Gronkowski123
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2012
- Messages
- 10,384
- Reaction score
- 5,791
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.List of TEs I would definitely take over Chandler, on account of production and/or potential:
Gronk
Jimmy Graham
Jason Witten
Greg Olsen
Martellus Bennett
Travis Kelce
Delanie Walker
Antonio Gates
Dwayne Allen
Charles Clay
Vernon Davis
Coby Fleener
Jermaine Gresham
Tyler Eifert
Jordan Cameron
Kyle Rudolph
Jared Cook
Julius Thomas
Jordan Reed
Austin Seferian-Jenkins
That's 20 right there, and there's a few more like Marcedes Lewis that are just about on the same level. Granted, some of the younger guys still have a *lot* more to prove, but I'd still take their potential over Chandler's established ceiling if I had a pick of one or the other. And that's not trashing on the guy; I like Chandler and think he will add real value to this offense. He's a good player and the team is better with him on it. But there are plenty of young TEs that have a lot more promise than he does, and plenty of TEs closer to him in age who are better.
List of TEs I would definitely take over Chandler, on account of production and/or potential:
Gronk
Jimmy Graham
Jason Witten
Greg Olsen
Martellus Bennett
Travis Kelce
Delanie Walker
Antonio Gates
Dwayne Allen
Charles Clay
Vernon Davis
Coby Fleener
Jermaine Gresham
Tyler Eifert
Jordan Cameron
Kyle Rudolph
Jared Cook
Julius Thomas
Jordan Reed
Austin Seferian-Jenkins
That's 20 right there, and there's a few more like Marcedes Lewis that are just about on the same level. Granted, some of the younger guys still have a *lot* more to prove, but I'd still take their potential over Chandler's established ceiling if I had a pick of one or the other. And that's not trashing on the guy; I like Chandler and think he will add real value to this offense. He's a good player and the team is better with him on it. But there are plenty of young TEs that have a lot more promise than he does, and plenty of TEs closer to him in age who are better.
That's fair, but I'm not really sure what the point is in comparing him against starters. $2.25M for this season is more than reasonable for one of the best #2 TEs in the league on a team that plays a ton of multi-TE sets.
And while drops are a subjective topic, it's interesting to note Chandler, bad hands and all, caught about 66% of his targets last season in Buffalo with some pretty terrible QBs (47 receptions in 71 targets, 10.6 YPC). Jimmy Graham is a significantly better player who had a much better QB, but caught about 68% of his targets, and averaged less per catch. Witten was around 71%, Olsen at 68%, and Bennett at 70%. Gronk was around 63%, although he also had significantly more YPC which can also factor in that there are deeper throws for him.
Let me be clear: Chandler is nowhere near as good as any of those guys. I am not saying that at all. All I am saying is he seems to catch similar percentages of balls as a lot of top guys at his position, so the hands can't be that terrible. Or if they are, the rest of his game seems to make up for it enough that there's not a significant drop in production, certainly for a #2 TE.
Jimmy Graham's arrival pushed promising second-year man Luke Willson down the depth chart. Willson has 2 receptions in 4 targets in 2 games so far. Kelce's back-up hasn't caught a pass. Ed ****son backs up Olsen and has 1 catch on 2 targets. Zach Miller is TE2 behind Bennett and has 2 catches on 2 targets. Maybe you'd add Gavin Escobar to the list with 4 catches in 5 targets, although his fumble and general stupidity have Cowboys fans gnashing their teeth.
Chandler finished in the top 20 in catches and yards last season, and he's our second-stringer. He's better than some teams's TE1, and certainly better than the majority of TE2s. Just because he doesn't match Gronk's production doesn't mean he sucks.
Gronks don't grow on trees.
I think the problem is that a lot of people expected Chandler to be a grade A tight end, which he has never been(exept against us). So when he performs like what he is, and frankly right in line with what he is payed, then people get dissapointed. Because they thought he was something he was never been.I would suggest reading the post that I quoted, because that provides the context for why I put that list together. The person I quoted disputed my claim that he was around the 25th best TE in the league, putting him solidly in the borderline-starter-to-good-#2 range. I like Chandler and he's a perfect adequate #2 TE. His pay is in line with the caliber of player he is, and if he had better hands and blocked better--like some people in this thread are complaining that they expected--then he wouldn't have signed here in the first place because he would've got more money somewhere else than the Pats are willing to pay for his role. He wasn't signed to be that guy and he isn't paid to be that guy. He's fine for the role that he was signed to play.
he was around the 25th best TE in the league, putting him solidly in the borderline-starter-to-good-#2 range. I like Chandler and he's a perfect adequate #2 TE.
If he is ~25th best in a league that has 32 teams, doesn't that mean he is an excellent #2?
I think the problem is that a lot of people expected Chandler to be a grade A tight end, which he has never been(exept against us). So when he performs like what he is, and frankly right in line with what he is payed, then people get dissapointed. Because they thought he was something he was never been.
I like the addition of Chandler. Because I think he gives us much greated depth at the TE position than we've had for a while, and gives us a good #2 TE.
Yep. My perception is that people think he is Gronk Jr. Chandler is not even Gronk's 2nd cousin on his mother's side.Exactly, he's right in line with what we paid him to be. People who are complaining about him are complaining that we didn't get a top-tier TE for TE2 money. If he was the player they want him to be, he wouldn't be here because he'd be making a couple million more per year and would be out of the Pats' TE2 price range.