BTB: TE Schultz is starting to show his potential

[LovinItAll]

I don't care that Ertz has 100 catches. There are at least 10 TEs more dynamic than him. I said that a whole bunch of posts ago.

I think that's being taken out of context, or I misspoke. Because what I mean is find one who isn't an elite athlete and developed beyond what I think Schultz will from their rookie year. Ertz is still the same player he's always been, they just throw it to him more. He was a polished receiver when he entered the league.

I just did as you asked. Schultz has a great pair of hands and can block. Can he learn the TE position at a high level and be an effective starter? I DON'T KNOW. You think you do. Time will tell.

 

[OmerV]

What's your point in comparing him to Ertz? I don't think Ertz has a higher ceiling than Schultz does...

You think Shultz ceiling is as high or higher than Ertz, and with 2 games still remaining in the season Ertz has 1,038 yards and 6 TDs, yet you have been calling Shultz no better than a #2TE? Your sense of logic is even further off than I knew. If I have a TE putting up over 1,000 yards and 6+TDs that is a #1 TE, and upgrading the TE will not be a priority.

That said, at this point I wouldn't credit Schultz with being capable of that - it's way too early to claim that. Unlike you, I understand this is his rookie season, and that he is only recently getting an opportunity to do more within the office, so it is much too early for any firm determination about his ceiling.

 

[Mobinvans]

11 catches 99 yards...zero TDS

It's amazing how low this franchises expectations are

I'm not saying he might pan out, he does have a pretty pedestrian QB....

 

[Future]

You think Shultz ceiling is as high or higher than Ertz, and with 2 games still remaining in the season Ertz has 1,038 yards and 6 TDs, yet you have been calling Shultz no better than a #2TE? Your sense of logic is even further off than I knew. If I have a TE putting up over 1,000 yards and 6+TDs that is a #1 TE, and upgrading the TE will not be a priority.

That said, at this point I wouldn't credit Schultz with being capable of that - it's way too early to claim that. Unlike you, I understand this is his rookie season, and that he is only recently getting an opportunity to do more within the office, so it is much too early for any firm determination about his ceiling.

Athletically yes. In the right system, yea, he can go out and catch 500 passes. That's true for lots of players in the league. I don't think Ertz is that great of a player, he just gets a lot of touches. Witten was never the best receiving TE in the game either. Ertz isn't in the same category as Gronk, Kelce, and others, because he doesn't change games.

And again, what do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

It's really easy to crap all over someone else's opinion, when you can't make one of your own.

 

[Future]

I just did as you asked. Schultz has a great pair of hands and can block. Can he learn the TE position at a high level and be an effective starter? I DON'T KNOW. You think you do. Time will tell.

Define high-level and effective starter. Ertz is effective, but he's not high level. Schultz can be that. But being a starter in this league doesn't mean you're a #1.

 

[OmerV]

I asked you very specific questions, and you can't do it. The difference between me, you and whoever in this thread is

1 - I have an actual idea, and am sticking to it
2 - You are saying you have no idea what he could be come and refusing to use any real examples to prove me wrong.

So again, what do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

You're just waxing about the idea of player development and blah blah blah. Players don't develop if they don't have the athletic upside to develop into.

First, and again, your questions have nothing to do with what LovinitAll or myself have said. You are attempting/fabricating a point that neither contradicts or even applies to what we said. You can't just make up an irrelevant argument and pretend it applies. LovingitAll's point was simply about Schultz showing potential now, and completely illogically you have pretended that he said Schultz was something "special" and a "gamebreaker". Accordingly, you are either a blowhard trying to manufacture a fight by making stuff up, or you're mind is incapable of understanding the written word.

I told you what I thought his ceiling was, despite the fact that the question had nothing to do with what I have said or what LovinitAll said, and if you want you can compare those numbers to others that put up similar stats. I don't care if he looks like anyone else, I care about what he produces, and I gave you the numbers I thought he could produce. And, again, despite the fact that you are pretending to make a point even though it has no bearing on what anyone has said.

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

Ten different people are thinking that its the 1990s.

None of those things are true for TEs like Schultz.

Idiot, I said he hit his ceiling in terms of the type of player he can be. The ceiling that he's at is impact game-to-game. Don't give me this "unintelligent deduction" nonsense and then misquote me.

Wait a minute, youre gonna call ME an idiot!!??!?? lmao.

The type of player he can become has not been determined. He can improve you ****ing moron. You saying "hes hit his ceiling as the type of player he can become" doesnt make it any less stupid.

Nevermind everyone can continue to pile up on you for your stupid *** comments. Idc anymore.

 

[Future]

First, and again, your questions have nothing to do with what LovinitAll or myself have said. You are attempting/fabricating a point that neither contradicts or even applies to what we said. You can't just make up an irrelevant argument and pretend it applies. LovingitAll's point was simply about Schultz showing potential now, and completely illogically you have pretended that he said Schultz was something "special" and a "gamebreaker". Accordingly, you are either a blowhard trying to manufacture a fight by making stuff up, or you're mind is incapable of understanding the written word.

I told you what I thought his ceiling was, despite the fact that the question had nothing to do with what I have said or what LovinitAll said, and if you want you can compare those numbers to others that put up similar stats. I don't care if he looks like anyone else, I care about what he produces, and I gave you the numbers I thought he could produce. And, again, despite the fact that you are pretending to make a point even though it has no bearing on what anyone has said.

what do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

 

[Future]

Wait a minute, youre gonna call ME an idiot!!??!?? lmao.

The type of player he can become has not been determined. He can improve you ****ing moron. You saying "hes hit his ceiling as the type of player he can become" doesnt make it any less stupid.

Nevermind everyone can continue to pile up on you for your stupid *** comments. Idc anymore.

Improve to what? What do you think he's going to be?

Do you think he's going to be Gronk, Kelce. If the answer is no, then he has nowhere else to go, b/c he's already a solid player.

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

So basically you have no point. You're disagreeing and can't back it up.

If you weren't high on him, then you cannot think his ceiling is best TE ever. You think every drafted player has the ceiling of best ever? lol. Ok, and Hunter Henry is the same player now he was when he was drafted. I already said that Schultz could catch a lot of balls, depending on the system, but he can do that now.

I've backed it up. You havent.

Your argument is he wont be Gronk, he's more fasano.

Theres a huge gap between those players and many different tiers. And he could land in any of them.

"Ok and hunter henry is the same player he was when he was drafted" do you even know *** youre trying to say?

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

Improve to what? What do you think he's going to be?

Do you think he's going to be Gronk, Kelce. If the answer is no, then he has nowhere else to go, b/c he's already a solid player.

There's levels between solid and HOF level. Can't believe I have to explain that to someone.

Right now he's acting as a lower TE2. Which you're considering "solid". Gronk and Kelce are HOF level. So saying theres nowhere to go means there's no levels betwern those two classes which is ridiculous.

Right now he's lower TE2
He can develop into a top TE2-Geodert
There's lower TE1 such as Rudolph, Hooper, and the like
Then there is solid TE1 who arent yet elite such as Kittle, Burton, Ebron

This is just like the QB debate. It's either you're as good as Brady, Rodgers, Brees or youre just a guy. Which couldnt be further from the truth.

 

[LovinItAll]

Define high-level and effective starter. Ertz is effective, but he's not high level. Schultz can be that. But being a starter in this league doesn't mean you're a #1.

While it's nice to want the best player in the league at every position, that's not going to happen.

Ertz is EASILY a top 10 TE, maybe a top 5. I consider any player in the top 10 at their position to be good at their position. Not elite necessarily, but desirable for most teams.

A player doesn't catch 100 for 1000 just because he gets the touches. He's a target for a reason. He gets open. He makes the catch. He's available.

You want an elite TE. I do, too. Maybe Travis gets tired of catching balls from his stud QB and comes to Dallas. Stranger things have happened. Not much stranger, though.

 

[Future]

I've backed it up. You havent.

Your argument is he wont be Gronk, he's more fasano.

Theres a huge gap between those players and many different tiers. And he could land in any of them.

"Ok and hunter henry is the same player he was when he was drafted" do you even know *** youre trying to say?

There is a huge gap in between those players and of those many layers, the players who fill those gaps do not impact games more than the next one. Go ahead, define the layers, and then tell me the players who fit them, and then tell me how they impact the game differently than the others. I'll wait.

Hunter Henry hasn't developed, because TEs who aren't drafted as elite athletes don't develop into more than what they are. Ertz is the same player he was as a rookie, so is Henry. It's guys like Engram, Howard, Ebron who develop.

 

[OmerV]

Athletically yes. In the right system, yea, he can go out and catch 500 passes. That's true for lots of players in the league. I don't think Ertz is that great of a player, he just gets a lot of touches. Witten was never the best receiving TE in the game either. Ertz isn't in the same category as Gronk, Kelce, and others, because he doesn't change games.

And again, what do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

It's really easy to crap all over someone else's opinion, when you can't make one of your own.

Production is what matters, not how athletic you think a guy looks. If that were the case Martellus Bennett would have been a better TE than Jason Witten. Ertz is producing, and if Schultz could produce similarly I would be thrilled with that.

Again, I don't care if he looks like this player or that, I care about the production. Not everyone produces using the same style - at Jason Witten's peak he looked nothing like Shannon Sharp, but they both produced. From a size, athleticism standpoint Witten didn't look that impressive, but he had great instincts, great understanding of the game, great ability to read defenses and find seams and holes, and great hands. It takes time to find that out about a player - we certainly didn't know it with Witten from his first, limited use rookie season.

 

[Future]

While it's nice to want the best player in the league at every position, that's not going to happen.

Ertz is EASILY a top 10 TE, maybe a top 5. I consider any player in the top 10 at their position to be good at their position. Not elite necessarily, but desirable for most teams.

A player doesn't catch 100 for 1000 just because he gets the touches. He's a target for a reason. He gets open. He makes the catch. He's available.

You want an elite TE. I do, too. Maybe Travis gets tired of catching balls from his stud QB and comes to Dallas. Stranger things have happened. Not much stranger, though.

I don't want the best player at every position. I think the Cowboys TEs are good enough that they can win a Super Bowl with them.

Top 10 all around probably, but he's not explosive as a receiver. That's what I'm talking about. Because of that, he doesn't change games. Getting open, making catches, and being available are standard traits for solid tight ends. The good ones get open against bracket coverage and can make contested catches regularly.

I think Ertz is good, but I don't think he's a gamebreaker TE. They are few and far between. Gronk, Kelce, Howard, Engram, Kittel, Ebron are guys who can dictate defenses because of their skillset. Behind them are the likes of Ertz, Olsen and Henry who, in systems without high-target WRs, can catch 100 balls and have bigger numbers than the others, but don't really dictate coverages. They're easily replaceable either by other TEs or WRs and RBs who can exploit the same matchups. The impact they have on games is not much different than what Schultz or Swaim gives you right now. That's my point.

 

[Future]

Production is what matters, not how athletic you think a guy looks. If that were the case Martellus Bennett would have been a better TE than Jason Witten. Ertz is producing, and if Schultz could produce similarly I would be thrilled with that.

Again, I don't care if he looks like this player or that, I care about the production. Not everyone produces using the same style - at Jason Witten's peak he looked nothing like Shannon Sharp, but they both produced. From a size, athleticism standpoint Witten didn't look that impressive, but he had great instincts, great understanding of the game, great ability to read defenses and find seams and holes, and great hands. It takes time to find that out about a player - we certainly didn't know it with Witten from his first, limited use rookie season.

What do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

 

[Denim Chicken]

11 catches 99 yards...zero TDS

It's amazing how low this franchises expectations are

I'm not saying he might pan out, he does have a pretty pedestrian QB....

Hes a rookie 4th rounder that has only been targeted 15 times. What do you expect? I swear some of you know nothing about football.

For referce, Hayden Hurst (another rookie TE) picked in the first round, 25th overall, has 10 catches for 102 yards and 1 TD.

 

[OmerV]

What do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

lol - you are trying very hard to disguise the fact that you aren't talking about anything that either contradicts or applies to what either myself of LovinitAll said, and that you are fabricating an irrelevant argument.

 

[Future]

lol - you are trying very hard to disguise the fact that you aren't talking about anything that either contradicts or applies to what either myself of LovinitAll said, and that you are fabricating an irrelevant argument.

What do you think he can be. Who do you look at as his ceiling? More than that, using your own scale, who are the players that are Average - Solid - Good - Very Good, and what is the difference that each of them makes on a game-to-game basis? And then, what is the difference they are making that Schultz isn't over the last 2 weeks, and how will Schultz impact games in ways that they don't?

 

[Denim Chicken]

Someone tell me what Schultz is going to turn into. Nobody is doing that. It's not piling on, it's an echo chamber.

Let's pull out the Crystal balls.

If I had to make a comparison, I'd say he could be our Lance Kendricks.