Offensive Depth Chart - skill positions only

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 23, 2024

Great breakdown BBJ. I think you pretty much nailed my feelings on this group. The potential is there and you don't have to struggle to see it as in previous years. The QB room has done a complete 180. Zappe was our starting QB by the end of the year and now he's fighting for a spot. Mass improvement there. I think they pickup another vet RB at some point. That position can be plug and play. You forgot Terell Jennings in that group. Maybe nothing but hes at least invited to camp. The WR room is exciting. Polk, Baker, Douglas and Boutte all represent a ton of upside. Bourne and Osborn are solid vets. Juju says hes 100% after being 60% last year. I'm not sure I buy it but if so hes serviceable. Super excited for what Bell could bring to the table as a TE/HB/FB. Especially with what Van Pelt is rumored to run. Henry is a solid to above average vet who might have had better stats with an actual QB but I digress... Hooper and Wilcox are better than Gesicki. That's really not saying much but still.

You are 100% correct in stating that it all comes down to the OL. The entire left side will be a work in progress. If they can get average play from whatever combination they put there things will look great. If not, none of these skill position guys will be able to perform. Most of the offenses success rests on how that group comes together.

NextBigThing8184 · May 23, 2024

RB - Stevenson is pretty good. Not a fan of Gibson due to the fumbles and the kind of weird running style he’s never fixed since converting to RB. Maybe with some coaching he can clean that up. If he doesn’t put the ball on the ground and if he’s used in a limited role, he can be a useful contributor but I think he’s going to be equal parts flash and frustration. Hasty and Harris are fungible bottom of the roster/practice squad guys who may or may not make the roster.

TE - if Henry is healthy he’s a nice complementary piece and a solid starting TE. Hooper is washed up and Wilcox is JAG. I like the Bell pick but not expecting much from him in 2024 (or ever).

WR - the floor is higher than it has been, certainly there’s enough bodies where you hope they can find 4 NFL caliber guys although I don’t see anyone with #1 or even high #2 upside. I like Polk a lot as a prospect, maybe Baker can contribute. Osborn has issues with drops and, like Gibson, will probably be equal parts useful and frustrating. Bourne (if/when healthy) and Douglas are nice role players. JJSS and Reagor probably have a better shot to contribute than Thornton or Boutte but that’s not saying much. It’s still a bottom 5-6 group in the league, a unit which at its best is likely full of low end #2’s and #3’s.

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 23, 2024

NextBigThing8184 said:
RB - Stevenson is pretty good. Not a fan of Gibson due to the fumbles and the kind of weird running style he’s never fixed since converting to RB. Maybe with some coaching he can clean that up. If he doesn’t put the ball on the ground and if he’s used in a limited role, he can be a useful contributor but I think he’s going to be equal parts flash and frustration. Hasty and Harris are fungible bottom of the roster/practice squad guys who may or may not make the roster.

TE - if Henry is healthy he’s a nice complementary piece and a solid starting TE. Hooper is washed up and Wilcox is JAG. I like the Bell pick but not expecting much from him in 2024 (or ever).

WR - the floor is higher than it has been, certainly there’s enough bodies where you hope they can find 4 NFL caliber guys although I don’t see anyone with #1 or even high #2 upside. I like Polk a lot as a prospect, maybe Baker can contribute. Osborn has issues with drops and, like Gibson, will probably be equal parts useful and frustrating. Bourne (if/when healthy) and Douglas are nice role players. JJSS and Reagor probably have a better shot to contribute than Thornton or Boutte but that’s not saying much. It’s still a bottom 5-6 group in the league, a unit which at its best is likely full of low end #2’s and #3’s.

Like the Bell pick but don't expect him to contribute? Odd. Like Polk a lot but don't even see him as a high #2? Weird. Maybe Baker contributes? Douglas in his second year is just a role player? Reagor has more of a shot than Boutte? Those are some interesting takes. Guess we'll find out when the season comes. I mean, I get it and I can see where you would have that perception but these views some overly pessimistic.

j44thor · May 23, 2024

Boutte has to get through the legal process before we find out if he has anything left as a player which seems highly unlikely at this point. I doubt he makes the team this year assuming he comes off the reserve list at some point.

Cellar-Door · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Like the Bell pick but don't expect him to contribute? Odd. Like Polk a lot but don't even see him as a high #2? Weird. Maybe Baker contributes? Douglas in his second year is just a role player? Reagor has more of a shot than Boutte? Those are some interesting takes. Guess we'll find out when the season comes. I mean, I get it and I can see where you would have that perception but these views some overly pessimistic.

Why is this weird? TEs, particularly taken late in the draft usually don't do much as rookies, late round picks in general are not contributors early. If Bell makes the roster at all it was a good pick, if he's contributing by year 3 it's a good pick.

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 23, 2024

Cellar-Door said:
Why is this weird? TEs, particularly taken late in the draft usually don't do much as rookies, late round picks in general are not contributors early. If Bell makes the roster at all it was a good pick, if he's contributing by year 3 it's a good pick.

He said ever though.

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 23, 2024

j44thor said:
Boutte has to get through the legal process before we find out if he has anything left as a player which seems highly unlikely at this point. I doubt he makes the team this year assuming he comes off the reserve list at some point.

Sure, the possible legal troubles are concerning but already coming to the conclusion that he has nothing left after a lost season with bottom of the league QB play after being fawned over as a potential steal just a year ago is kind of strange to me. He has more potential than Thornton and Reagor combined.

BigJimEd · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
He said ever though.

Bell's a 7th round pick. What are the odds a 7th round pick even make the team? 10%. Considerably less to be a significant contributor. One can like the pick and still recognize the odds are low that he will contribute much if anything.

j44thor · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Sure, the possible legal troubles are concerning but already coming to the conclusion that he has nothing left after a lost season with bottom of the league QB play after being fawned over as a potential steal just a year ago is kind of strange to me. He has more potential than Thornton and Reagor combined.

I never fawned over him as a potential steal. He fell because he had a terrible combine combined with a pedestrian final couple seasons and coachability questions. He was fine as a 6th rd dart throw but only becomes relevant if he became a player he hadn't been for a couple seasons.
The early age breakout seasons was a green flag surrounded by swirling red flags.

I'd argue Thornton has more potential which isn't saying much. At least he can run fast.

GB5 · May 23, 2024

Boutte will get cut or practice squad.
Thornton will be a guy they try to trade (a 7th?), or practice squad,
Zappe will be the same. Trade for a 7th or gone, unless they think they can get Milton thru waivers

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 23, 2024

BigJimEd said:
Bell's a 7th round pick. What are the odds a 7th round pick even make the team? 10%. Considerably less to be a significant contributor. One can like the pick and still recognize the odds are low that he will contribute much if anything.

Considering the depth at the TE and RB position I'd say his odds are better than 10%. League wide 7th round picks hit at a much lower rate though so the perception is valid I suppose. Hes an offensive tweener which is why he lasted so long (he was a projected 5th rounder.) I don't agree that someone can like a pick and then say meh on outcomes. Those two things are mutually exclusive. It makes no sense when you think about it for more than a second. I like the Drake Maye pick but doubt he ever improves his footwork and likely won't get a second contract. See? That's just a ridiculous thing to say. It's leaning toward the negative after saying the pick was good. Its contradictory.

j44thor said:
I never fawned over him as a potential steal. He fell because he had a terrible combine combined with a pedestrian final couple seasons and coachability questions. He was fine as a 6th rd dart throw but only becomes relevant if he became a player he hadn't been for a couple seasons.
The early age breakout seasons was a green flag surrounded by swirling red flags.

I'd argue Thornton has more potential which isn't saying much. At least he can run fast.

Ok, but a large portion of analysts did. Boutte can run routes. Thornton runs in a straight line. Thornton also tried to put on weight in the off-season and couldn't. His ceiling dropped. Both are on the bubble so this conversation is likely pointless.

NextBigThing8184 · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Like the Bell pick but don't expect him to contribute? Odd. Like Polk a lot but don't even see him as a high #2? Weird. Maybe Baker contributes? Douglas in his second year is just a role player? Reagor has more of a shot than Boutte? Those are some interesting takes. Guess we'll find out when the season comes. I mean, I get it and I can see where you would have that perception but these views some overly pessimistic.

I like the Bell pick because he has some upside and for a late round pick he has some interesting qualities. But I certainly don’t expect a late pick to be much of a contributor in year 1. He’s likely a healthy scratch or practice squad guy. #3 TE who aren’t good blockers don’t find themselves active on game day often. That’s hardly a pessimistic take.

Boutte/Reagor - I don’t think either makes the roster but Reagor has special teams ability. Boutte showed virtually nothing last year and his off field baggage / character is perhaps a factor. In terms of physical ability, Reagor has more but obviously hasn’t come close to realizing it. As a WR5, I think it’s reasonable to think the guy who can return kicks has a leg up.

Douglas as a role player, I mean, that’s what he is. A complementary slot guy. Perhaps you see him as a legitimate top 2 WR on a good offense but his ceiling IMO is excellent #3.

I like Polk because he’s a high floor type guy but he’s never going to scare defenses. He can’t get separation. I watched him a ton last year and wanted the Pats to draft him but his upside to me is Amendola-esque. Tough, reliable but not someone who scares defenses. And that’s assuming he pans out, which most draft picks don’t. I don’t know if AVP is creative enough to scheme Polk open consistently but Polk has a lot of learning to do if he’s going to be able to beat his man off the snap.

Baker, interesting set of skills but still I would never bet on a 4th round WR to contribute much ever let alone in their rookie year. The success rate of WR taken in that portion of the draft is less than 25% and almost all of those guys have a few interesting skills. I think it’s realistic, hardly pessimistic, to think that it’s unlikely he contributes, and if he does, it will probably take a fair bit of development.

Perhaps you have a ton of faith in Wolf and Groh as being WR scouting gurus or AVP/Hughes having great WR development skills, but there’s really no reason as of now to think the Pats have landed a bunch of stud rookies who will overperform the consensus scouting reports and historical trends. I hope they do. But it would be a huge outlier if they got meaningful contributions from more than 1 of Boutte (essentially a rookie), Bell, Polk and Baker. I could see Polk putting up 40-550-4 or something like that. The others I’m not expecting anything meaningful from. And if Douglas is more than a glorified (but good at his role) complementary player, I don’t see how the other guys (Baker, Boutte and I guess Thornton) get enough snaps to contribute much.

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

Boutte fell for a bunch of reasons but let's not pretend he didn't have some damn good tape at the end of his freshman year, in parts of his sophomore year, and in parts of his junior year (watch him vs UGA). He was a 5-star too. I think the combine doesn't matter for slots/Zs which is what Boutte is. Boutte unfortunately has had a bunch of injuries at LSU which limited some of his higher end explosiveness he had earlier. Boutte had rehab clashes and other clashes with the coaching staff and had a boat load of off-field issues. I just hope he can get help if he needs it for gambling and yeah, ideally, he can start producing. Odds are against him.

NextBigThing8184 · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Considering the depth at the TE and RB position I'd say his odds are better than 10%. League wide 7th round picks hit at a much lower rate though so the perception is valid I suppose. Hes an offensive tweener which is why he lasted so long (he was a projected 5th rounder.) I don't agree that someone can like a pick and then say meh on outcomes. Those two things are mutually exclusive. It makes no sense when you think about it for more than a second. I like the Drake Maye pick but doubt he ever improves his footwork and likely won't get a second contract. See? That's just a ridiculous thing to say. It's leaning toward the negative after saying the pick was good. Its contradictory.

Ok, but a large portion of analysts did. Boutte can run routes. Thornton runs in a straight line. Thornton also tried to put on weight in the off-season and couldn't. His ceiling dropped. Both are on the bubble so this conversation is likely pointless.

You can certainly like a pick and be meh about outcomes. I like the Milton pick a lot because if he hits, he’s going to be very very valuable. Which is more than you can say about most 6th rounders. But the chances of him hitting are tiny.

I like late round picks who have interesting traits and aren’t guys whose absolute perceived ceiling is “rotational RB”, “useful run plugger” or “good special teamer who can maybe backup a position” but usually late round guys who have better ceilings have much worse outcomes because (as with very raw QB’s, or guys with major character/size/speed/quality of competition issues) those guys wouldn’t be available late round unless they were long shots.

NextBigThing8184 · May 23, 2024

SMU_Sox said:
Boutte fell for a bunch of reasons but let's not pretend he didn't have some damn good tape at the end of his freshman year, in parts of his sophomore year, and in parts of his junior year (watch him vs UGA). He was a 5-star too. I think the combine doesn't matter for slots/Zs which is what Boutte is. Boutte unfortunately has had a bunch of injuries at LSU which limited some of his higher end explosiveness he had earlier. Boutte had rehab clashes and other clashes with the coaching staff and had a boat load of off-field issues. I just hope he can get help if he needs it for gambling and yeah, ideally, he can start producing. Odds are against him.

NFL practice squads are littered with guys who were highly graded recruits and flashed a bit at the age of 20.

Not disagreeing with your assessment at all, just observing that every team has a few Boutte types and I think anyone expecting him to be more than practice squad fodder simply because he looked good as a freshman 4 years ago is overly optimistic.

Jimbodandy · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Like the Bell pick but don't expect him to contribute? Odd. Like Polk a lot but don't even see him as a high #2? Weird. Maybe Baker contributes? Douglas in his second year is just a role player? Reagor has more of a shot than Boutte? Those are some interesting takes. Guess we'll find out when the season comes. I mean, I get it and I can see where you would have that perception but these views some overly pessimistic.

What's great about Bell is his athleticism, but his weight and height stuff is not optimal and he needs development there and a decent amount of coaching up, according to some reports.

He's a project, exactly like most guys taken that late. Nobody should ever expect a guy taken that late to contribute in year one and perhaps ever. But with the athleticism, maybe he's a gold mine down the road. Maybe. I don't think that it's pessimistic to think that we might not get a productive NFL player out of him. We probably won't. But if we do, what value.

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Like the Bell pick but don't expect him to contribute? Odd. Like Polk a lot but don't even see him as a high #2? Weird. Maybe Baker contributes? Douglas in his second year is just a role player? Reagor has more of a shot than Boutte? Those are some interesting takes. Guess we'll find out when the season comes. I mean, I get it and I can see where you would have that perception but these views some overly pessimistic.

I think when you say stuff like "odd" and "Weird" instead of "hey what do you mean by this" it creates a combative atmosphere or tone which I am not sure you are meaning to do. Maybe that is how I read it. I didn't think either of his statements were weird FWIW. There are guys I really like who are more or less 7th round rotational players. Examples are run stuffing nose tackles. Really like can just mean they are very good at a certain role. Or that they have some traits you would love to see get more of a chance to develop. Or, you see this massive 350 pound dude stuff every run that comes his way but he is worthless as a pass rusher. I love to watch that but... yeah value wise day 3. Another example is someone who is super athletic but raw. I might really like them but they might not ever work out.

The odds are against most 4th round picks even contributing much at all.

When we think about WR 1s, 2s, 3s it is a production thing. I could see Polk being a 500-900 yard kind of guy. Or busting. If he is more of a 500 or so yard guy 600 yard guy that is a WR3. Maybe he is your clutch chain mover. I like Baker a lot and think he has a top 15-20 WR ceiling. He also has some trap doors where he might not ever realize his potential.

I don't like Bell and don't even view him as a TE. He's a big RAC guy who doesn't even block well. Can't run routes. He's an F type or he's a big gadgety slot.

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

NextBigThing8184 said:
NFL practice squads are littered with guys who were highly graded recruits and flashed a bit at the age of 20.

Not disagreeing with your assessment at all, just observing that every team has a few Boutte types and I think anyone expecting him to be more than practice squad fodder simply because he looked good as a freshman 4 years ago is overly optimistic.

I thought Boutte without the off field issues and injuries was a round 2 kind of prospect. Hell he had been getting mocked in round 1 that same year! Every NFL team doesn't have 1 Boutte type let alone multiple ones. You're underselling how good of a prospect he was before he fell from grace. There aren't that many 5 star guys year to year anyway... there are like 32 per year! Many of them turn into 1st round picks.

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

@NextBigThing8184 I think being on the PS would be great for Boutte. Takes the pressure off of him and lets him put his life in order and develop.

Quick edit: he had good games in 2022 or 2023 or whatever his last year was (tired AF at the moment). His game vs UGA for the SEC championship was electric.

BigJimEd · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Those two things are mutually exclusive. It makes no sense when you think about it for more than a second. I like the Drake Maye pick but doubt he ever improves his footwork and likely won't get a second contract. See? That's just a ridiculous thing to say. It's leaning toward the negative after saying the pick was good. Its contradictory.

That is not an apt comparison at all. It's all about options available at the time.
For example if one thinks a 7th round pick has a 40% chance of being a significant contributor while other options at that spot have at most 20%. Then that's a good pick even if the odds are still against them amounting to much.

dynomite · May 23, 2024

SMU_Sox said:
I thought Boutte without the off field issues and injuries was a round 2 kind of prospect. Hell he had been getting mocked in round 1 that same year! Every NFL team doesn't have 1 Boutte type let alone multiple ones. You're underselling how good of a prospect he was before he fell from grace. There aren't that many 5 star guys year to year anyway... there are like 32 per year! Many of them turn into 1st round picks.

Right, I was absolutely thrilled with taking a shot on Boutte as a 6th round pick. As someone who has been complaining for years that the Pats don't have enough high-upside talent at offensive skill positions, Boutte and Pop Douglas were great targets at that stage in the draft. Not every 6th round pick is going to work out, but Boutte remains an exciting guy to dream on for a rebuilding team.

Now, if the Pats had decided to take a WR with pick 144 in the 5th round that year, I wouldn't have minded getting Puka Nacua instead of Mafi... but I don't have complaints about them taking Boutte and Douglas.

And I know highlight reels are highlight reels, but I can't imagine many guys available in the 6th round of the draft have Boutte's game tape from college (against SEC level competition):

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxR6rTjQFZ0

Eck'sSneakyCheese · May 23, 2024

NextBigThing8184 said:
I like the Bell pick because he has some upside and for a late round pick he has some interesting qualities. But I certainly don’t expect a late pick to be much of a contributor in year 1. He’s likely a healthy scratch or practice squad guy. #3 TE who aren’t good blockers don’t find themselves active on game day often. That’s hardly a pessimistic take.

Boutte/Reagor - I don’t think either makes the roster but Reagor has special teams ability. Boutte showed virtually nothing last year and his off field baggage / character is perhaps a factor. In terms of physical ability, Reagor has more but obviously hasn’t come close to realizing it. As a WR5, I think it’s reasonable to think the guy who can return kicks has a leg up.

Douglas as a role player, I mean, that’s what he is. A complementary slot guy. Perhaps you see him as a legitimate top 2 WR on a good offense but his ceiling IMO is excellent #3.

I like Polk because he’s a high floor type guy but he’s never going to scare defenses. He can’t get separation. I watched him a ton last year and wanted the Pats to draft him but his upside to me is Amendola-esque. Tough, reliable but not someone who scares defenses. And that’s assuming he pans out, which most draft picks don’t. I don’t know if AVP is creative enough to scheme Polk open consistently but Polk has a lot of learning to do if he’s going to be able to beat his man off the snap.

Baker, interesting set of skills but still I would never bet on a 4th round WR to contribute much ever let alone in their rookie year. The success rate of WR taken in that portion of the draft is less than 25% and almost all of those guys have a few interesting skills. I think it’s realistic, hardly pessimistic, to think that it’s unlikely he contributes, and if he does, it will probably take a fair bit of development.

Perhaps you have a ton of faith in Wolf and Groh as being WR scouting gurus or AVP/Hughes having great WR development skills, but there’s really no reason as of now to think the Pats have landed a bunch of stud rookies who will overperform the consensus scouting reports and historical trends. I hope they do. But it would be a huge outlier if they got meaningful contributions from more than 1 of Boutte (essentially a rookie), Bell, Polk and Baker. I could see Polk putting up 40-550-4 or something like that. The others I’m not expecting anything meaningful from. And if Douglas is more than a glorified (but good at his role) complementary player, I don’t see how the other guys (Baker, Boutte and I guess Thornton) get enough snaps to contribute much.

You see TE3 I see FB1. I'm likely wishcasting and I'll admit being overly optimistic. I was caught up on you saying he likely never contributes anything ever. I just can't wrap my head around that. You like the potential of the pick if all falls right maybe? Guess I'm caught up on wording.

Reagor is a KR only. He's almost unplayable as a WR. I take the guy that might produce at his position over a ST only guy.

Douglas, had you said excellent 3 and not role player I wouldn't have questioned it. Role player sounds demeaning.

Polk as Amendola? I guess Danny was productive, especially here, but I think his ceiling is slightly higher. Again, you see low end #2 I see high end #2.

As far as Baker, 4th round this year is a lot different than previous years. WR was loaded this year. Hes a high 3rd, low 2nd rounder most years. More upside than Polk but lower floor.

I have a ton of faith that due to a lack of better options Baker and Polk may see the field more than your normal 2nd or 4th rounders. I also think they are already building a great rapport with Drake. Will they be world beaters this year? Probably not and I think we're in agreement there. Whats the minimum though on overall performance being considered a contribution? At what level does it become meaningful?

NextBigThing8184 said:
You can certainly like a pick and be meh about outcomes. I like the Milton pick a lot because if he hits, he’s going to be very very valuable. Which is more than you can say about most 6th rounders. But the chances of him hitting are tiny.

I like late round picks who have interesting traits and aren’t guys whose absolute perceived ceiling is “rotational RB”, “useful run plugger” or “good special teamer who can maybe backup a position” but usually late round guys who have better ceilings have much worse outcomes because (as with very raw QB’s, or guys with major character/size/speed/quality of competition issues) those guys wouldn’t be available late round unless they were long shots.

I think I understand it now as you like the potential but aren't holding your breath. I guess thats reasonable. You like them picking Milton but are leery of it ever working out. Still seems not right to me but I'll get over it.

Jimbodandy said:
What's great about Bell is his athleticism, but his weight and height stuff is not optimal and he needs development there and a decent amount of coaching up, according to some reports.

He's a project, exactly like most guys taken that late. Nobody should ever expect a guy taken that late to contribute in year one and perhaps ever. But with the athleticism, maybe he's a gold mine down the road. Maybe. I don't think that it's pessimistic to think that we might not get a productive NFL player out of him. We probably won't. But if we do, what value.

Some see project, I see it as a player without a position. Is he a great TE? Not really. Is he great with the ball in his hands? Yes. Can he catch? Yup. Can he block in line? Nope. Can he lead block? Yep. Can he run the ball? Actually, yes. Looks and sounds like an athletic FB to me. That's my hope.

SMU_Sox said:
I think when you say stuff like "odd" and "Weird" instead of "hey what do you mean by this" it creates a combative atmosphere or tone which I am not sure you are meaning to do. Maybe that is how I read it. I didn't think either of his statements were weird FWIW. There are guys I really like who are more or less 7th round rotational players. Examples are run stuffing nose tackles. Really like can just mean they are very good at a certain role. Or that they have some traits you would love to see get more of a chance to develop. Or, you see this massive 350 pound dude stuff every run that comes his way but he is worthless as a pass rusher. I love to watch that but... yeah value wise day 3. Another example is someone who is super athletic but raw. I might really like them but they might not ever work out.

The odds are against most 4th round picks even contributing much at all.

When we think about WR 1s, 2s, 3s it is a production thing. I could see Polk being a 500-900 yard kind of guy. Or busting. If he is more of a 500 or so yard guy 600 yard guy that is a WR3. Maybe he is your clutch chain mover. I like Baker a lot and think he has a top 15-20 WR ceiling. He also has some trap doors where he might not ever realize his potential.

I don't like Bell and don't even view him as a TE. He's a big RAC guy who doesn't even block well. Can't run routes. He's an F type or he's a big gadgety slot.

You're correct and I apologize if it indeed came across that way. I'm going to try to be more careful with my wording. Saying you like the player, pick or the value then immediately acknowledging the lesser outcome just seems off to me. Like I said, I'll get over it but it makes me question the statement.

I like Myles Cole. I think he has a chance to be a beast on that Jags line if he works out. For me to then say but hes a 7th rounder and hes never going to see the field, to me just doesn't align. Acknowledging reality I guess? But then why do you like it? Because of the potential you don't think is going to come to fruition?

BigJimEd said:
That is not an apt comparison at all. It's all about options available at the time.
For example if one thinks a 7th round pick has a 40% chance of being a significant contributor while other options at that spot have at most 20%. Then that's a good pick even if the odds are still against them amounting to much.

But it's like saying its a good pick because of the 40% chance then immediately saying but it won't matter because hes 60% likely to fail. That's where my brain skips.

Jimbodandy · May 23, 2024

Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Some see project, I see it as a player without a position. Is he a great TE? Not really. Is he great with the ball in his hands? Yes. Can he catch? Yup. Can he block in line? Nope. Can he lead block? Yep. Can he run the ball? Actually, yes. Looks and sounds like an athletic FB to me. That's my hope.

Nothing wrong with hope. You might be right.

FWIW, I think that they're not really looking at this year as much about accumulating wins as they are about building up the roster. Maybe he is a fullback, maybe he's a gadget guy who lines up in the backfield, sometimes tight, sometimes split wide, in motion, end arounds. Even they maybe don't know what he's good at yet. But they're probably going to take their time figuring it out. This team isn't a contender with the rosiest of glasses.

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

I have no issue looking at WR 1, 2, 3 as a production expectation. I have an issue with it though in this kind of exercise because I think you would be better served by looking at it from a split end, flanker, slot perspective.

Split ends/X: Reagor, Thornton, J Baker
Flanker/Z: Bourne, Boutte
Slot: Osborne, Pop, Polk

I think Baker and Polk are probably guys who can play all 3 roles but in year 1 Baker is more naturally suited as an X. Osborne, Bourne, and Boutte are slankers (slot-flankers, a portmanteau made by yours truly).

Some think Baker is best as a Z btw and not an X.

Thornton is either a Z or an X and he might profile best as a Z with a free release.

In some ways we don't have anyone who is best as an X depending on how you feel about Baker. Personally I think he is very good there but YMMV. We definitely have little quality depth at X though and we might have to rely on Baker or Polk to handle it. I am super skeptical of Polk as an X in year 1.

Saints Rest · May 23, 2024

I feel like traditionally, -- and I realize Mayo may see this different than BB, but 45 is still 45, -- some ST contributions come from the RB/WR/TE stable. It will be interesting to see who in this depth chart might have value there. I think it's exacerbated by the departure of the various ST-only guys as well as the lack of likely ST contributors from the other 2024 draftees.

Saints Rest · May 23, 2024

SMU_Sox said:
I have no issue looking at WR 1, 2, 3 as a production expectation. I have an issue with it though in this kind of exercise because I think you would be better served by looking at it from a split end, flanker, slot perspective.

Split ends/X: Reagor, Thornton, J Baker
Flanker/Z: Bourne, Boutte
Slot: Osborne, Pop, Polk

I think Baker and Polk are probably guys who can play all 3 roles but in year 1 Baker is more naturally suited as an X. Osborne, Bourne, and Boutte are slankers (slot-flankers, a portmanteau made by yours truly).

Some think Baker is best as a Z btw and not an X.

Thornton is either a Z or an X and he might profile best as a Z with a free release.

In some ways we don't have anyone who is best as an X depending on how you feel about Baker. Personally I think he is very good there but YMMV. We definitely have little quality depth at X though and we might have to rely on Baker or Polk to handle it. I am super skeptical of Polk as an X in year 1.

SMU, can you review for me the different skillsets/body types of an X vs a Z? (Slot I am clear on)

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

Saints Rest said:
SMU, can you review for me the different skillsets/body types of an X vs a Z? (Slot I am clear on)

Sure. Also, I know you are clear on slots but you never know who wants a refresher on it so I am going to throw that in too.

Let's zoom out first though. When you look at the top 20-30 WRs in the NFL the vast majority will lineup outside and are X's. Only 3 WRs are top 15 guys who line up in slot primarily: Ceedee Lamb, Keenan Allen, and ARStB.

X's are stationary. They are on the LOS. They are the ones that don't get a free release. There are two archetypes of an X receiver but the best guys are usually both: 1) Speed and 2) Big Body Possession. Tyreek Hill or Waddle are great examples of speed X's (when they play that position). Brandin Cooks is a speed X. Bigger guys can be speed X's too but typically the smaller guys who play outside are speed X's. Tyquan Thornton was supposed to be a Speed X. Speed X's don't have to be contested catch guys or ball winners because they can beat press and get separation with speed. DeVante Parker is a classic big body possession X. N'Keal Harry was supposed to be a big body possession X. Big body possession guys have to beat press, get enough separation to not have everything be a contested catch, and they have to be contested catch specialists//ball-winners. We often think about how important this skill set is on third downs and in the red zone. A lot of X receivers do not have the best change of direction abilities. They are not going to run a whip route and snap back and forth like a gumby slot would. X's run your gos, posts, corners, digs, deep outs. The best X receivers are a blend of both big body possession and speed: Julio Jones, Randy Moss, DK Metcalf, etc. The truly god-tier ones like Megatron can also change direction well. Many times even the best X's will just be "NFL open" because they are playing with a corner typically in their hip pocket. X's are often given 1:1s matchups and might get man-to-man coverage when everyone else is in zone. While RAC is important to all WR roles it is less important to the X. Although the best WRs in the game, like AJ Brown, can play all 3 roles well and have great RAC too. Most X's are strong route runners as well. Typically X's are big (height and weight) and fast.

Z's can be stationary but they are the guys put into motion. They lineup outside too but unlike X's they are not on the LOS and get a free release. There are multiple types of Z's. The two main archetypes here are: 1) Vertical Z's and 2) Schemed Touch//RAC Z's. Many Z's are a blend of both and the best are excellent at both. Vertical Z's simply win on vertical routes. Many are fast, like Desean Jackson, but some are average to a tick below average speed like Baker and Polk who we just drafted. Some Z's who are less fast tend to be ball winners but not all. Usually the vertical stem guys are also good route runners. Schemed Touch//RAC Z's win because through motion or route combinations and play calls they get the ball in their hands and do damage afterwards. Sometimes they are good route runners but you don't have to be. Kendrick Bourne is a schemed touch or RAC Z. Osborne is too. Puka Nacua was probably the best Z last year. Hill and Waddle also play Z in Miami and they are both fast and have amazing RAC. Puka is not as fast but still wins partly because of scheme and partly because of his route running and ball skills. Typically Z's are not as big (height and weight) as X receivers but they are as fast or faster.

Slots can be stationary or put into motion as well. They lineup inside and get a free release. There are quite a few archetypes for the slot position: 1) Gumby Slot, 2) Vertical Slot, 3) Underneath//RAC//Schemed-Touch slot, 4) Big Slot. As usual the best slots are a combination of some or all of these. Gumby slots are your prototypical BB slots who are great route runners with excellent change of direction. "Quicker than fast" is a common description of these guys but sometimes they are quick AND fast too. Think Wes Welker. Vertical slots excel at vertical routes from the slot. Think Tyler Lockett as a prototype. They are usually fast. I can't think of a slow vertical slot guy even if some slower slots can be adequate vertically. These guys are usually excellent route runners as well. Their change of direction is also typically very good. Underneath//RAC//Schemed-Touch slots are like what we thought JJSS would be. I think this one is pretty self-explanatory. These are the guys who do well with the ball in their hands and the best ones are also excellent underneath route runners like with whip routes, flats, option routes, etc. Big slots should be self explanatory. Sometimes they are borderline possession only guys which is the fear with Polk (and don't get much separation). The prototype here is Anquan Boldin. RAC is also important for most slots because slots in many offenses run the underneath routes. Route running is also important for most slots because they run the most option routes and sharp horizontal stemmed routes. All sorts of body types and athletic profiles can play slot.

SMU_Sox · May 23, 2024

Personally though @Saints Rest my favorite slot receiver is the big slot, my favorite Z is the vertical one, and my favorite X is the big body possession one.

Offensive Depth Chart - skill positions only

slappy happy

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

New Member

Member

slappy happy

Member

queer eye for the next pats guy

Member

Member

Member

queer eye for the next pats guy

queer eye for the next pats guy

queer eye for the next pats guy

Member

Member

Member

Member

queer eye for the next pats guy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

queer eye for the next pats guy

queer eye for the next pats guy