Longgone

Here is the disconnect. You claim that tight ends lack value because not many work out. Tight ends have tremendous value because it is a very difficult position to play well and requires a rare blend of attributes; size, strength, speed, agility, quicks, smarts. If you have a good one, they are gold. Secondly, Hockenson was a very productive receiver. To diminish his role in the offense because they weren't winning is disingenuous. I believe he had some issues with blocking, focus and route running that soured Detroit on him, but if you think the current trio is in any way, shape or form an equal talent replacement for Hockenson, much less a potentially more balanced top tight end, then I question your judgement.

You keep repeating these things and they just aren't true, Hockenson was a key component of Detroit's passing game. Detroit in no way runs an offense that devalues tight ends, it does require them to block, however. Stating a slot receiver can replace all that a top te can do is ignorance, the roles complement and supplemental each other. A te that can threaten 3 levels would only open things up for arsb.

They did, he had 43 targets in 7 games and 84 targets in 12 games in '21, that's a pretty key component, yet I think he frustrated them to some degree. And this is not to mention the added value to the run game that a TE brings, an area where I believe Hockenson was also short.

And it needs to be explained again that a premium TE , would be an integral part of this offense, because a top te can create mismatches that can't be replicated with other positions. If you don't think Johnson and Campbell would take advantage of that, you're nuts.

No one is saying draft one in the first round, or overdraft one, only that the position group is weak and worthy of upgrade. And no, TE as a position does not lack value, its a very important position, it's just that a complete one is hard to find. It's stupid to compare it to a long snapper. But to follow your logic, guard is not as valuable as tackle, does that mean you shouldn't bother to upgrade a mediocre guard position group?

The point is, using the fact they traded Hockenson as rationale for maintaining mediocre tight ends is absurd. Any position you upgrade gives you a competitive advantage, and tight end is not somehow exempt from that or of lesser importance, despite the fact that you managed to scheme around it.

Or, they were 1-6 and unhappy with Hockensons performance, and made a decision they were not going to re-sign him, so they got something for him of value for the future.

Cheap, below average talent-wise, and certainly upgradeable

"And they are absolutely, perfectly fine with mediocre TE's." "the Lions are perfectly content to go with Mitchell, Wright & Zylstra again next year." who's full of bullshit?

No, I said there was justification for upgrading the position and I wouldn't bitch about it, not that i wanted or expected it. Mostly I strenuously disagree with your premise that no upgrade is needed for the specious reasons you offered.

Pretending you know how they will value individual players is cute. And I never said one word about taking anyone in the first round.

That's not at all my argument. Of course some other position groups may more desperately be in need of an upgrade. But you don't overlook the tight end position if that player is the best value on your board, and that position is not currently a strength in your system, and you certainly don't pass them up for the illogical reasons that you have presented, presuming that you know how Holmes and Campbell value tight ends.

The concept that you don't need to upgrade a position group because " they were just fine with what they had last year" is ludicrous. The idea is simple; better talent gives you better matchups and a competitive advantage, and this is just as true at TE as any other position. The thinking that you don't need to upgrade talent because you can scheme around it is faulty.

You are making assumptions based on particular circumstances. If Johnson/Campbell have a weapon they will use it, they don't have a rote offense. TE talent right now is below average and could use an upgrade.

That was based on the personnel he had, not how he would utilize a prospective new draft pick.

This just isn't true, they use their personnel to their strengths, whatever those may be, and surely, this is one position group that can use an upgrade, a top tight end is a unique weapon and can open up other aspects of an offense. and you are very unlikely to get any kind of an upgrade in the later rounds. I do agree that other positions likely have priority right now.

I absolutely agree with this and I'd be shocked if they took one that early, however, there a a few freaky te prospects who will surely be gone by the lions 3rd round pick that would be a lot of fun in their offense.

Maybe that was more Hockenson, and circumstances than the position.

They don't need another mediocre tight end. If they choose to upgrade, that's nothing to bitch about.

I know lions fans are techy about drafting a tight end high, but it is one of their weaker position groups, they run a lot of two te sets, and a top te would open up a lot of other possibilities for their offense.

Probably none of the corners have value at 6.

Purportedly the intent is to reduce the odds of long extra innings games, burning out pitching staffs.

The benefit is that you have two of them, of course you want a te who can also occasionally handle a de inline.

A Travis Kelce.

Every player is a composite. Whether he creates runs or prevents them, both have value. Get players who offer the most overall value, you don't focus on just one obvious factor.