Is there a world in which we move up for Kyle Pitts?
 

Yes, Pitts is a TE, but he's really just a huge-ass WR. Last year there were rumblings that we were very interested in trading up for Ruggs. Veach clearly places an emphasis on surrounding PM with elite talent.

So, that said, if he's available in the 13-16 range, would Veach be willing to move up from 32?

I'd imagine the cost would be #32, a 3rd rounder, and a '22 first-rounder (also probably #32). Basically, the same package we gave up to move from 27 to 10 in 2017.

Note: If EB gets hired by Houston, remember we'll have an extra 3rd this year.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Lf0L7tkC5GI" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I dont see them giving up two firsts for a tight end honestly. I think if anything they would try to make a run a Njoku. Dont get me wrong as a former HS tight end i love the idea and what Kelce does for our offense. But with picking late for the foreseeable future i dont see them mortgaging it.

Uh, no. He's going top 10.

For sure; just wondering if we'd be in play should he slip to that 13-16 range. I could see him possibly slipping purely based on positional value.

Before Eric Fisher tore his Achilles’?

Maybe.

Now? No way.

He is Shannon Sharpe Part II. Amazing player. We would rape even more with him.

Fair, and not challenging, but I'm curious on your thoughts here: is it because we now need to take a Tackle at 32? Or trade up for one? Or because we'll need the extra 3rd rounder to address?

Who is the can't-miss T prospect that we need to get if we go that route?

Trading up for anybody is a gamble, on that I agree.

But changing the draft board completely just because of Fisher is a bad idea. That's how you end up overreacting and reaching. We already had a need at OT - there should be OT's on the draft board. Stick with draft board and if one is there, take one. But don't rearrange the draft board just because of Fisher.

We don't need to take anybody at 32.

Zeroing in on one position is a terrible idea, regardless of need.

Carolina and Cincinnati are possible but either way I dont think he gets past NYG. They are desperate need of anyone who can help on offense. That, combined with them not being pumped to pay Engram, makes Pitts a perfect fit.

I'm not saying you change the draft board. I just think their ability to trade up for what might be a luxury is reduced.

I don't think it's 100 percent they take an OT in the 1st by any means. This draft is deep at that spot and they may end up grading all the guys available after the top 10 and before Day 3 as being similar.

It's more of losing some of the flexibility to spend draft capital to move up as much as it would take to grab Pitts.

I shouldn't say "No way." It's possible they would still pay that price to move up for a playmaker they think is worth it.

Maybe they view Pitts or Devonta Smith or Jamarr Chase that way. Maybe if one of those guys slips into the mid-1st they make the move.

Again, I would hope the Fisher injury doesn't affect their flexibility at all because they shouldn't have ever been entertaining trading up from 32 to say 15. That's just too costly, this team needs bodies to fill spots. We don't have unlimited money.

If Rashawn Slater dips a bit due to a run on the QBs and WRs go up and grab him. Sewell and a couple of defenders selected could push him into the teens.

As a general rule, I would trade down, not up. Veach has shown the ability to find quality players in later rounds and even in UDFAs. Why would I limit the number of selections? I would far prefer to give Veach more picks, even if they are outside the 1st round.

I absolutely agree.

It would be amazing to have him and Kelce but I can't see how we end up getting him.

I've been holding my breath al year that Kelce doesn't get hurt. Our offense would be much different. I trust Veach can find us a TE in FA or a later round. Kelce wasn't drafted in rd1. More a fan of moving back rather than up.

Daniel Jeremiah has him going #12 to San Fran

Has KC taking the DT from washington. Could make since in that draft scenario as he's the first DT taken off the board.

They're going to run Pitts AND Kittle?

Crazy.

When I seen this a few days ago I laughed. Why in the world would they use an high 1st rounder on a TE when they got the 2nd best in the league already? I'm sure there is other areas needed to improve upon first.

There's a lot of option for TE this year. Bushman or Ferguson for me. But we could get Kenny Yeboah in the later rounds too.

This place loves to dream up scenarios of 2 All-Pro TEs on the field at the same time, for some unknown reason. SF isn't drafting Pitts and the Chiefs aren't trading an extra first to move up for him either.

I could argue Pitts would be the best WR in the class if he was a WR, that dudes a top 10 guy.

Trade up for a Tight End when they have Kelce? Get the **** out of here, people.

He’d basically be a WR in our offense.

They could basically draft an actual WR that would see the field more, without needing to move up as much.

Easy tiger, no need for all that sass!

I recognize they’d be able to draft a WR at 32. In fact, I hope we do and I hope it’s Terrace Marshall.

I’m merely wondering if Pitts is bonerriffic enough for Veach to move up, that’s all.

No. It makes absolutely no sense.

Silly January Dante84, March Dante84 is laughing at you.

Dude's so ****ing sick. Certainly going top 8.

I'm not sure I see a world where he isn't the pick at #5 to Cincy... unless Atlanta does it at #4.

What was silly in January was the thought of KC trading up for him. It remains silly. ;)

Yes - it was always silly, I'll concede that for sure.

I keep seeing Chase to Cincy bc of the Burrow/LSU chemistry, which has me thinking he could slip a spot or two.

I'd definitely understand why ATL would take him, but at the same time, I feel like it would be earrings on a pig since they have so many other needs.

I've seen the speculation but Chase makes absolutely zero sense for Cincy. They already have Higgins and Boyd at WR plus they have an OC that loves running 12P and Drew Sample hasn't exactly lit the world on fire through 2 seasons. Pitts is a far more valuable pick for them than Chase.

If they don't go Pitts, Sewell makes more sense than Chase. While they already have the 11th overall pick in Jonah Williams at LT, he did miss his rookie year to a torn labrum and then missed half a dozen games last year to a knee injury. They signed Reilly Reiff to play RT and could kick him to LT if injury struck again, but they may very well decide to kick Williams down inside and roll with Sewell instead at LT.

As for Atlanta, agreed. The best thing they can do is trade down and gain more picks. So many holes defensively.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LHv3KJzuJmc" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

https://www.profootballrumors.com/20...erest#ref=home

Since a productive rookie campaign, Kyle Pitts has not lived up to expectations. The Falcons tight end remains in the team’s plans, but he has been the subject of trade talks.

Multiple teams have reached out to speak about Pitts’ availability, Jordan Schultz of Fox Sports reports. He adds that nothing is imminent at this time. Today’s development is not entirely new, however. Bleacher Report’s James Palmer notes the former No. 4 pick has been “relatively available” throughout the offseason.

After a strong college career at Florida, Pitts faced major expectations given his draft slot. He managed to record 1,026 yards during his debut season, earning a Pro Bowl nod along the way. That campaign only included one touchdown grab, though, and improved red zone production was viewed as a source of improvement moving forward. In different offensive systems and with a number of quarterbacks in Atlanta, Pitts has been unable to match his rookie year or establish himself as a consistent touchdown threat.

Given the Falcons’ decision to pick up Pitts’ fifth-year option, he is owed $10.88MM in 2025. The pending free agent would thus represent an expensive addition on the part of any acquiring team. Swinging a trade for the 24-year-old would no doubt include at least a short extension being worked out upon arrival. To date, Pitts has not done enough to warrant a big-ticket deal or a sizable price on the trade market.

On that point, Schultz reports a Day 2 pick would need to be the starting point for any serious trade talks. He adds Atlanta’s preference would be to keep Pitts in place for at least one more season. The team’s offense also features former top-10 picks in the form of wideout Drake London and running back Bijan Robinson. Expectations are high for those two to continue developing as the Falcons turn to Michael Penix Jr. at quarterback on a full-time basis on 2025.

Pitts has played a full 17 game-slate in three of his four NFL seasons, but since his encouraging rookie campaign he has only averaged between 35.4 and 39.2 receiving yards per game. Especially considering his skillset, increasing that figure will be critical in landing him a notable second contract in the NFL. That effort will likely take place in Atlanta, but an acceleration of trade discussions could pave the way for a swap taking place before the start of the season.

I'd absolutely listen in conversation about Pitts.

No team control left and likely an expensive extension candidate based on talent and pedigree. But if you wanted to try to find a guy who could replace Kelce long-term with a minimal change to the offense, that's your guy.

Is a big extension in the cards? I mean, his production the last 3 years has been fire roasted ass.

I would throw a Day 3 pick at Pitts and see what you can get out of him, and Atlanta would be smart to take that. It's the only way they're likely to get any value back out of him.

A 3rd and late pick swap like their 6 for our 6 would be interesting.

Especially if we know Kelce’s money is off the books next year; some could go here and the rest could go to the McDuffie/Karloftis deals.

He has not been nearly as good as expected and would be a waste of resources. If it's not Gray or Wiley (and I still hope it's Wiley) that emerge as a strong TE1 I'd prefer we spend another draft pick over paying premium price at the position.

I could be wrong.

They are not getting shit for him.

They should have never gave him the 5th year option IMO. If you are trading him and the team is saving you 10M against the cap, you are not getting much back in draft compensation.

What's interesting is that the Chiefs are in a financial position where they could do this. You could send them 1 4 and take the salary. And if he balls out, well, he's going to save his career.

What would he even make in free agency or in a contract extension? Probably not a ton, correct?