Thanks Bloom, this rocks as usual!
Thanks for all your hard work, but let's keep the accolades for Wylie and Broyles to a minimum as I was hoping to get them on the cheap in the later rounds of my Rookie Draft.
It's still kind of fluid right now, but there will a tier-based rookie ranking article with the post draft version. I would say that there's a break around 7/8, 14/15, 21/22/23, and 40 or so in terms of absolute value.position by position tiers tend to break along those lines.Bloom,I thought that you always included tiers, no? Thanks
I would say Childs for sure moves up in non ppr. Broyles and Wylie would be close.Since Childs and Broyles are coming back from serious injuries, their draft position will change their value to as it gives us insight into what the team doctor's prognosis is for their recovery, etc. same with wylie and his durability issuesSeeing Wylie compared to Welker, is his value a lot higher in PPR formats than a non-PPR format? Just value relative to other WRs; so, would guys like Broyles and Childs have more value than him in non-PPR?
I can't argue too vigorously against that. In general, 2-7 is pretty tight. Griffin just has more of a big play game as a runner and deep passer, which translates better to fantasy, but Luck is bust-proof and a great runner in his own right.Lot of momentum going toward RGIII over Luck. I'm sticking with Luck.
But if Griffin runs anywhere near as often as Newton did as a rookie, he's going to get killed. Newton is much bigger, and I don't think even he can possibly keep up that amount of rushing over the long term.I can't argue too vigorously against that. In general, 2-7 is pretty tight. Griffin just has more of a big play game as a runner and deep passer, which translates better to fantasy, but Luck is bust-proof and a great runner in his own right.Lot of momentum going toward RGIII over Luck. I'm sticking with Luck.
Wylie just went at 3.1 in our rookie draft. Broyles at 3.3Thanks for all your hard work, but let's keep the accolades for Wylie and Broyles to a minimum as I was hoping to get them on the cheap in the later rounds of my Rookie Draft.
definitely something big he needs to adjust his approach to in pros, but i think he is not a "run first" QB by any stretch. He might be a "leave the pocket quick" guy, which he'll need to work on, but shanny's offense will naturally have him on move a lot to mitigate that. RG3 does consistently look pass first when he breaks the pocket.But if Griffin runs anywhere near as often as Newton did as a rookie, he's going to get killed. Newton is much bigger, and I don't think even he can possibly keep up that amount of rushing over the long term.I can't argue too vigorously against that. In general, 2-7 is pretty tight. Griffin just has more of a big play game as a runner and deep passer, which translates better to fantasy, but Luck is bust-proof and a great runner in his own right.Lot of momentum going toward RGIII over Luck. I'm sticking with Luck.
RG3 is neither a run 1st or a leave the pocket quick guy. One of his most highly regarded traits is his willingness to stand in the pocket and deliver the ball. His pocket awareness is exceptional for a college QB, regardless of his spread attack. RG3 runs when there are great plays to be made by doing so or if it was designed. I think anyone who expects these great amounts of rushing attempts by him in the NFL are going to be disapointed.definitely something big he needs to adjust his approach to in pros, but i think he is not a "run first" QB by any stretch. He might be a "leave the pocket quick" guy, which he'll need to work on, but shanny's offense will naturally have him on move a lot to mitigate that. RG3 does consistently look pass first when he breaks the pocket.But if Griffin runs anywhere near as often as Newton did as a rookie, he's going to get killed. Newton is much bigger, and I don't think even he can possibly keep up that amount of rushing over the long term.I can't argue too vigorously against that. In general, 2-7 is pretty tight. Griffin just has more of a big play game as a runner and deep passer, which translates better to fantasy, but Luck is bust-proof and a great runner in his own right.Lot of momentum going toward RGIII over Luck. I'm sticking with Luck.
I agree with you there, but then that means he's not getting all those points for running like Newton did. I like Griffin a lot, but I think people are just drawing a straight line from what Newton did as a rookie to what they think Griffin will do. I don't think Newton himself will ever put up the same number of fantasy points ever again, much less Griffin. I mean, Newton had 14 - FOURTEEN - rushing TDs last year. People are kicking themselves that they missed out on Newton in last year's rookie drafts, and they're vowing to never make that mistake again. Enter Griffin. That's just my two cents. I know they're very different, but that's precisely why I think most people will be disappointed if they think they're going to get Newton's numbers by drafting Griffin.In leagues that award four points per passing TD, you'd have to throw 21 more TD passes to match up with Newton's 14 rushing TDs. I'm not saying Griffin won't rush for any TDs, but I think people really need to temper their expecations.definitely something big he needs to adjust his approach to in pros, but i think he is not a "run first" QB by any stretch. He might be a "leave the pocket quick" guy, which he'll need to work on, but shanny's offense will naturally have him on move a lot to mitigate that. RG3 does consistently look pass first when he breaks the pocket.But if Griffin runs anywhere near as often as Newton did as a rookie, he's going to get killed. Newton is much bigger, and I don't think even he can possibly keep up that amount of rushing over the long term.I can't argue too vigorously against that. In general, 2-7 is pretty tight. Griffin just has more of a big play game as a runner and deep passer, which translates better to fantasy, but Luck is bust-proof and a great runner in his own right.Lot of momentum going toward RGIII over Luck. I'm sticking with Luck.
I'm just curious. Why are you so high on a guy that has had such limited opportunities? That's pretty big praise for a guy that doesn't have much of a track record, especially compared to guys like Blackmon and Floyd.I'm not even going to pretend to to level headed, but Stephen Hill is going to pass all the WRs sooner, not later. BTW, who do you see as his NFL comp? Thanks!
Do you also have Hightower a tier beneath Kendricks?Like where you have Mychal Kendricks and Zach Brown (not yet listed).Hoping we can find a place for Bobby Wagner and Demario Davis in the 30-60 range after the draft.Whitney Mercilus has me nervous, but I understand the argument. Can't see ranking Coples behind him if both are drafted to play 4-3 DE, though.
I've got a really bad man crush here. Not a big fan of Blackmon, he's (to me) a WR2 with a slim chance of WR1 numbers. I like Floyd (a lot). I think K Wright does not have the skill set to dominate, more like a contributor. A Jefferey (to me at least) does not have a high ceiling. Hill has something that you can't teach and that is size & speed. Mike Wallace had the same effect on me when he came into the league. GT did not really use Hill that often, still baffled by it.I'm just curious. Why are you so high on a guy that has had such limited opportunities? That's pretty big praise for a guy that doesn't have much of a track record, especially compared to guys like Blackmon and Floyd.I'm not even going to pretend to to level headed, but Stephen Hill is going to pass all the WRs sooner, not later. BTW, who do you see as his NFL comp? Thanks!
Thing that scares me is that many more informed than me have said he can't catch very well in traffic (i.e. not the combine) and doesn't play as fast as he times.I've got a really bad man crush here. Not a big fan of Blackmon, he's (to me) a WR2 with a slim chance of WR1 numbers. I like Floyd (a lot). I think K Wright does not have the skill set to dominate, more like a contributor. A Jefferey (to me at least) does not have a high ceiling. Hill has something that you can't teach and that is size & speed. Mike Wallace had the same effect on me when he came into the league. GT did not really use Hill that often, still baffled by it.I'm just curious. Why are you so high on a guy that has had such limited opportunities? That's pretty big praise for a guy that doesn't have much of a track record, especially compared to guys like Blackmon and Floyd.I'm not even going to pretend to to level headed, but Stephen Hill is going to pass all the WRs sooner, not later. BTW, who do you see as his NFL comp? Thanks!
I keep hearing people say this, but I'm not seeing any substance behind the opinion. Hill is very much an enigma if you ask me. He could be a Pro Bowler or could be a 4th stringer in a few years.Thing that scares me is that many more informed than me have said he can't catch very well in traffic (i.e. not the combine) and doesn't play as fast as he times.I've got a really bad man crush here. Not a big fan of Blackmon, he's (to me) a WR2 with a slim chance of WR1 numbers. I like Floyd (a lot). I think K Wright does not have the skill set to dominate, more like a contributor. A Jefferey (to me at least) does not have a high ceiling. Hill has something that you can't teach and that is size & speed. Mike Wallace had the same effect on me when he came into the league. GT did not really use Hill that often, still baffled by it.I'm just curious. Why are you so high on a guy that has had such limited opportunities? That's pretty big praise for a guy that doesn't have much of a track record, especially compared to guys like Blackmon and Floyd.I'm not even going to pretend to to level headed, but Stephen Hill is going to pass all the WRs sooner, not later. BTW, who do you see as his NFL comp? Thanks!
4th stringer IMO. Limited route tree, questionable hands, doesn't play as physical as he should, not quick in and out of breaks, questionable deep ball skills. One trick pony...go deep.I keep hearing people say this, but I'm not seeing any substance behind the opinion. Hill is very much an enigma if you ask me. He could be a Pro Bowler or could be a 4th stringer in a few years.Thing that scares me is that many more informed than me have said he can't catch very well in traffic (i.e. not the combine) and doesn't play as fast as he times.I've got a really bad man crush here. Not a big fan of Blackmon, he's (to me) a WR2 with a slim chance of WR1 numbers. I like Floyd (a lot). I think K Wright does not have the skill set to dominate, more like a contributor. A Jefferey (to me at least) does not have a high ceiling. Hill has something that you can't teach and that is size & speed. Mike Wallace had the same effect on me when he came into the league. GT did not really use Hill that often, still baffled by it.I'm just curious. Why are you so high on a guy that has had such limited opportunities? That's pretty big praise for a guy that doesn't have much of a track record, especially compared to guys like Blackmon and Floyd.I'm not even going to pretend to to level headed, but Stephen Hill is going to pass all the WRs sooner, not later. BTW, who do you see as his NFL comp? Thanks!
I'm nowhere near as bold as Bloom. I'll do scouting capsules and comps, but I'm not comfortable doing fantasy rankings/tiers until these guys get drafted.I have my eye on Luke Kuechly, Donta Hightower, Mychal Kendricks, Lavonte David, Zach Brown, Bobby Wagner, Demario Davis and James-Michael Johnson as potential every-down linebacker targets with enough upside to rank in the top 2-3 tiers of fantasy linebackers.Do you also have Hightower a tier beneath Kendricks?Like where you have Mychal Kendricks and Zach Brown (not yet listed).Hoping we can find a place for Bobby Wagner and Demario Davis in the 30-60 range after the draft.Whitney Mercilus has me nervous, but I understand the argument. Can't see ranking Coples behind him if both are drafted to play 4-3 DE, though.
Bloom,As a point of reference, at first glance how does this draft class compare to last years?
Hill intrigues me, the first name that comes to mind is Terrell Owens. Here's the highlight reel:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kQWb4NXvJcWhat impresses me most is the pure physicality, running people over, stiffarms, body position going up for the ball. And you just cant teach what you see at 1:10 in, that range makes my mouth water. He's obviously dangerous on the go route, but he's gonna be a beast in the red zone, and is also a danger to blow up a bubble screen at any moment. Definitely unpolished but the things he is missing are things that potentially can be learned... but better yet they aren't necessary to still be an impact player from day one. If he's the kind of guy that flourishes on the biggest stages (like most of the great ones do), he could be another TO in his prime. Of course he could also end up on the scrap heap. That being said, for where you could get him he could be an absolute grandslam- I think the other WRs in this draft just dont have that kind of ceiling (although there are some very quality guys), and granted a lot of them dont have as low a floor. I like to gamble on the most bang for your buck with rookie WR- I can usually find the more pedestrian guys elsewhere. You don't need to hit on Dwayne Bowe or Hakeem Nicks or Mike Wallace too often to do a huge amount of damage, and after the first one or two or three top WRs the cost drop off is usually substantial.
That's his entire highlight film from college. He still looks stiff, not much quick twitch, not physical enough, and he stiff armed a D3 player. His best season is 28 receptions in college. Blackmon, Sanu, Criner, Wright, Floyd, etc have had almost every season in college above that total.His short shuttle is 4.48, which was the worst at the combine by .12!!! This means his short area quickness, in and out of routes isn't good.Hill intrigues me, the first name that comes to mind is Terrell Owens. Here's the highlight reel:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kQWb4NXvJcWhat impresses me most is the pure physicality, running people over, stiffarms, body position going up for the ball. And you just cant teach what you see at 1:10 in, that range makes my mouth water. He's obviously dangerous on the go route, but he's gonna be a beast in the red zone, and is also a danger to blow up a bubble screen at any moment. Definitely unpolished but the things he is missing are things that potentially can be learned... but better yet they aren't necessary to still be an impact player from day one. If he's the kind of guy that flourishes on the biggest stages (like most of the great ones do), he could be another TO in his prime. Of course he could also end up on the scrap heap. That being said, for where you could get him he could be an absolute grandslam- I think the other WRs in this draft just dont have that kind of ceiling (although there are some very quality guys), and granted a lot of them dont have as low a floor. I like to gamble on the most bang for your buck with rookie WR- I can usually find the more pedestrian guys elsewhere. You don't need to hit on Dwayne Bowe or Hakeem Nicks or Mike Wallace too often to do a huge amount of damage, and after the first one or two or three top WRs the cost drop off is usually substantial.
RG3 can and will hang in the pocket, but too often I see him leave the pocket early. I agree that he won't have the rushing attempts of say Vick, but his running ability will definitely enhance his fantasy value more than Luck or Tannehill - who are both very very athletic QB prospectsRG3 is neither a run 1st or a leave the pocket quick guy. One of his most highly regarded traits is his willingness to stand in the pocket and deliver the ball. His pocket awareness is exceptional for a college QB, regardless of his spread attack. RG3 runs when there are great plays to be made by doing so or if it was designed. I think anyone who expects these great amounts of rushing attempts by him in the NFL are going to be disapointed.definitely something big he needs to adjust his approach to in pros, but i think he is not a "run first" QB by any stretch. He might be a "leave the pocket quick" guy, which he'll need to work on, but shanny's offense will naturally have him on move a lot to mitigate that. RG3 does consistently look pass first when he breaks the pocket.But if Griffin runs anywhere near as often as Newton did as a rookie, he's going to get killed. Newton is much bigger, and I don't think even he can possibly keep up that amount of rushing over the long term.I can't argue too vigorously against that. In general, 2-7 is pretty tight. Griffin just has more of a big play game as a runner and deep passer, which translates better to fantasy, but Luck is bust-proof and a great runner in his own right.Lot of momentum going toward RGIII over Luck. I'm sticking with Luck.
at his best, calvin johnson, at his worst, troy williamsonI'm not even going to pretend to to level headed, but Stephen Hill is going to pass all the WRs sooner, not later. BTW, who do you see as his NFL comp? Thanks!
i would say he has plenty of physicality. he's a punt returner and generally a rugged player who doesnt back down.Wylie hype is getting our of control. This is a guy who is going to struggle to adapt to the NFL IMO. He is undersized and lacks any physicallity to his play. It's nice to be fast and quick, but you also have to be able to play through restrictions to get open in the NFL. He is going to need a lot of work to ever come anything remotely close to Welker.
Mercilus vs Coples was tough. Mercilus isn't the same natural pass rusher as Coples, but his overall AA and awareness make me think that he'll be a good tackle total guy and do enough in terms of sacks. Coples has the elite upside, but also doesn't have the linebacker AA of Mercilus. final draft slot will decide this one.Wagner and Davis are definitely coming up soon.Like where you have Mychal Kendricks and Zach Brown (not yet listed).Hoping we can find a place for Bobby Wagner and Demario Davis in the 30-60 range after the draft.Whitney Mercilus has me nervous, but I understand the argument. Can't see ranking Coples behind him if both are drafted to play 4-3 DE, though.
I think Miller is more one-dimensional and since we are talking PPR here, Polk's top-notch receiving ability comes into play.I just have a thing about taking safeties in rookie drafts, seems like you can find good ones on the WW and numbers aren't 100% correlated to talent, so I prefer to bottom-feed at the position, which pushes them way down my rankings unless we are talking about Eric Berry, Sean Taylor types.L. Miller is way too low. Placing him behind Polk is just silly IMO. He is a vastly more talented RB. I can't imagine any situation what so ever that would make me even for a second want to draft Polk over Miller.M. Barron should be in the top 50. He is a sure starter in the NFL for years and there are at least 20 guys on this list who will end up out of the NFL or barried on a teams depth chart in 2 years. I'd easly take the top S ahead of several of the fringe talents to even enter the draft at positions like RB and WR.
way better.not as deep at QB, but much more talented at the top.better at RB from top to bottombetter at WR except at the very topabout equal at the top of TE, but not that deep.much better at LB top to bottomBloom,As a point of reference, at first glance how does this draft class compare to last years?
This is pretty much exactly what Russ Lande said on our show a few weeks ago. in three years he'll either be at the top of the league or not even on a roster.I keep hearing people say this, but I'm not seeing any substance behind the opinion. Hill is very much an enigma if you ask me. He could be a Pro Bowler or could be a 4th stringer in a few years.
That's not really what I'm talking about when I say physicality. I don't doubt his personal toughness. Returning punts is a fearless endeavor which certainly leads towards his grit. Punt returns happen is space by natural occurrence though. WR need to be able to create their own space and that is where I take issue with his game as it translates to the NFL. Sure he is quick and fast, but from what I've seen anytime a DB gets their hands on him he struggles mightily. This will be a major issue in the NFL where the DBs are bigger, faster, quicker, stronger and have better technique thus use their hands better to redirect WRs. I think he is a career slot guy at best. There's nothing wrong with that and there is certainly a place for it in today's NFL. There just isn't very much fantasy value in it.i would say he has plenty of physicality. he's a punt returner and generally a rugged player who doesnt back down.Wylie hype is getting our of control. This is a guy who is going to struggle to adapt to the NFL IMO. He is undersized and lacks any physicallity to his play. It's nice to be fast and quick, but you also have to be able to play through restrictions to get open in the NFL. He is going to need a lot of work to ever come anything remotely close to Welker.
Isn't Welker a career slot guy? Danny Amendola? We can agree that Wylie falls somewhere on that spectrum. I'd say there's fantasy value there.That's not really what I'm talking about when I say physicality. I don't doubt his personal toughness. Returning punts is a fearless endeavor which certainly leads towards his grit. Punt returns happen is space by natural occurrence though. WR need to be able to create their own space and that is where I take issue with his game as it translates to the NFL. Sure he is quick and fast, but from what I've seen anytime a DB gets their hands on him he struggles mightily. This will be a major issue in the NFL where the DBs are bigger, faster, quicker, stronger and have better technique thus use their hands better to redirect WRs. I think he is a career slot guy at best. There's nothing wrong with that and there is certainly a place for it in today's NFL. There just isn't very much fantasy value in it.i would say he has plenty of physicality. he's a punt returner and generally a rugged player who doesnt back down.Wylie hype is getting our of control. This is a guy who is going to struggle to adapt to the NFL IMO. He is undersized and lacks any physicallity to his play. It's nice to be fast and quick, but you also have to be able to play through restrictions to get open in the NFL. He is going to need a lot of work to ever come anything remotely close to Welker.
Welker can line up wide, but is certainly far less effective. Welker has been very fortunate in being placed in the ideal circumstances for fantasy success though. I think we can agree that the odds of such things happening to Wylie are extremely remote. This is without even getting into the odds that his ability translates the same.Isn't Welker a career slot guy? Danny Amendola? We can agree that Wylie falls somewhere on that spectrum. I'd say there's fantasy value there.That's not really what I'm talking about when I say physicality. I don't doubt his personal toughness. Returning punts is a fearless endeavor which certainly leads towards his grit. Punt returns happen is space by natural occurrence though. WR need to be able to create their own space and that is where I take issue with his game as it translates to the NFL. Sure he is quick and fast, but from what I've seen anytime a DB gets their hands on him he struggles mightily. This will be a major issue in the NFL where the DBs are bigger, faster, quicker, stronger and have better technique thus use their hands better to redirect WRs. I think he is a career slot guy at best. There's nothing wrong with that and there is certainly a place for it in today's NFL. There just isn't very much fantasy value in it.i would say he has plenty of physicality. he's a punt returner and generally a rugged player who doesnt back down.Wylie hype is getting our of control. This is a guy who is going to struggle to adapt to the NFL IMO. He is undersized and lacks any physicallity to his play. It's nice to be fast and quick, but you also have to be able to play through restrictions to get open in the NFL. He is going to need a lot of work to ever come anything remotely close to Welker.
seeing as the team that drafts him will be thoroughly familiar with his abilities and have a plan for they plan on using him (likely in his natural slot role), I would put the chances of Wylie being in a situation that is at least conducive to fantasy success as somewhat strong. The Lions WR coach ran the drills at his pro day. That qualifies as a good spot imo.Welker can line up wide, but is certainly far less effective. Welker has been very fortunate in being placed in the ideal circumstances for fantasy success though. I think we can agree that the odds of such things happening to Wylie are extremely remote. This is without even getting into the odds that his ability translates the same.Isn't Welker a career slot guy? Danny Amendola? We can agree that Wylie falls somewhere on that spectrum. I'd say there's fantasy value there.That's not really what I'm talking about when I say physicality. I don't doubt his personal toughness. Returning punts is a fearless endeavor which certainly leads towards his grit. Punt returns happen is space by natural occurrence though. WR need to be able to create their own space and that is where I take issue with his game as it translates to the NFL. Sure he is quick and fast, but from what I've seen anytime a DB gets their hands on him he struggles mightily. This will be a major issue in the NFL where the DBs are bigger, faster, quicker, stronger and have better technique thus use their hands better to redirect WRs. I think he is a career slot guy at best. There's nothing wrong with that and there is certainly a place for it in today's NFL. There just isn't very much fantasy value in it.i would say he has plenty of physicality. he's a punt returner and generally a rugged player who doesnt back down.Wylie hype is getting our of control. This is a guy who is going to struggle to adapt to the NFL IMO. He is undersized and lacks any physicallity to his play. It's nice to be fast and quick, but you also have to be able to play through restrictions to get open in the NFL. He is going to need a lot of work to ever come anything remotely close to Welker.