Chris Cooley for a 1st and a 3rd -- would you do it?

A year ago, I would have dealt a 1st and a 3rd for Gates. He was phenomenal this year, but he had that foot injury, and that risk would at least make me pull the 3rd rounder from the offer. So I agree.

You never give up a 1st for a TE. NEVER. That's a vinny cerrato move if there ever was one.

You never give up a 1st for a TE. NEVER. That's a vinny cerrato move if there ever was one.What's the difference between a tight end, a receiver, and a running back if their marginal value is equal?

You never give up a 1st for a TE. NEVER. That's a vinny cerrato move if there ever was one.

I agree.

I would have for Gates about 3 years ago

What's the difference between a tight end, a receiver, and a running back if their marginal value is equal?

Their value isn't equal and it never will be. You'll never see a TE get paid what a WR or RB does or command the importance those spots due (especially in the draft).


How many TEs have you seen drafted in the top 10 the past decade? Now go back and see how many RBs/WRs have been drafted in the top 10. TE doesn't have the same value. Just like a Full Back will never command the type of value that a TE or WR will.

Their value isn't equal and it never will be. You'll never see a TE get paid what a WR or RB does or command the importance those spots due (especially in the draft).


How many TEs have you seen drafted in the top 10 the past decade? Now go back and see how many RBs/WRs have been drafted in the top 10. TE doesn't have the same value. Just like a Full Back will never command the type of value that a TE or WR will.Actually, I set the value equal in my hypothetical, so you don't have to worry about explaining that. Your job was not to tell me that the values are never equal, it was to tell me why, if values are equal, that you should pay less compensation for a TE than a RB or WR.

I can see, at most, one reason why you could be right on this.

I'm just going to use Gates, because he's the consensus best receiving TE. Not a great blocker, so that hurts his value. But bear with me.

Gates, in 2010, was more valuable than every receiver in the NFL (according to DYAR (http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr)) other than Brandon Lloyd and Mike Wallace. He did this in 12 games. Clearly if there was any skilled player worth two high picks (including a first rounder) based only on last year's production, it's Gates.

I'm just going to use Gates, because he's the consensus best receiving TE. Not a great blocker, so that hurts his value. But bear with me.

Gates, in 2010, was more valuable than every receiver in the NFL (according to DYAR (http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr)) than Brandon Lloyd and Mike Wallace. He did this in 12 games. Clearly if there was any skilled player worth two high picks (including a first rounder) based only on last year's production, it's Gates.

Gates may go down as the best TE when he retires

Gates may go down as the best TE when he retiresPossibly. But I'm just using him because he's the best right now.

Their value isn't equal and it never will be. You'll never see a TE get paid what a WR or RB does or command the importance those spots due (especially in the draft).


How many TEs have you seen drafted in the top 10 the past decade? Now go back and see how many RBs/WRs have been drafted in the top 10. TE doesn't have the same value. Just like a Full Back will never command the type of value that a TE or WR will.

Only kickers and punters make less than RBs. The NFL is a passing game and positions associated with passing and stopping the pass are the highest paid. The days of the big back are over, they are cogs that are replaced every couple of years.