More significantly, they do devalue WR relative to most teams. They are the only team that hasn't used a first-rounder on a WR since Belichick got there, and they traded away both Branch and Moss because of contract issues.

More teams than not have spent a 2nd or first round pick on a TE in the last 5-6 seasons (I will openly admit....I am not 100 percent certain of this. I know that at least 7 have....but I am not sure whether some guys were 3rd or 2nd rounders for the other teams and I am feeling lazy). And a number of other teams have drafted basketball players late in the draft to try and capture the next Graham or Gates.

i don't think that the market inefficiency is all that significant, but I could certainly be wrong.
PFR's Draft Finder is good for this sort of thing. The answer's 13 (they have 14 but count Funchess as a TE). Only six of those were drafted as high as Gronk.

I think there is a market inefficiency here. Gronk's highest cap hit is $12 MM - that's nuts. I think the advantage the Patriots have in taking advantage of this is the Erhardt-Perkins scheme, which is concept-based and not tied to particular positions. So we've seen New England get a lot of production from slot receivers, receiving backs, and tight ends while largely ignoring the (very expensive) X receiver position that many teams rely on for production.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,882
Washington, DC
I think there is a market inefficiency here. Gronk's highest cap hit is $12 MM - that's nuts. I think the advantage the Patriots have in taking advantage of this is the Erhardt-Perkins scheme, which is concept-based and not tied to particular positions. So we've seen New England get a lot of production from slot receivers, receiving backs, and tight ends while largely ignoring the (very expensive) X receiver position that many teams rely on for production.
Splitting hairs, but this to me suggests that the market is efficient but that the market for TEs is qualitatively different in that TEs aren't as fungible across teams as WRs. Almost all teams know how to use an X receiver, so demand is higher for them. There are still a number of teams that wouldn't know how to maximize the offensive value of a TE.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
I'll only add that it's difficult to understand what over/under-valued "the market" is for players at a given position without looking a the distributions of talent and salaries at each. E.g., comparing salaries and production of Gronk to those of the top X-reciever in the league is meaningful, but leaves a whole lot out. Maybe the available talent-level at TE is pretty flat except for a few exceptions like Gronk and Graham, compared to WRs. Or maybe not. I don't know.