SageAgainstTheMachine Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Question: What do all of us here on TBD have in common with Brandon Pettigrew? Answer: We all scored 0 touchdowns for Oklahoma this past season. That's right, zero, zilch, nil, none. In a high scoring, pass-happy offense, the "best tight end in the draft" caught zero touchdown passes last year. Doesn't that give you a little bit of pause? All physical skills and blocking abilities aside, his production at Oklahoma over 4 years is uninspiring to say the least. 112 receptions, 1,450 yards, 9 touchdowns over 4 years (I believe 3 of them as a starter) If he's so great, why are those numbers not better? I realize he's got a reputation as a good blocker, but if that's what we're looking for, blocking tight ends are a dime a dozen in the later rounds. Round 2, Chase Coffman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Question: What do all of us here on TBD have in common with Brandon Pettigrew? Answer: We all scored 0 touchdowns for Oklahoma this past season. That's right, zero, zilch, nil, none. In a high scoring, pass-happy offense, the "best tight end in the draft" caught zero touchdown passes last year. Doesn't that give you a little bit of pause? All physical skills and blocking abilities aside, his production at Oklahoma over 4 years is uninspiring to say the least. 112 receptions, 1,450 yards, 9 touchdowns over 4 years (I believe 3 of them as a starter) If he's so great, why are those numbers not better? I realize he's got a reputation as a good blocker, but if that's what we're looking for, blocking tight ends are a dime a dozen in the later rounds. Round 2, Chase Coffman. ummm he played for Oklahoma st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Yeah, but if Pettigrew were on that team, do you think they would find times to use him as an in-line blocker? The talents of their tight end undoubtedly have a huge impact on what offense they run. I don't think Pettigrew, as talented as he is, plays much in that offense. Would they "find times" to use him? I would hope so, but that assumes an open minded coach who thinks a little outside of the box. It always surprised me to hear some Run-and-Shoot teams in the NFL (the old Houston Oilers, for one) didn't even have a TE on the roster. "WTF, is up with that?" I asked. Well apparently a TE isn't "used" in the run-and-shoot. Well, on the goal line, there is no run-and-shoot, there is only "try to score a TD"...and there are plenty of times when a TE would do a world of good. In the same way, I would think a Pettigrew would manage to help Missou in certain situations. But, is he recruited to play there, in that offense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 even his sister Camille listed at 6' 3" is attending Wyoming on a full ride scholarship for volleyball. pic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I fully agree - though I would also add OL to the list of needs that are higher than TE. Bottom line - why would we reach for Pettigrew at #11 when TE is not even in our top 3 list of needs? I can only give you my opinion here, but here it is. Why cut it off at three? We have four primary needs. One of them is TE. Particularly if (as I think will happen) Curry, Crabtree, Orakpo, Raji and Brown are gone at #11, and maybe Maybin as well, there will be no obvious player at one of those four positions of need who sticks out as being a much better value than the others. In that scenario, after the top 3 DEs, there is a major drop, and the next DE who can rush the passer would probably be ranked well below the first rounders left at our positions of need. At that point, we would be looking at Cushing, Peria Jerry, maybe Andre Smith, though he might well be gone also, and Mack. None of those guys are slam dunks at #11, let's face it. So at that point, if you think that Pettigrew is a better prospect than the others, that's the way you would go. As a blocking AND recieving TE, he would improve BOTH the passing game AND the running game, unlike virtually all the other TEs available this year. There is a huge drop-off among TEs after Pettigrew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Question: What do all of us here on TBD have in common with Brandon Pettigrew? Answer: We all scored 0 touchdowns for Oklahoma this past season. That's right, zero, zilch, nil, none. In a high scoring, pass-happy offense, the "best tight end in the draft" caught zero touchdown passes last year. Doesn't that give you a little bit of pause? All physical skills and blocking abilities aside, his production at Oklahoma over 4 years is uninspiring to say the least. 112 receptions, 1,450 yards, 9 touchdowns over 4 years (I believe 3 of them as a starter) If he's so great, why are those numbers not better? I realize he's got a reputation as a good blocker, but if that's what we're looking for, blocking tight ends are a dime a dozen in the later rounds. Round 2, Chase Coffman. FYI, Oklahoma St. had more yards rushing than yards passing last year. Pettigrew missed 4 games last year and still managed 42 receptions 472 yards, if you prorate that he would of had 63 catches 700 yds He also the two years before that had 8 td's in a limited role. You got you're facts wrong my friend. this guy is not a dime a dozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Question: What do all of us here on TBD have in common with Brandon Pettigrew? Answer: We all scored 0 touchdowns for Oklahoma this past season. That's right, zero, zilch, nil, none. In a high scoring, pass-happy offense, the "best tight end in the draft" caught zero touchdown passes last year. Doesn't that give you a little bit of pause? All physical skills and blocking abilities aside, his production at Oklahoma over 4 years is uninspiring to say the least. 112 receptions, 1,450 yards, 9 touchdowns over 4 years (I believe 3 of them as a starter) If he's so great, why are those numbers not better? I realize he's got a reputation as a good blocker, but if that's what we're looking for, blocking tight ends are a dime a dozen in the later rounds. Round 2, Chase Coffman. I'm sorry, did you say a pass-happy offense. Try run-happy. They averaged nearly 60 rushes a game. You can't catch TDs if the QB doesn't throw to you, or if the OC doesn't call your plays. Pettigrew was out for 3 games this year with a high-ankle sprain if I remember correctly, so that also undoubtedly affected his stats. But he had 4 TDs the year before and 4 the year before that, in a RUN-HAPPY offense. If you'll just look at ANY draft pundit, and I mean any of them, they all say that he is not just a blocker but a reciever as well. NOT a guy who will catch long ones, I have to agree with you there. But he is absolutely a guy who will be a fine short-to-mediium range weapon, and unlike the other TEs, Pettigrew will be unpredictable, since you won't know what he's doing on any play as he can do both things. There is a reason he is a first-round prospect, the only one at TE this year, unlike all those dime-a-dozen blocking TEs in the later rounds. EDIT: Thanks, Magox. You said it better than I could have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Obviously, I haven't said we are going to pick him. I just don't know. Just that if things fall the way I think they will, and if we can't trade back, we will have a tough choice, and Pettigrew will be one of the guys in the small group we would be considering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I don't think Pettigrew, as talented as he is, plays much in that offense. Would they "find times" to use him? I would hope so, but that assumes an open minded coach who thinks a little outside of the box. It always surprised me to hear some Run-and-Shoot teams in the NFL (the old Houston Oilers, for one) didn't even have a TE on the roster. "WTF, is up with that?" I asked. Well apparently a TE isn't "used" in the run-and-shoot. Well, on the goal line, there is no run-and-shoot, there is only "try to score a TD"...and there are plenty of times when a TE would do a world of good. In the same way, I would think a Pettigrew would manage to help Missou in certain situations. But, is he recruited to play there, in that offense? Is he recruited there? That's a good question, but guys physically change, wildly, at that age. In some circumstances. How long have they had that offense there? Is it a long-term thing? Or just a reaction to personnel? I don't know. Do you? Does anybody on this thread? Do they run the spread 100% of the time? On short-yardage too? 4th and short? Anyway, those are good questions and good points, but I find it hard to believe that even in a team that mostly plays a spread offense that the guy has never been taught to block. There are fine points to blocking but the main thing is simply getting physical and doing it. Is Coffman, at 244, likely to become a good one? I just don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Question: What do all of us here on TBD have in common with Brandon Pettigrew? Answer: We all scored 0 touchdowns for Oklahoma this past season. That's right, zero, zilch, nil, none. In a high scoring, pass-happy offense, the "best tight end in the draft" caught zero touchdown passes last year. Doesn't that give you a little bit of pause? All physical skills and blocking abilities aside, his production at Oklahoma over 4 years is uninspiring to say the least. 112 receptions, 1,450 yards, 9 touchdowns over 4 years (I believe 3 of them as a starter) If he's so great, why are those numbers not better? I realize he's got a reputation as a good blocker, but if that's what we're looking for, blocking tight ends are a dime a dozen in the later rounds. Round 2, Chase Coffman. Even with 0 tds this year, he still had more college tds than Witten and Tony G. And with a guy like Coffman, how many of those "receiving" TEs actually become big time players in the pros? Why put a slower receiver out there? A guy like BP is made to be a TE in Buffalo. At the absolute worst case, we have an additional tackle out there. I love BP becuase he offers to bring 2 dimensions to the offense with his blocking and receiving ability. Trade down, take BP, and watch Trent have a monster season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bourbonboy Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 As a blocking AND recieving TE, he would improve BOTH the passing game AND the running game, unlike virtually all the other TEs available this year. There is a huge drop-off among TEs after Pettigrew. Agreed - but IMHO, these improvements would not make the Bills significantly better as a team, at least not this year while we have T.O. as a receiving threat. Using T.O., Evans, our RB, and Reed as our WR #3, there is not a big need for a receiving TE (teams with two stud wideouts seldom use the TE as a receiver often); and if we're looking for blocking, I'm not sure how much of an upgrade Pettigrew is over our current TE's or others that would be available much later in the draft. Picking at #11, we can and should get more of an impact player for our team. I like spot #11, because even if the top DE's that you mentioned are all gone by #11, then this means that there should still be a stud OT available. Or, at the worst case, Sanchez will still be there, and I still think there would be takers for Sanchez. We could trade down and pick up a valuable extra 2nd or 3rd round pick, then maybe we take Pettigrew or Ayers with a lower 1st round pick. Barring trades, no team after us is likely to take Pettigrew before the Eagles at #21, and this is the only scenario that I could see that makes sense for the Bills (and this is only an emergency plan B if we can't get a top talent at DE or OT at #11). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Agreed - but IMHO, these improvements would not make the Bills significantly better as a team, at least not this year while we have T.O. as a receiving threat. Using T.O., Evans, our RB, and Reed as our WR #3, there is not a big need for a receiving TE (teams with two stud wideouts seldom use the TE as a receiver often); and if we're looking for blocking, I'm not sure how much of an upgrade Pettigrew is over our current TE's or others that would be available much later in the draft. Picking at #11, we can and should get more of an impact player for our team. I like spot #11, because even if the top DE's that you mentioned are all gone by #11, then this means that there should still be a stud OT available. Or, at the worst case, Sanchez will still be there, and I still think there would be takers for Sanchez. We could trade down and pick up a valuable extra 2nd or 3rd round pick, then maybe we take Pettigrew or Ayers with a lower 1st round pick. Barring trades, no team after us is likely to take Pettigrew before the Eagles at #21, and this is the only scenario that I could see that makes sense for the Bills (and this is only an emergency plan B if we can't get a top talent at DE or OT at #11). But what you are not taking into consideration is that Pettigrew is not just a receiving TE he is a devastating blocker. He will be probably as good in his first year as Royal and surely much better than anyone we have right now on the blocking side of things, and will be most likely an upgrade in the receiving end. He is a huge target, nimble for his size, much much better hands than Royal and will give us a big, good Red Zone target. I think he will be major asset to acquire, specially for Trent Edwards. Regarding your statement of an impact player. I really think that you are not too familiar with Pettigrew. In my view he is the most NFL ready player in the draft. I believe he would make more of an impact in his rookie year than just about any other player coming through this years draft. Good blocking in his rookie year. 50 receptions, 500 yards and 5 TD's. That is the sort of impact I believe he would make for us in his rookie year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 FYI, Oklahoma St. had more yards rushing than yards passing last year. Pettigrew missed 4 games last year and still managed 42 receptions 472 yards, if you prorate that he would of had 63 catches 700 yds He also the two years before that had 8 td's in a limited role. You got you're facts wrong my friend. this guy is not a dime a dozen. He actually doesn't have his facts wrong (outside of the OSU-OU thingy), he just chooses to interpret them differently than you (& I). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 He actually doesn't have his facts wrong (outside of the OSU-OU thingy), he just chooses to interpret them differently than you (& I). I did know he went to oklahoma state, it was just a typo in the original...and I thought they were more of a passing team than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I wouldn't take Pettigrew at 11 but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want him on my team- If I was running a offense I'd want 2 game breakers and three grinders - Evans and T.O. are game breakers so I'd be very happy with Lynch, Pettigrew, and Reed as my grinders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I did know he went to oklahoma state, it was just a typo in the original...and I thought they were more of a passing team than that... ...but other than that... Just yanking your chain, Sage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OklahomaBill Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I don't know how it works but I imagine when teams workout Coffman they put him through blocking drills. IF he shows potential as a blocker I would think he would shoot up draft boards. It is not so much that Coffman didn't block but that he never even lined up at TE in college. He was basically a big WR. He is a talent and I wouldn't mind picking him up if he is around in third. As many have already said, Oklahoma State is pretty unique among spread offenses. They really use their spread to run the ball. Pettigrew also missed about a fourth of the season and the coaches probably did not do enough to highlight him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 ...but other than that... Just yanking your chain, Sage. haha I know, I'm not infallible, and I'm far from a draft expert...it's one of the few aspects of sports that never piqued my interest...i largely concern myself with who the bills pick after they pick them I was, however, giddy whenever I saw Coffman play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 haha I know, I'm not infallible, and I'm far from a draft expert...it's one of the few aspects of sports that never piqued my interest...i largely concern myself with who the bills pick after they pick them I was, however, giddy whenever I saw Coffman play as a schoolgirl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrobot Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 He actually doesn't have his facts wrong (outside of the OSU-OU thingy), he just chooses to interpret them differently than you (& I). He actually does. He says Blocking TE's are a dime a dozen in the later rounds. Other than Pettigrew, there are NO potential starters at TE who will block at all. IMHO, if we don't take Pettigrew, it's 50-50 if we even draft a TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts