MVP2110 wrote:ReasonablySober wrote:MVP2110 wrote:
You are missing the point. The question was when was the last time a RB was taken in the 1st where another player taken directly after(10-15 picks) wouldn't have been a better pick? You can find plenty of examples of QBs, WRs, OTs, Edge rushers, Secondary where that player picked clearly provided the best value. That hasn't been true since AP and even that is iffy because Revis went 7 picks later.
And I just gave you a list of players at "more important positions" taken higher than a RB or WR that ended up being worse. There's only been three TEs taken in the first since 2018. Kmet and Hockenson have both played with crappy QBs. Pitts too, but I'd trade #15 for him in a heartbeat.
My opposition to drafting a TE in the 1st has never been about positional value. A great tight end can have a major effect on winning and I'm not disputing that at all(unlike rb where SB winners often don't have a stud RB)
My opposition to taking a TE in the 1st is because I don't think NFL evaluators or draft niks have learned how to properly evaluate the position coming out of college. The hit rate on mid-late round tight ends is very similar to that of 1st round tight ends. Basically I don't trust that we've learned to identify which tight ends will hit or bust compared to other positions which hit on a much higher rate
A huge part of the reason is supply and demand. There simply aren't many (if any) elite tight end prospects in any given year. It's also a position where if you have one you're not going to prioritize getting another. But every team needs at least two tackles or three cornerbacks and a few guys who can get to the QB. But it's not like there aren't huge first round busts at those positions literally every single year.
