How did last yrs. OL affect the WR play?

[DPhinz_DPhinz]

The problem I have with that, is that I don't see any of the "top" 3 wideouts (Chase being the best of the three, and likely gone at #6) as great talents from an historical perspective.

What about the top 5 pass catchers?

See anyone that could be a factor in your historical perspective?

 

[Mach2]

What about the top 5 pass catchers?

See anyone that could be a factor in your historical perspective?

If I understand your question correctly, I would say Pitts has the potential, if the team with which he ends up can be creative enough to use him to his full potential.

What is the meaning of your reference to "5 pass catchers", as opposed to WRs? Are you trying to include RBs, or do you have another wideout in mind?

 

[DPhinz_DPhinz]

If I understand your question correctly, I would say Pitts has the potential, if the team with which he ends up can be creative enough to use him to his full potential.

What is the meaning of your reference to "5 pass catchers", as opposed to WRs? Are you trying to include RBs, or do you have another wideout in mind?

No RBs. I meant Pitts.

How would you access Pitts' potential to be a difference maker...on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being the worse and 10 being the best. Let's call 7 average.

 

[Mach2]

No RBs. I meant Pitts.

How would you access Pitts' potential to be a difference maker...on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being the worse and 10 being the best. Let's call 7 average.

I think the "unicorn" descriptor is an accurate one.

I've never been one to support "tweeners" as good bets, but I think Pitts' rather unique combination of size, speed and athletic abilities will allow him to be a mismatch nightmare. He could potentially line up anywhere outside of the tackles, and force defensive adjustment. This will help every receiver on the field.

His "potential" to be a difference maker I put at 9 on your scale (I don't believe in 10s),

Before now, I would never have even suggested taking a TE in the top of rd1.