2013 UNIT REVIEW: Tight End

[MaineMan]

TIGHT END (Hernandez is with the WRs)

GRONK .......(2610) (2700) (5600) (6600) ... contracted thru 2017
FELLS ........(1408) (1658) (2158) (UFA)
HERMAN-IR ..(390) .(480) .(570) (RFA)
BALLARD-IR .(540) (ERFA)

GRONK (6062/265) - Nothing I can add except that I really hope he can stay healthy for an entire season through the playoffs and the Superbowl.

FELLS (6033/259) was disappointing to me. Though I realize he had health issues, I expected him to be much more heavily involved in the running game as a blocker and to catch at least a few more passes than the 4 he did. At this point, I can't even say that Fells would have been all that much help as Gronk's backup/replacement in the last SB - just better than the nothing the Pats had. Fells is under contract, so there's at least some insurance there in case Ballard doesn't work out as well as we hope, but I'm not at all sure that that's worth his cap hit.

HERMAN (6044/253) is a complete unknown to me, but he's dirt cheap and already under contract and may well stick around through OTAs/Camp if he's recovered from his Achilles tear. If not, another developmental UDFA may replace him for OTAs/Camp/PS. He's not really relevant unless he turns out to be really special.

BALLARD (6061/275) really had only the one good season for the Giants in 2011 (13 starts, 38/604, 4 TDs) and there's no way to know for certain he can even come close to repeating that after a year out of football re-habbing a knee. If he DOES, it almost certainly makes Fells expendable. As an ERFA, though, the Pats pretty much get to dictate terms to Ballard. I'd guess maybe two years and I can't imagine his 2013 hit being much above $1.5M.

I'm guessing that the plan is to have Gronk and Ballard as the dynamic duo at TE with one more guy not named Hernandez (3 TEs, total) as a reserve/special-teamer/ player for 3 TE sets. For that role, he'll probably need to be able to block very well and catch a little. And, really, it shouldn't be all that difficult to do better than Fells and Hooman, even with a new UDFA. The big caveat here is that, if Ballard is going to flop, they probably won't know until well after the draft and after the best FAs are gone. Thus, Fells/Hooman probably stick around into Camp.

UNIT CAP HIT for 2013 around $5.0M-$6.0M.

[midgar8784]

Originally Posted by MaineMan

TIGHT END (Hernandez is with the WRs)

GRONK .......(2610) (2700) (5600) (6600) ... contracted thru 2017
FELLS ........(1408) (1658) (2158) (UFA)
HERMAN-IR ..(390) .(480) .(570) (RFA)
BALLARD-IR .(540) (ERFA)

GRONK (6062/265) - Nothing I can add except that I really hope he can stay healthy for an entire season through the playoffs and the Superbowl.

FELLS (6033/259) was disappointing to me. Though I realize he had health issues, I expected him to be much more heavily involved in the running game as a blocker and to catch at least a few more passes than the 4 he did. At this point, I can't even say that Fells would have been all that much help as Gronk's backup/replacement in the last SB - just better than the nothing the Pats had. Fells is under contract, so there's at least some insurance there in case Ballard doesn't work out as well as we hope, but I'm not at all sure that that's worth his cap hit.

HERMAN (6044/253) is a complete unknown to me, but he's dirt cheap and already under contract and may well stick around through OTAs/Camp if he's recovered from his Achilles tear. If not, another developmental UDFA may replace him for OTAs/Camp/PS. He's not really relevant unless he turns out to be really special.

BALLARD (6061/275) really had only the one good season for the Giants in 2011 (13 starts, 38/604, 4 TDs) and there's no way to know for certain he can even come close to repeating that after a year out of football re-habbing a knee. If he DOES, it almost certainly makes Fells expendable. As an ERFA, though, the Pats pretty much get to dictate terms to Ballard. I'd guess maybe two years and I can't imagine his 2013 hit being much above $1.5M.

I'm guessing that the plan is to have Gronk and Ballard as the dynamic duo at TE with one more guy not named Hernandez (3 TEs, total) as a reserve/special-teamer/ player for 3 TE sets. For that role, he'll probably need to be able to block very well and catch a little. And, really, it shouldn't be all that difficult to do better than Fells and Hooman, even with a new UDFA. The big caveat here is that, if Ballard is going to flop, they probably won't know until well after the draft and after the best FAs are gone. Thus, Fells/Hooman probably stick around into Camp.

UNIT CAP HIT for 2013 around $5.0M-$6.0M.

Something happen to Hernandez?

[grog]

Originally Posted by midgar8784

Something happen to Hernandez?

If you've been following along with these post superbowl threads you'd have seen that everyone considers him part of the WRs. In fact, you argued about him not being any good at WR jump ball type throws.

[midgar8784]

Originally Posted by grog

If you've been following along with these post superbowl threads you'd have seen that everyone considers him part of the WRs. In fact, you argued about him not being any good at WR jump ball type throws.

And I still think of him being considered with the TE's as I think he will still be used as that as well, so thats why I asked about him not being here, although "everyone" considers him a receiver? Not sure thats true. I thought he would be in both posts....although I am not sure about the jump ball type guy, I said I had not seen him not do that. So its hard to say what he is good at if I had not seen him do it..I wonder though, if Ballard can really fill a role like that. I mean what do we really know about him other than he had a ok season one year.

[BostonTim]

Originally Posted by midgar8784

And I still think of him being considered with the TE's as I think he will still be used as that as well, so thats why I asked about him not being here, although "everyone" considers him a receiver? Not sure thats true. I thought he would be in both posts....although I am not sure about the jump ball type guy, I said I had not seen him not do that. So its hard to say what he is good at if I had not seen him do it..I wonder though, if Ballard can really fill a role like that. I mean what do we really know about him other than he had a ok season one year.

What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet... .

Juliet

Cheers, BostonTim

[MaineMan]

Originally Posted by midgar8784

And I still think of him being considered with the TE's as I think he will still be used as that as well, so thats why I asked about him not being here, although "everyone" considers him a receiver? Not sure thats true. I thought he would be in both posts....although I am not sure about the jump ball type guy, I said I had not seen him not do that. So its hard to say what he is good at if I had not seen him do it..I wonder though, if Ballard can really fill a role like that. I mean what do we really know about him other than he had a ok season one year.

Honestly, it is a somewhat murky situation with Hernandez.

I couldn't put him with with both units since one of the main objectives of the "Reviews" was to derive a hypothetical Unit cap-hit and I didn't want to be counting him twice. I chose to include him with WRs instead of TEs because of the way I see his actual functional role on the field, regardless of his "official" positional designation (just like I wouldn't include Slater with the WRs).

In my view, one of the primary goals for the multiple-TE attack is to improve blocking for the ground game while simultaneously putting legit receiving threats on the field in order to keep a defense guessing. Gronk and Ballard fulfill both those requirements (well, we hope Ballard will, anyway). OTOH, Hernandez does almost nothing for run-blocking on the LoS and is almost exclusively a receiving threat.

This is not to say that Hernandez won't continue to line up in a TE spot from time-to-time (probably as a 3rd-TE, if Ballard plays well), just as he may continue to line up as a FB occasionally (though I wouldn't include him with the FBs, either). However, the offense seems highly unlikely to be dependent on him blocking for the ball-carrier from those spots.

[midgar8784]

Originally Posted by MaineMan

Honestly, it is a somewhat murky situation with Hernandez.

I couldn't put him with with both units since one of the main objectives of the "Reviews" was to derive a hypothetical Unit cap-hit and I didn't want to be counting him twice. I chose to include him with WRs instead of TEs because of the way I see his actual functional role on the field, regardless of his "official" positional designation (just like I wouldn't include Slater with the WRs).

In my view, one of the primary goals for the multiple-TE attack is to improve blocking for the ground game while simultaneously putting legit receiving threats on the field in order to keep a defense guessing. Gronk and Ballard fulfill both those requirements (well, we hope Ballard will, anyway). OTOH, Hernandez does almost nothing for run-blocking on the LoS and is almost exclusively a receiving threat.

This is not to say that Hernandez won't continue to line up in a TE spot from time-to-time (probably as a 3rd-TE, if Ballard plays well), just as he may continue to line up as a FB occasionally (though I wouldn't include him with the FBs, either). However, the offense seems highly unlikely to be dependent on him blocking for the ball-carrier from those spots.

I guess its that unknown with ballard, I think when Gronk went down they threw him into more of a block role, with gronk in they were spliting him out in the slot a few times.

[MaineMan]

Originally Posted by midgar8784

I guess its that unknown with ballard, I think when Gronk went down they threw him into more of a block role, with gronk in they were spliting him out in the slot a few times.

Yeah, I'm sure I saw Hernandez doing dome traditional TE blocking from time-to-time when Gronk was out, even though McD had to know that it wasn't optimal. It may have been because, mediocre as Hernandez is as a blocker, it was probably better to keep him on the field than to substitute Fells.

Seems like it used to be difficult to find a TE who was good as a receiver while very good blocking TEs were a dime-a-dozen. There's still no surplus of receiving TEs (who are actually good), but it also seems to have become harder to find TEs who can really block well. The Niners are apparently very eager to keep Delanie Walker even though the guy dropped just under 18% of his targets in 2012. For comparison, Welker's drops amounted to about 5% of his targets. Delanie Walker is an extremely effective run-blocker and special teamer, though.

My hope for Ballard is that he turns out to be as great a run-blocker as Gronk has been, even if he ends up catching only 30 for 350 or so and a few TDs over the course of 16 full games (IOW, he stays healthy). That would be a huge improvement over Fells and Hooman combined and allow Hernandez to more thoroughly exploit his receiving talents.

[MaineMan]

Reiss posted today that since Ballard wasn't active in enough games as a rookie, he didn't accrue an official "season" and, thus, his 2012 contract tolls into 2013 (at $630k) and he's not an ERFA until 2014. IOW, the Pats control his rights for TWO years, not just the one.

What's interesting, though --- Myron Pryor's 2012 contract tolled into 2013 because he was never activated off PUP last season. But the same also applies to Ballard, so is Reiss simply mistaken as to the reason why Ballard's contract tolled into 2013, or could it be that Ballard actually has THREE years to go yet?

Anyway, we don't have to worry about his 2013 cap-hit maybe being higher. And, if he proves to be even 75% as good as Gronk, they can pay him in 2014.

[MaineMan]

Combine review:

First, there's Mayock's "Three E's": Eifert, Ertz, Escobar. They're probably a bit oversold. I mean, it's Mayock and the market is well-primed for TEs. Eifert seems like the real deal, though.

The thing for me is that they're all basically Hernandez - good (perhaps very good) receivers, but blocking isn't a strong point (and may never be).

Gronk, IMHO, is a critical piece in the Pats offense because he run-blocks so well. Defenses don't know whether he's staying in or going out, so play-action is very well enhanced and the ground game benefits a lot.

The guy at the Combine who appears to offer that Gronk-like quality the most is actually Vance McDonald. I mean, he's not Gronk, of course, but he offers the tactical advantage that Gronk does more than the others.

[chevss454]

Originally Posted by MaineMan

Combine review:

First, there's Mayock's "Three E's": Eifert, Ertz, Escobar. They're probably a bit oversold. I mean, it's Mayock and the market is well-primed for TEs. Eifert seems like the real deal, though.

The thing for me is that they're all basically Hernandez - good (perhaps very good) receivers, but blocking isn't a strong point (and may never be).

Gronk, IMHO, is a critical piece in the Pats offense because he run-blocks so well. Defenses don't know whether he's staying in or going out, so play-action is very well enhanced and the ground game benefits a lot.

The guy at the Combine who appears to offer that Gronk-like quality the most is actually Vance McDonald. I mean, he's not Gronk, of course, but he offers the tactical advantage that Gronk does more than the others.

I agree. Eifert is a lot like AHern & McDonald is a lot like Gronk.