An Argument Against TE at 29

Board Performance Issues We are aware of performance issues on the board and are working to resolve them! The board may be intermittently unavailable during this time. (May 07) x

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!

Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.

An Argument Against TE at 29

Markulous
Veteran
Posts: 2,841
Threads: 9
Joined: Dec 2004
Reputation: 4

#16

04-23-2018, 04:57 PM

(04-23-2018, 04:34 PM)NYC4jags Wrote:
(04-23-2018, 04:27 PM)JackCity Wrote: In year 1? Definitely not for me. I think expecting any rookie to be above average right out of the gate is asking for disappointment, especially outside of the top 15ish blue chip type talent.
I'd hope the rookie showed the promise and traits you drafted him for but ultimately average is the expectation I'd go with.

I'd agree on guard impact wise too.

Yes, in year one.
At Guard specifically. (RG even more specifically)

I don't think it's a position that should be typically drafted early and I think that 2nd and 3rd picks routinely can transition fairly easily and play at an average level as rookies. Therefore - if I'm taking that position in the late first - I want a guy that is a cut above average at right guard right out of the gate.

I think Hernandez, Wynn, Daniels, Price, Ragnow are definitely going to be above average. This class is loaded at the top.

Messages In This Thread

An Argument Against TE at 29 - by Bullseye - 04-23-2018, 11:46 AM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by NYC4jags - 04-23-2018, 12:11 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JNev - 04-23-2018, 12:38 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by Markulous - 04-23-2018, 12:39 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by knarnn - 04-23-2018, 01:09 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by Markulous - 04-23-2018, 01:22 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by pirkster - 04-23-2018, 12:43 PM

An Argument Against TE at 29 - by Andy G - 04-23-2018, 02:02 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JNev - 04-23-2018, 02:48 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by The Real Marty - 04-24-2018, 05:32 AM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JackCity - 04-23-2018, 03:19 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by NYC4jags - 04-23-2018, 03:42 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JackCity - 04-23-2018, 04:12 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by NYC4jags - 04-23-2018, 04:17 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JackCity - 04-23-2018, 04:27 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by NYC4jags - 04-23-2018, 04:34 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by Markulous - 04-23-2018, 04:57 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JackCity - 04-23-2018, 05:21 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by NYC4jags - 04-23-2018, 05:30 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JackCity - 04-23-2018, 06:05 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JaG4LyFe - 04-23-2018, 08:11 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by JaG4LyFe - 04-23-2018, 05:46 PM

RE: An Argument Against TE at 29 - by Deacon - 04-24-2018, 08:44 AM

Users browsing this thread:

1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!

Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.