Why Kyle Pitts makes so much sense for the Eagles

[Road to Victory]

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/eagles/why-kyle-pitts-makes-so-much-sense-eagles

Why Kyle Pitts makes so much sense for the Eagles 

By Rueben Frank

FEB 27, 202

Kyle Pitts makes sense in so many ways that he has to be included in any conversation about what the Eagles might do at No. 6.

He’s a tight end, and the Eagles are likely about to lose the best tight end in franchise history. He’s a big-time weapon, and the Eagles desperately need weapons. And he played at Florida under offensive coordinator Brian Johnson, who happens to be Nick Sirianni’s quarterbacks coach.

Pitts, a suburban Philly native, is one of the top tight end prospects in recent years, a 6-foot-6, 250-pound playmaking hybrid who projects as a top-10 pick in April.

If you’re thinking No. 6 is too high to take a tight end in the draft, don’t think of Pitts as a conventional tight end. He averaged 17.9 yards per catch this past year, 3rd-highest in the BCS among all players with at least 40 catches and highest by any BCS tight end since Ladarius Green of Louisiana averaged 18.0 in 2010.

Green went on to become a 4th-round pick of the Chargers (where he played under Eagles offensive coordinator Shane Steichen).

Pitts is a mismatch nightmare. He can line up anywhere and is too fast for most linebackers to cover and too big for most corners. He's not considered an elite blocker but he's not bad.

NFL.com’s Daniel Jeremiah, a one-time Eagles scout, has Pitts ranked as the 3rd-best player in the draft and wrote in his scouting report: "Pitts is a unique talent with the ability to take over a game,” adding, "He runs routes like a wideout” and "he beat upper-echelon SEC cornerbacks on a regular basis.”

Pitts finished 10th in the Heisman Trophy voting this year, making him the first tight end in the top 10 since Ken MacAfee of Notre Dame in 1977. McAfee went on to become a top-10 pick of the 49ers in 1978 but only played two seasons in the NFL, catching 46 passes.

Since McAfee, seven more tight ends have been drafted in the top-10. Kellen Winslow and Vernon Davis were both selected at No. 6.

The only tight ends the Eagles have taken in the 1st round are Charle Young No. 6 in 1973 and Keith Jackson No. 13 in 1988. Young made three Pro Bowls and Jackson five.

There are lots of intriguing options at No. 6, including a couple elite receivers, some promising quarterbacks, a potential star corner and franchise offensive tackle.

But if the Eagles decide to move forward with Jalen Hurts, Pitts could provide him with a generational playmaking talent and give Sirianni an explosive, versatile offensive force as he begins his Eagles coaching career.

The Eagles do have Dallas Goedert coming back, but his contract is up after the 2021 season.

Pitts first caught the Florida coaches’ eyes in the fall of 2018, his true freshman year out of Archbishop Wood in Warminster — the same high school that produced Villanova’s Collin Gillespie.

Pitts was playing wide receiver back then, backing up Van Jefferson, who wound up becoming the Rams’ 2nd-round pick last year.

"He was a guy with just so much talent we had to get him on the field,” Johnson told reporters covering Florida in September. "He was a guy that as a young player, as a freshman, he played behind Van and really got a chance to learn from him. And we put him in the game, he made some plays, he continued to develop and grow and now he’s in a position where he’s one of the best players in America. …

"He did no good sitting next to us on the sideline. We found a way to get him in there and help kind of accelerate his development. … We played him a little bit more outside because he had so much talent, a huge catch radius, he’s fast getting out of breaks, and then he kind of grew into what we saw in terms of him being an elite tight end.”

There's one more reason Pitts makes sense for the Eagles.

He went to Florida. Guess where Howie Roseman went to college.

 

 

 

[UK_EaglesFan89]

For me Pitts makes so much sense. I also think we could get Pitts if we trade back a couple of spots which is almost a perfect situation. Add a legit play maker who we could build this O around and add further draft assets. I'm big on Chase too and if he's on the board it would be hard to look the other way but the idea of moving back a little and taking Pitts? I love that.

Pitts would be a match up nightmare, he genuinely could have the kind of impact that Kittle does for the Niners. He's quick enough to play on the outside. He's big enough to dominate. He would be too big and perhaps too quick for LBs, he would be too big for a lot of CBs. He could be a go to guy for our future QB (be that Hurts or be that someone else) and he could be a dominate one two punch with Goedert.

[time2rock]

5 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

For me Pitts makes so much sense. I also think we could get Pitts if we trade back a couple of spots which is almost a perfect situation. Add a legit play maker who we could build this O around and add further draft assets. I'm big on Chase too and if he's on the board it would be hard to look the other way but the idea of moving back a little and taking Pitts? I love that.

Pitts would be a match up nightmare, he genuinely could have the kind of impact that Kittle does for the Niners. He's quick enough to play on the outside. He's big enough to dominate. He would be too big and perhaps too quick for LBs, he would be too big for a lot of CBs. He could be a go to guy for our future QB (be that Hurts or be that someone else) and he could be a dominate one two punch with Goedert.

I'm really torn between Chase and Pitts ... 1a and 1b on my wish list.  I have mentioned previously that the idea of trading back a couple of spots intrigues me ... if say Carolina really wants a QB (if Fields drops ... which I think is a real possibility he'll be there at 6, unless someone else moves up earlier for him), we trade with them moving back only 2 spots and picking up their 3rd in the process, that may be hard to pass on.  If both Chase and Pitts are still sitting there at 6 before we swing that deal (and assuming we know Carolina is moving up for a QB), then one of those players has to be there at 8.  Now if Miami or another team picking ahead of us grabs one of those players, then I'd probably just take whichever is left at 6 and not risk losing him just to get that extra 3rd.   

[Road to Victory]

1 hour ago, time2rock said:

I'm really torn between Chase and Pitts ... 1a and 1b on my wish list.  I have mentioned previously that the idea of trading back a couple of spots intrigues me ... if say Carolina really wants a QB (if Fields drops ... which I think is a real possibility he'll be there at 6, unless someone else moves up earlier for him), we trade with them moving back only 2 spots and picking up their 3rd in the process, that may be hard to pass on.  If both Chase and Pitts are still sitting there at 6 before we swing that deal (and assuming we know Carolina is moving up for a QB), then one of those players has to be there at 8.  Now if Miami or another team picking ahead of us grabs one of those players, then I'd probably just take whichever is left at 6 and not risk losing him just to get that extra 3rd.   

I just read somewhere that Fields could drop out of the top 20. Obviously, just speculation but who knows. 

[UK_EaglesFan89]

6 hours ago, time2rock said:

I'm really torn between Chase and Pitts ... 1a and 1b on my wish list.  I have mentioned previously that the idea of trading back a couple of spots intrigues me ... if say Carolina really wants a QB (if Fields drops ... which I think is a real possibility he'll be there at 6, unless someone else moves up earlier for him), we trade with them moving back only 2 spots and picking up their 3rd in the process, that may be hard to pass on.  If both Chase and Pitts are still sitting there at 6 before we swing that deal (and assuming we know Carolina is moving up for a QB), then one of those players has to be there at 8.  Now if Miami or another team picking ahead of us grabs one of those players, then I'd probably just take whichever is left at 6 and not risk losing him just to get that extra 3rd.   

If we could trade back a couple of spots and still grab Chase or Pitts... That would be a very good outcome. I mean sure they'd run the risk that either Chase or Pitts could be off the board if they do trade down but I think they could position themselves so that they could still snag one of them. And if they evaluate both to be similar in terms of the impact they could have then I mean that would be great. I think 3-4 QBs go off the board before us and that could put us in an ideal spot to trade back a couple of spots with a QB needy team who want to take the 4th QB off the board.

[Madriver]

On 3/1/2021 at 1:24 AM, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

For me Pitts makes so much sense. I also think we could get Pitts if we trade back a couple of spots which is almost a perfect situation. Add a legit play maker who we could build this O around and add further draft assets. I'm big on Chase too and if he's on the board it would be hard to look the other way but the idea of moving back a little and taking Pitts? I love that.

Pitts would be a match up nightmare, he genuinely could have the kind of impact that Kittle does for the Niners. He's quick enough to play on the outside. He's big enough to dominate. He would be too big and perhaps too quick for LBs, he would be too big for a lot of CBs. He could be a go to guy for our future QB (be that Hurts or be that someone else) and he could be a dominate one two punch with Goedert.

Pitts is the logical choice at 6 unless by some miracle Sewell falls into our laps.

Jacksonville, Jets, Atlanta need QBs. Miami or Cincy could take him ahead of us though.

However as you point out, a trade back with some QB needy team would be awesome.

[UK_EaglesFan89]

4 hours ago, Madriver said:

Pitts is the logical choice at 6 unless by some miracle Sewell falls into our laps.

Jacksonville, Jets, Atlanta need QBs. Miami or Cincy could take him ahead of us though.

However as you point out, a trade back with some QB needy team would be awesome.

I think Pitts is logical at #7-9 too. A little trade back with a team behind us that are in need of drafting a QB? Carolina perhaps? This may be why Howie is getting it out there that they are looking at QBs.

[time2rock]

On 3/3/2021 at 1:45 AM, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I think Pitts is logical at #7-9 too. A little trade back with a team behind us that are in need of drafting a QB? Carolina perhaps? This may be why Howie is getting it out there that they are looking at QBs.

I stated earlier when discussing the same scenario (i.e. to trade back to 8 if Carolina comes knocking) that I am only considering that IF (1) both Chase and Pitts still be on the board when the 6th pick comes up and (2) we know Carolina is moving up for a QB.  That way we are guaranteed to get one of those players regardless of what Detroit does.  

[UK_EaglesFan89]

7 hours ago, time2rock said:

I stated earlier when discussing the same scenario (i.e. to trade back to 8 if Carolina comes knocking) that I am only considering that IF (1) both Chase and Pitts still be on the board when the 6th pick comes up and (2) we know Carolina is moving up for a QB.  That way we are guaranteed to get one of those players regardless of what Detroit does.  

Agreed there bud. I think there is a very high chance that Chase is off the board before we pick. And so in that scenario I don't think I'd trade down. Not if they are absolutely sold on Pitts.

[Outlaw]

Pitts is my 1a. Even with Chase on the board, I think Pitts is that versatile weapon that Hurts needs. There is a good amount of depth at WR this year. The difference between Pitts and the #2 TE is a Grand Canyon. 

[Madriver]

It now looks as though the WFT is without a QB.

[time2rock]

25 minutes ago, Madriver said:

It now looks as though the WFT is without a QB.

Maybe they are planning to make a run at one of the QBs reportedly wanting out (Watson, etc.).  They do have the 4th most cap space.  Or maybe are looking to draft one, either where they currently sit (someone like a Mac Jones?) or by moving up.  

[EaglesAddict]

I just don't understand the logic of drafting Pitts.  I don't care what the "draft experts" say (i.e., the talking heads)...it would be a complete waste of a valuable resource at #6 to take a TE when we already have a pretty good young one now.  You don't commit to playing 12 personnel as your base offense, that is seriously limiting. 

I don't want to hear how Pitts can be used in other spots, etc.  He's a tight end.  Every time when draftniks say a player can be moved around like a "chess piece", it just means that the player doesn't excel at one true position.  Pitts is a TE, that is the position he excels at and will almost certainly remain at predominantly in the NFL regardless of who drafts him. 

 

 

[EricAllenPick6]

2 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

Every time when draftniks say a player can be moved around like a "chess piece", it just means that the player doesn't excel at one true position.

Yeah, while I agree with you, his film is so very impressive.  Runs great routes, has amazing hands, goes across the middle and makes tough catches, is fast enough to make some guys miss.  I think he's the kind of guy that you line up at the Z receiver spot and go. 

[EaglesAddict]

40 minutes ago, EricAllenPick6 said:

Yeah, while I agree with you, his film is so very impressive.  Runs great routes, has amazing hands, goes across the middle and makes tough catches, is fast enough to make some guys miss.  I think he's the kind of guy that you line up at the Z receiver spot and go. 

I don't disagree with that notion, but unless you're going to formally make a position change, he will still be a TE that...on occasion...lines up in different spots.  I would be stunned if the Eagles drafted him.  I don't think the Eagles will, nor do I think they should...which is one of the rare occasions where what I think they "will do" and "should do" match 

[birdman#12]

3 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

I just don't understand the logic of drafting Pitts.  I don't care what the "draft experts" say (i.e., the talking heads)...it would be a complete waste of a valuable resource at #6 to take a TE when we already have a pretty good young one now.  You don't commit to playing 12 personnel as your base offense, that is seriously limiting. 

I don't want to hear how Pitts can be used in other spots, etc.  He's a tight end.  Every time when draftniks say a player can be moved around like a "chess piece", it just means that the player doesn't excel at one true position.  Pitts is a TE, that is the position he excels at and will almost certainly remain at predominantly in the NFL regardless of who drafts him. 

 

 

Wow.....That kind of thinking went out in the sixties.

The best offenses create mismatches.  speed, size and quickness all play roles in creating those mismatches.  And the fact is that Goedert and Pitts would not only create mismatches, but could also open up the field more for the WRs and even the RBs.   And with a young and inexperienced QB, that's invaluable.

When I first heard the Pitts possibility, I dismissed it.....but Pitts is unique, big, fast and good hands.  It would be a good pick.  

It was really difficult to judge the eagles young WRs last year with Wentz struggling so much.  Plus Pedersen yanking them in and out of the lineup.....

Hopefully, Sirianni and his OC and WR coach, can get more out of them.....but I do think they'll draft a WR in the first 3 rounds,

[EaglesAddict]

On 3/12/2021 at 2:06 PM, birdman#12 said:

Wow.....That kind of thinking went out in the sixties.

The best offenses create mismatches.  speed, size and quickness all play roles in creating those mismatches.  And the fact is that Goedert and Pitts would not only create mismatches, but could also open up the field more for the WRs and even the RBs.   And with a young and inexperienced QB, that's invaluable.

When I first heard the Pitts possibility, I dismissed it.....but Pitts is unique, big, fast and good hands.  It would be a good pick.  

It was really difficult to judge the eagles young WRs last year with Wentz struggling so much.  Plus Pedersen yanking them in and out of the lineup.....

Hopefully, Sirianni and his OC and WR coach, can get more out of them.....but I do think they'll draft a WR in the first 3 rounds,

So, you're saying Pitts would be officially changed to a WR if the Eagles drafted him?  Or, you think it would be a good idea to commit to 12 personnel?  I understand Pitts is a dynamic prospect and if we didn't already have Goedert, I'd be on board.  But, I can't see drafting him at 6 and keeping him at TE.  If they want to get him on the field and his position title is TE, then it would either be in 12 personnel or he's replacing Goedert.  

[UK_EaglesFan89]

4 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

So, you're saying Pitts would be officially changed to a WR if the Eagles drafted him?  Or, you think it would be a good idea to commit to 12 personnel?  I understand Pitts is a dynamic prospect and if we didn't already have Goedert, I'd be on board.  But, I can't see drafting him at 6 and keeping him at TE.  If they want to get him on the field and his position title is TE, then it would either be in 12 personnel or he's replacing Goedert.  

I think whoever drafts Pitts needs to move him around. Play him at TE, play him in the slot and play him on the outside. He's a dynamic guy and he's going to be a play maker. Plus he can block if needed. Now of course you don't want him doing that a lot but it just allows you to be a little bit more creative and not be so predictable when he's on the field. 

[birdman#12]

16 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

So, you're saying Pitts would be officially changed to a WR if the Eagles drafted him?  Or, you think it would be a good idea to commit to 12 personnel?  I understand Pitts is a dynamic prospect and if we didn't already have Goedert, I'd be on board.  But, I can't see drafting him at 6 and keeping him at TE.  If they want to get him on the field and his position title is TE, then it would either be in 12 personnel or he's replacing Goedert.  

I'm saying that a guy who is versatile and  matchup problem, it gives an offense options. Pitts and Goddert on the field together is a problem for defenses AND gives a young, inexperienced QB some dangerous options. 

The eagles probably need another WR......but weapons are weapons.....and a TE combo of Pitts and Goedert can make the field "bigger".

But as long as they draft a WR, TE or CB.....I'm on board.......the last thing I want them to do is try to "outsmart" everybody.....

[EaglesAddict]

16 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I think whoever drafts Pitts needs to move him around. Play him at TE, play him in the slot and play him on the outside. He's a dynamic guy and he's going to be a play maker. Plus he can block if needed. Now of course you don't want him doing that a lot but it just allows you to be a little bit more creative and not be so predictable when he's on the field. 

I agree...but I'd imagine that the team drafting Pitts will be one that either does not have a current young/promising TE of their own or has a good, but older vet who will likely be gone after next season.  In other words, I think he'll be drafted by a team that has a current opening at TE or will have an opening after a year.

[EaglesAddict]

5 hours ago, birdman#12 said:

I'm saying that a guy who is versatile and  matchup problem, it gives an offense options. Pitts and Goddert on the field together is a problem for defenses AND gives a young, inexperienced QB some dangerous options. 

The eagles probably need another WR......but weapons are weapons.....and a TE combo of Pitts and Goedert can make the field "bigger".

But as long as they draft a WR, TE or CB.....I'm on board.......the last thing I want them to do is try to "outsmart" everybody.....

I don't disagree about Pitts, but after seeing so much 12 personnel the last few years I'm done with it besides the occasional "heavy set" formation. Pitts needs to be a starter and will likely go to a team that currently doesn't have one (a good one, that is).

In any case, I just don't see the Eagles taking him anyway, regardless of what any of us think.  I think CB is the most likely position addressed in round 1, barring some crazy trade down to the back half of round 1.  That said, it'll be interesting to see what the Eagles do if they're sitting there at 6 with their choice of any WR or CB.  Would they take Chase over Farley or Surtain?  Hell, what if Lance or Fields is there at 6?  Or one of the OTs?  Again, I'm talking about what would the Eagles do, not what you would personally do.

[Madriver]

1 hour ago, EaglesAddict said:

 That said, it'll be interesting to see what the Eagles do if they're sitting there at 6 with their choice of any WR or CB.  Would they take Chase over Farley or Surtain?  Hell, what if Lance or Fields is there at 6?  Or one of the OTs?  Again, I'm talking about what would the Eagles do, not what you would personally do.

Indeed. That would be an interesting dilemma.

I would say first off that QB is off the table simply because of the drama it would create for the FO. They have to roll with Hurts for a year.

Replacements for Mailata or Johnson? If you pick a tackle in the top of the 1st they need to start.

That leaves WR or CB and that's what the team is looking at IMHO.

I would personally love to see a trade down for more picks. We aren't winning anything this year so let's get some Tier 1 developmental players in the 1st and 2nd.

[UK_EaglesFan89]

3 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

I agree...but I'd imagine that the team drafting Pitts will be one that either does not have a current young/promising TE of their own or has a good, but older vet who will likely be gone after next season.  In other words, I think he'll be drafted by a team that has a current opening at TE or will have an opening after a year.

Perhaps but to be honest teams need play makers. This team desperately needs a play maker and Pitts looks to be exactly that.

[birdman#12]

4 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

I don't disagree about Pitts, but after seeing so much 12 personnel the last few years I'm done with it besides the occasional "heavy set" formation. Pitts needs to be a starter and will likely go to a team that currently doesn't have one (a good one, that is).

In any case, I just don't see the Eagles taking him anyway, regardless of what any of us think.  I think CB is the most likely position addressed in round 1, barring some crazy trade down to the back half of round 1.  That said, it'll be interesting to see what the Eagles do if they're sitting there at 6 with their choice of any WR or CB.  Would they take Chase over Farley or Surtain?  Hell, what if Lance or Fields is there at 6?  Or one of the OTs?  Again, I'm talking about what would the Eagles do, not what you would personally do.

Well, as I implied, I just don't want them to f--- it up........

They have very clear needs......I don't want them to get "creative"......

[EaglesAddict]

20 hours ago, Madriver said:

Indeed. That would be an interesting dilemma.

I would say first off that QB is off the table simply because of the drama it would create for the FO. They have to roll with Hurts for a year.

Replacements for Mailata or Johnson? If you pick a tackle in the top of the 1st they need to start.

That leaves WR or CB and that's what the team is looking at IMHO.

I would personally love to see a trade down for more picks. We aren't winning anything this year so let's get some Tier 1 developmental players in the 1st and 2nd.

100% agree with this.  I actually hope a QB is still on the board at 6, that will enhance the chances of someone wanting to trade up.  I think I've settled on wanting the Eagles to trade down...but not too far, just far enough to get an additional quality pick and still land a quality player with their first rounder.

That said, I also wouldn't be upset with trading far down if it meant getting a 2022 first rounder in the deal.