Would you trade up from 18 for a shot at Pitts?? | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Would you trade up from 18 for a shot at Pitts??

MrChadRico said:
I love Pitts, I would trade up a few spots for him 100% .

I'm my dream mock, we trade down to 8 and get Waddle/Smith or Chase and then somehow Pitts falls to 18. Its a pipe dream but it would be amazing.
Click to expand...
How about we trade the 2nd we get from Carolina to move from 18 to 9 and pick Waddle/Smith followed by Pitts. ?
 
Mach2 said:
TBH, we have had pretty bad luck with 30+ year old FAs. They always seem to either get injured, or are just playing out the string on one last payday.

Obviously I have no knowledge of the coaches comfort level with the young guys going forward, but my sense is the team won't spend big on a FA O-line aquisition.

If they have serious concerns, Sewell is probably the way to go. If not, then there is no reason to do anything drastic.

I know ppl pushing hard for Smith/Chase/Waddle/Harris don't want to hear it, but if the FO truly thinks the O-line is not finished, and seriously flawed, they will continue to invest.
Click to expand...

I would also love Sewell at 3 and then either trade back up for Waddle or Pitts OR just stay at 18 and draft a Bateman or Marshall... Thats truly my preference in the draft because I ****in love Sewell, however the idea of getting a Smith/ Pitts combo or a Pitts/Waddle combo is very alluring if we can address OL in fa...
Hell, there's multiple ways to attack this, though. We could trade down slightly and take Pitts in the top 10 or just take him at 3 then take a Marshall or Bateman at 18 then take a RT prospect and a LB or RB prospect in the 2nd round.
We can go about this off season in many ways, but we def have to address OT, WR, RB, LB and NT. I only want a TE if it's Pitts.
 
gregorygrant83 said:
Curious to see if Miami fans would be willing to trade the 18th overall pick and Gesicki to move up and draft Kyle Pitts? The Dolphins might need to toss in a future pick too, but it might be worth it.
Click to expand...
NO! why would you give Gesicky away? the guy thrived with Fitzpatrick, he was frustrated with TUA, TUA needs to grow and learn how to use him.
 
gregorygrant83 said:
Curious to see if Miami fans would be willing to trade the 18th overall pick and Gesicki to move up and draft Kyle Pitts? The Dolphins might need to toss in a future pick too, but it might be worth it.
Click to expand...
trade down, always, trade up never
 
I get that Sewell is a great prospect but I feel like it's alot like taking a QB at #3.

Its a mulligan pick. We just selected a Lt, Rt and Gaurd last draft. Grier took Hunt to play at RT even though everyone here has seemed to either forget that or just ignored the fact Grier said it the day we took Hunt.

I dont like redrafting positions year after year.... let's not forget we took Dieter 2 years ago too. At some point you have to get your moneys worth out of these draft picks.

#3 is just the perfect pick for a trade down if we can get Carolina io do it.
 
Forget Sewell. We don't need him. We have a chance to get two huge playmakers (I know, Dolphins.. playmakers?!) YES! Let's not pass this opportunity up. Offensive linemen, later. Defense later. I like one of the star wide receivers and Pitts, but I think we are getting that order wrong.
 
We don't want Pitts and really we don't want Gesicki. At least not if we are serious about running a RPO based offense with Tua.

Keep in mind we have to block like every play is a running play. We have to sell every play as a RPO play. That pretty much means your TE has to at least pretend to block every play, and when he catches the ball, it will mostly be a slip out and sit down into a soft spot in the zone. We need a guy who can block well and understand the nuances of the game to find those soft spots. Then use his size to block out defenders and get those easy positive yardage plays.

Sure, every now and then he will run a vertical route but that won't be the mainstay of his game. It seems like that is about all Gesicki is good for IMHO.

So we don't need those guys. We need someone more along the lines of Pat Freiermuth. Truthfully our TE doesn't even need to be that good. We need the better talent at WR and RB. In particular our RB's need to be well rounded and be above average at running, catching, and blocking.

One thing we don't need, is anyone on offense that is a "tell". Our WR's have to be capable blockers. The main goal is to pull a safety into the box, then run a vertical along with a deep crosser/post, and force the remaining safety to pick one side of the field or the other. That is when backs and TE's will slip into those vacated areas too.

So yes, we need guys with speed. We need guys that can get separation. We need guys with YAC ability. But what we really need are smart well rounded players who can FOOL you into thinking they are doing something different than what they actually are. Grant and Gesicki aren't fooling you into thinking they are there on 2nd and goal from the 7 for a power run play.
 
Russ57 said:
We don't want Pitts and really we don't want Gesicki. At least not if we are serious about running a RPO based offense with Tua.

Keep in mind we have to block like every play is a running play. We have to sell every play as a RPO play. That pretty much means your TE has to at least pretend to block every play, and when he catches the ball, it will mostly be a slip out and sit down into a soft spot in the zone. We need a guy who can block well and understand the nuances of the game to find those soft spots. Then use his size to block out defenders and get those easy positive yardage plays.

Sure, every now and then he will run a vertical route but that won't be the mainstay of his game. It seems like that is about all Gesicki is good for IMHO.

So we don't need those guys. We need someone more along the lines of Pat Freiermuth. Truthfully our TE doesn't even need to be that good. We need the better talent at WR and RB. In particular our RB's need to be well rounded and be above average at running, catching, and blocking.

One thing we don't need, is anyone on offense that is a "tell". Our WR's have to be capable blockers. The main goal is to pull a safety into the box, then run a vertical along with a deep crosser/post, and force the remaining safety to pick one side of the field or the other. That is when backs and TE's will slip into those vacated areas too.

So yes, we need guys with speed. We need guys that can get separation. We need guys with YAC ability. But what we really need are smart well rounded players who can FOOL you into thinking they are doing something different than what they actually are. Grant and Gesicki aren't fooling you into thinking they are there on 2nd and goal from the 7 for a power run play.
Click to expand...
Who doesnf want giseki?
 
3rdandinches said:
The draft value chart makes it our 18 and 50 for the 10th pick. I would do this in a heart beat, pick up A.Jones RB in FA and our offense starts to look scary especially when D.Smith WR is our 3rd overall pick. Take the best available RT at 36 to bump Hunt inside.
Click to expand...
We could move back from 3 to 8 and pick up a 1st next year and a second this year. At 8 we can still get one of the top 3 wr's and use that 2nd that we just got and our 18 to move back up to get Pitts.
We still get our guys and not having to use anything more than we have right now.
 
Russ57 said:
We don't want Pitts and really we don't want Gesicki. At least not if we are serious about running a RPO based offense with Tua.

Keep in mind we have to block like every play is a running play. We have to sell every play as a RPO play. That pretty much means your TE has to at least pretend to block every play, and when he catches the ball, it will mostly be a slip out and sit down into a soft spot in the zone. We need a guy who can block well and understand the nuances of the game to find those soft spots. Then use his size to block out defenders and get those easy positive yardage plays.

Sure, every now and then he will run a vertical route but that won't be the mainstay of his game. It seems like that is about all Gesicki is good for IMHO.

So we don't need those guys. We need someone more along the lines of Pat Freiermuth. Truthfully our TE doesn't even need to be that good. We need the better talent at WR and RB. In particular our RB's need to be well rounded and be above average at running, catching, and blocking.

One thing we don't need, is anyone on offense that is a "tell". Our WR's have to be capable blockers. The main goal is to pull a safety into the box, then run a vertical along with a deep crosser/post, and force the remaining safety to pick one side of the field or the other. That is when backs and TE's will slip into those vacated areas too.

So yes, we need guys with speed. We need guys that can get separation. We need guys with YAC ability. But what we really need are smart well rounded players who can FOOL you into thinking they are doing something different than what they actually are. Grant and Gesicki aren't fooling you into thinking they are there on 2nd and goal from the 7 for a power run play.
Click to expand...
RPO is actually more about box counts, and hat on hat. There are ways to mitigate what you are alluding to, including motion, alignment, etc. In fact they are basic tools in high level RPO concepts.

I also don't agree that every play has to be sold, and blocked up the same, for it to be effective.

Some coordinators use that philosophy, and build the entire "O" off that base. Others employ it in spots, as a package within a larger system, while keeping more standard plays.

The Falcons did exactly that with Ryan a few years back.
 
Mach2, I'm clearly being simplistic to illustrate a point. You get the concept. Those thinking we need to resign Gesicki and move up for Pitts aren't.

It has nothing to do with rather or not Gesicki and Pitts are TE match up nightmares. They just aren't the right nightmares for us moving forward. Kelce would be though:)

I "really" hope we see a lot more motion and alignment incorporated going forward. I certainly don't want everything blocked up the same. I do like the idea of being sold but I'm totally down on being sold on confusion.....much like our cover zero defense has done at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom