Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
finito

Doug Baldwin

Recommended Posts

Baldwin over the last 21 games has been averaging 5.4-74-.80 over that span. In my league that equates to 17.6 ppg. For nearly a year and a half. He's basically been just a notch below that upper tier of elite WR but still safely in the middle of the WR1 picture. Still criminally underrated. The Seahawks offense hasn't really been lighting the league on fire lately either yet he still has had a decent floor and the 3 TD game shows his crazy ceiling.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone else not like him this week?  worried about gameflow

i feel like he'll be the odd one out for me, behind Powell/Rawls/Crowder (PPR league, 2RB/2WR/flex).  Crowder is the one i'm least confident starting over him, but i figure his game should be way more pass-heavy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WR6 in PPR leagues going into week 17. Looking at his numbers through 16 weeks Baldwin only had 2 games below 9 points with one of those weeks (week 2) being because of injury. The TD'S aren't really there but he's got a decent shot at 100 receptions on the season, which is a big increase over last year, and who knows maybe he'll catch 3 TD'S next week. Lol 

He's going to score about the same amount of points this year as last year but in a different way. Less TD's and more receptions. I see no reason why he's not a top 10 WR next year too. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you take the 2nd game of the season out where he tweaked his ankle and the last game of the season where they pulled him at half over the last 22 games he's averaging

6.1-81-.86 a game.

In PPR that's 19.36 points a game. Only Antonio Brown averaged more this season. He's an elite WR. He had a stretch where he scpred 9.4, 7.1, 12.9, and 9.1 but the entire offense was struggling at that point. I'm done fighting it emotionally lol. A year and half is long enough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Milkman said:

If you take the 2nd game of the season out where he tweaked his ankle and the last game of the season where they pulled him at half over the last 22 games he's averaging

6.1-81-.86 a game.

In PPR that's 19.36 points a game. Only Antonio Brown averaged more this season. He's an elite WR. He had a stretch where he scpred 9.4, 7.1, 12.9, and 9.1 but the entire offense was struggling at that point. I'm done fighting it emotionally lol. A year and half is long enough.

 

He's underrated sure but you're overselling it here.  There's a reason you chose the last year and a half for your sample and that's because it's the perfect cutoff to maximize that insane touchdown run he had at the end of last season which was very clearly a major aberration/outlier relative to the rest of his career.  He's a 28 year old 6 year vet who's best finishes in PPG are WR9 and WR16 in spite of a historic touchdown run that he almost certainly will never repeat.

At his current prices I'm a buyer as well, and being paired with an elite young QB is great as well, but again you are overstating it.  An "elite WR" who has been in the league 6 years without any notable injury issues while playing with one of the league's best QBs would have done more by now.

If he has another nice game in the playoffs the time to buy at a discount will probably be over anyway.

Edited by FreeBaGeL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finished WR8 this year and WR10 last year in my league. The thing is He finished WR8 this year with only 7 TD's. That's important to note because it makes him a more legit WR1 than last year. It shows that insane TD rate isn't needed for him to put up WR1 numbers.

As far as cutting his stats off when I did, Yes it includes that crazy TD run he had last year but it also is when Seattle shifted to more passing and featured Baldwin more. 22 games is a big enough sample to make a judgement on the player imo. In the last season and half there hasn't been many WR better than Baldwin. It's just a fact. Check out where FBG has he ranked in dynasty rankings though.......in the 30's I think. That makes him a huge buy right now. Plus his game is more savvy and built on his connection to an elite QB which makes me believe he'll age well putting up WR1 seasons for 3-4 more years........ 

Edited by Milkman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, FreeBaGeL said:

An "elite WR" who has been in the league 6 years without any notable injury issues while playing with one of the league's best QBs would have done more by now.

I disagree. He has played with Wilson for 5 years, not 6, and Seattle was a very low volume passing offense the first 3 of those years, finishing #32, #31, and #32 in passing attempts. He "broke out" in his third season, in 2013 and has been underrated ever since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the reason that Baldwin hasn't had a bigger fantasy impact is because previous to the last two seasons the Seahawks were a run centric team. They were consistently at the bottom of the league in pass attempts during Lynch's prime years. The combination of Wilson's development and the retirement of Lynch almost forced the team too transition to a pass first team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2017 at 8:08 AM, Just Win Baby said:

I disagree. He has played with Wilson for 5 years, not 6, and Seattle was a very low volume passing offense the first 3 of those years, finishing #32, #31, and #32 in passing attempts. He "broke out" in his third season, in 2013 and has been underrated ever since.

 

3 hours ago, 32 Counter Pass said:

Part of the reason that Baldwin hasn't had a bigger fantasy impact is because previous to the last two seasons the Seahawks were a run centric team. They were consistently at the bottom of the league in pass attempts during Lynch's prime years. The combination of Wilson's development and the retirement of Lynch almost forced the team too transition to a pass first team.

This is lazy analysis.  While Doug Baldwin was putting up 800 yards and 3 TDs on only 460 pass attempts in 2014, Dez Bryant was putting up 1350 yards and 16 TDs on 475 attempts (31st in the league) and DeAndre Hopkins was putting up 1200+ yards on 480 attempts (30th in the league).  Heck, even Jeremy Maclin put up 1300 yards and 10 TDs on 490 attempts (28th in the league).

If you look at the bottom of the team list in pass attempts in those years when Baldwin was putting up 600-800 yards it is littered with players putting up great WR stats.   Heck the lowest passing volume in all those years was the 2013 49ers who had only 417 attempts and Anquan Boldin put up 85/1200/7 that season.

Again, I'm not arguing that he's not underrated.  He is.  The point I was arguing is that he's an elite NFL WR.  Elite NFL WRs get theirs, and if the argument is that they weren't throwing enough for him to put up great stats then that may as well be an argument that he's not an elite player because the bottom of the list in passing attempts is full of WRs that produced while their team was down there.

Maybe he'll develop into an elite NFL player, but 6 years barely cracking the top 10 of WRs in PPG one single time?  He hasn't been there yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

 

This is lazy analysis.  While Doug Baldwin was putting up 800 yards and 3 TDs on only 460 pass attempts in 2014, Dez Bryant was putting up 1350 yards and 16 TDs on 475 attempts (31st in the league) and DeAndre Hopkins was putting up 1200+ yards on 480 attempts (30th in the league).  Heck, even Jeremy Maclin put up 1300 yards and 10 TDs on 490 attempts (28th in the league).

If you look at the bottom of the team list in pass attempts in those years when Baldwin was putting up 600-800 yards it is littered with players putting up great WR stats.   Heck the lowest passing volume in all those years was the 2013 49ers who had only 417 attempts and Anquan Boldin put up 85/1200/7 that season.

Again, I'm not arguing that he's not underrated.  He is.  The point I was arguing is that he's an elite NFL WR.  Elite NFL WRs get theirs, and if the argument is that they weren't throwing enough for him to put up great stats then that may as well be an argument that he's not an elite player because the bottom of the list in passing attempts is full of WRs that produced while their team was down there.

Maybe he'll develop into an elite NFL player, but 6 years barely cracking the top 10 of WRs in PPG one single time?  He hasn't been there yet.

Let me add to my previous post so I am not accused of lazy analysis (God forbid!). The Seahawks were a run centric, Lynch centric offense. The Seahawks purposely limited the demands on a rookie/young QB. I would also say that Baldwin was not a complete player when he entered the league. All of that is changing: Lunch is gone, Wilson has developed as a QB, and Baldwin has developed as a player. Thus his two top 10 finishes over the past two years (ppr format). I consider him a very underrated fantasy asset and perfectly fine with others disagreeing with my assessment. 

In the examples of Bryant and Maclin, they were a central part of their offenses and more complete players at the time.

Just curious, where you rate Baldwin? A low level WR2? A low level WR3? Not worthy of a roster spot?

Edited by 32 Counter Pass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, 32 Counter Pass said:

I consider him a very underrated fantasy asset and perfectly fine with others disagreeing with my assessment. 

In the examples of Bryant and Maclin, they were a central part of their offenses and more complete players at the time.

Just curious, where you rate Baldwin? A low level WR2? A low level WR3? Not worthy of a roster spot?

If you're just going to latch onto assumptions (assumptions that I have specifically rebuked in my posts) then what's the point in having a discussion?  This happens a lot around here.  Unless you're saying "dude this guy is the best player in the history of the world" then you must totally hate that player and think he's awful.  It's like partisan politics.  You can't generally be highish on a player but find faults in him.  Either you think he's god's gift to football or he's complete rubbish.

In my two posts in this thread I have stated, explicitly, twice, that I think Baldwin is underrated at his current ranking.  In my two posts in this thread I have stated, explicitly, twice, that my only contention is with Baldwin being considered an elite WR.  Who are the elite WRs?  Brown, Evans, OBJ, Julio, AJG?  You think he belongs in that tier?  I don't think you do.  I think we're probably on the same page but you're latching onto the data I'm using to argue that he's not an elite WR and thinking that I'm also trying to say he's not a good WR, even though I've done my best to make it clear that's not what I'm saying.

If your only point is that you consider him an underrated fantasy asset then why are you arguing with me and assuming I'm too low on him, given that I have said exactly the same?

So let's unpack it.  I've said I think he's underrated at his current rankings.  His current FBG dynasty ranking is WR22, so right away that rules out low level WR3 and "not worthy of a roster spot", and basically "low level WR2" as well because if I thought of him there I would have said he's properly rated, not underrated.

Of their list of 21 guys ahead of him I'd easily take him ahead of White, Moncrief, Coleman, Diggs, and Jeffery.  I'd have to think on things closer but ultimately he'd end up probably in the tier (and probably near the top of it) with Parker, Demaryius, Robinson, Cooks, and Allen.  So that leaves him somewhere around WR13 or so, a low end WR1 or high end WR2.

He's a good player, in a good situation with a good young QB that doesn't look to be changing any time soon.  He's not situation-proof like I would consider an elite WR to be, nor is he young enough to overlook that imo.

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

If you're just going to latch onto assumptions (assumptions that I have specifically rebuked in my posts) then what's the point in having a discussion?  This happens a lot around here.  Unless you're saying "dude this guy is the best player in the history of the world" then you must totally hate that player and think he's awful.  It's like partisan politics.  You can't generally be highish on a player but find faults in him.  Either you think he's god's gift to football or he's complete rubbish.

In my two posts in this thread I have stated, explicitly, twice, that I think Baldwin is underrated at his current ranking.  In my two posts in this thread I have stated, explicitly, twice, that my only contention is with Baldwin being considered an elite WR.  Who are the elite WRs?  Brown, Evans, OBJ, Julio, AJG?  You think he belongs in that tier?  I don't think you do.  I think we're probably on the same page but you're latching onto the data I'm using to argue that he's not an elite WR and thinking that I'm also trying to say he's not a good WR, even though I've done my best to make it clear that's not what I'm saying.

If your only point is that you consider him an underrated fantasy asset then why are you arguing with me and assuming I'm too low on him, given that I have said exactly the same?

So let's unpack it.  I've said I think he's underrated at his current rankings.  His current FBG dynasty ranking is WR22, so right away that rules out low level WR3 and "not worthy of a roster spot", and basically "low level WR2" as well because if I thought of him there I would have said he's properly rated, not underrated.

Of their list of 21 guys ahead of him I'd easily take him ahead of White, Moncrief, Coleman, Diggs, and Jeffery.  I'd have to think on things closer but ultimately he'd end up probably in the tier (and probably near the top of it) with Parker, Demaryius, Robinson, Cooks, and Allen.  So that leaves him somewhere around WR13 or so, a low end WR1 or high end WR2.

He's a good player, in a good situation with a good young QB that doesn't look to be changing any time soon.  He's not situation-proof like I would consider an elite WR to be, nor is he young enough to overlook that imo.

I am not arguing, and to be honest I didn't read thru the entire thread. I was responding to "An "elite WR" who has been in the league 6 years without any notable injury issues while playing with one of the league's best QBs would have done more by now." I am not arguing that he is elite. I have him as a solid WR2 with WR1 upside. May not be elite but certainly in the next tier down. But let me be more precise in my response:

1. When Wilson came into the league he wasn't one of the league's best QBs
2. Wilson has only been in the league 5 years
3. Both he and WIlson were developing together, becoming better players than when they entered the league
4. The Seahawk offense has transitioned

You accused me of lazy analysis but it seems you are guilty of the same same with your quoted post above.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Milkman said:

There's only a handful of WR I'd take in front of him the next 2-3 years.

That's a strong statement. I was higher on him than some people patting themselves on the back in here (see page 5 of this thread), but I'm ready to pump the brakes a bit. He was a very safe pick at WR24 in 2016 with obvious WR1 potential (since he was just a WR1 in 2015), but he's also got obvious WR2 downside should the team pass less in 2017 and/or feature anyone else. So while I targeted him heavily at WR24, here's why I will probably avoid him if his price is WR12 or more:

First, Lockett's progress from injury will be huge. He was finally starting to look like the player people relentlessly hyped this offseason (and was picked by several in this thread to outperform Baldwin this year). If he's healthy to start the season, I fully expect him to command more than 66 targets next year. Second, even if Lockett's rehab goes poorly, Paul Richardson is making a strong case that he deserves way more than 36 targets next year (12 of them came after Lockett's injury, so really the WR3 got about 78 targets last year). We also shouldn't forget Kearse. People were quick to write him off when hyping Lockett. I tried to remind those people that Seattle just gave him a decent 3-year contract last offseason, but he was still written off. Yet there he was, starting and getting more snaps than Lockett... also getting 89 targets. So given the competition for targets, I fear 125 unlikely to repeat.

It's not all bad, though, because I expect Graham and his 95 targets to be gone. However, they'll likely replace him with someone that will still draw at least 60 targets, though.

The largest concern when it comes to his targets is the running game. They didn't have much of one this year. Michael looked good at times, but he led the team with only 117 carries @ 4.0 ypc, so the run game was exceptionally weak this year (as a team, they ranked 28th in RB rushing yards, 29th in rushes). Rawls was 2nd on the team with 109 carries @ a paltry 3.2 ypc. Prosise only got 30 carries on the season. This means they had to lean on Wilson's arm. As a team they went from 489 passing attempts to 564 (15% increase), but efficiency went way down as YPA dropped and PTD decreased by a third. Granted some of that had to do with Wilson's early season injury, but I think a healthy Rawls + Prosise in 2017 will result in fewer passing attempts, as well as potentially more RB targets (93 in 2016).

So while I like Baldwin and would be happy to have him on my teams next year, I think there are better ways to spend that early pick or those auction dollars if he carries a top 12 price tag next year. I expect his production to be lumped in with guys like Tate, Edelman, and Crabtree so I don't see a need to pay a premium price for him. If I'm paying a top 12 price for a guy I want 150+ targets and/or 14+ ypr. 

Don't get me wrong - if his ADP is WR24 again, I'll once again target him as my WR2 expecting 100-110 targets, but if people share your feelings, I'll have to find my value elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

First, Lockett's progress from injury will be huge.

Lockett's potential emergence took a huge hit with that injury IMO. I doubt he will ever regain the exact same level of speed, range of motion, and agility he had prior to the injury, but, even if he does, it won't be in time to open next season.

45 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

Paul Richardson is making a strong case that he deserves way more than 36 targets next year

Yes, sure he will get more than 36 targets, if he is healthy. But his career 51/599/2 stat line isn't particularly compelling, especially spread out over three seasons. He has potential, but that's all it is at this point.

47 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

We also shouldn't forget Kearse. People were quick to write him off when hyping Lockett. I tried to remind those people that Seattle just gave him a decent 3-year contract last offseason, but he was still written off. Yet there he was, starting and getting more snaps than Lockett... also getting 89 targets.

Yes, Kearse got 89 targets in 16 games... because Lockett was hurt for much of the season. He will probably get another similar workload next year, thanks to Lockett's most recent injury. But it is worth noting that Kearse didn't do much with those 89 targets -- 41/510/1 (12.4 ypr). That catch percentage is horrible, and his performance across the board was down from 2015. He is a JAG who can stay healthy, which matters only because Lockett and Richardson have struggled to stay healthy.

52 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

The largest concern when it comes to his targets is the running game. ... As a team they went from 489 passing attempts to 564 (15% increase), but efficiency went way down

Yes and no. The concern in terms of number of targets is definitely the running game. But, as you allude to here, with a stronger running game, it is likely that the quality of targets will increase. That was a fine tradeoff for Baldwin in 2015, so there is no reason that cannot also be true in 2017. It seems likely that Wilson will also be healthier, which should also improve the quality of targets.

55 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

I think a healthy Rawls + Prosise in 2017 will result in fewer passing attempts, as well as potentially more RB targets (93 in 2016)

I seriously doubt the bolded. This season was the high mark for RB targets during the past 5 years with Wilson at QB. Per FBG DD, they had 92 this season, and the previous high was 80 in 2015. It's fair to say that Prosise could be a better receiving RB than they had in prior years, but I don't see passing attempts going down while at the same time RB targets go up.

58 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

So while I like Baldwin and would be happy to have him on my teams next year, I think there are better ways to spend that early pick or those auction dollars if he carries a top 12 price tag next year...

Don't get me wrong - if his ADP is WR24 again, I'll once again target him as my WR2 expecting 100-110 targets, but if people share your feelings, I'll have to find my value elsewhere.

Agree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Lockett's potential emergence took a huge hit with that injury IMO. I doubt he will ever regain the exact same level of speed, range of motion, and agility he had prior to the injury, but, even if he does, it won't be in time to open next season.

Yes, sure he will get more than 36 targets, if he is healthy. But his career 51/599/2 stat line isn't particularly compelling, especially spread out over three seasons. He has potential, but that's all it is at this point.

Yes, Kearse got 89 targets in 16 games... because Lockett was hurt for much of the season. He will probably get another similar workload next year, thanks to Lockett's most recent injury. But it is worth noting that Kearse didn't do much with those 89 targets -- 41/510/1 (12.4 ypr). That catch percentage is horrible, and his performance across the board was down from 2015. He is a JAG who can stay healthy, which matters only because Lockett and Richardson have struggled to stay healthy.

Yes and no. The concern in terms of number of targets is definitely the running game. But, as you allude to here, with a stronger running game, it is likely that the quality of targets will increase. That was a fine tradeoff for Baldwin in 2015, so there is no reason that cannot also be true in 2017. It seems likely that Wilson will also be healthier, which should also improve the quality of targets.

I seriously doubt the bolded. This season was the high mark for RB targets during the past 5 years with Wilson at QB. Per FBG DD, they had 92 this season, and the previous high was 80 in 2015. It's fair to say that Prosise could be a better receiving RB than they had in prior years, but I don't see passing attempts going down while at the same time RB targets go up.

Agree with this.

What are you talking about in regard to Lockett? He broke his shin. Badly. Both bones. But it's not like he's getting his ankle fused or had a complete tear of the achilles (things that would limit range of motion and speed). If you've got a source that backs up that statement it genuinely would be appreciated because I had not heard that. I don't own him, but had been thinking about buying, so that would be crucial information. The last time I checked, he was expected to be back at training camp with a full recovery.

Richardson was a 2nd round pick who had a slow start (and missed almost an entire season, so it is deceiving to say those stats are spread out over 3 seasons). He looks the part now that he's getting a shot and that's all that matters.

Can we really get excited about improved quality of targets when Baldwin caught 75.2% of his targets? Healthy or not, Wilson's connection with Baldwin was as good as we can ever expect. I mean, I'm not ruling out a return to double digit TDs off of 110 targets or less, but it would be foolish to bet a top 12 WR pick on that. TDs are very unpredictable. I think 80/1000 is a very realistic expectation for Baldwin next year - I'd say he's got over a 50% chance of achieving that. As for 10 TDs, I'd say there's less than a 50% chance of that. Given his low targets and low-ish YPR, he needs those TDs to justify a top 12 WR pick, especially in a ppr format.

Don't blame Lockett's injury for Kearse's role. Kearse began the season as the starting WR2 and Lockett was playing WR3 snaps BEFORE the injury. I agree Kearse is not a special talent, but he plays a large enough role that we should not ignore him like people try to do. I think I read he maintained his starting job due to his superior blocking. He was very efficient in 2015, so maybe he was the one whose quality of targets suffered.

As for RB targets, Prosise was drafted specifically to be a backfield receiving threat (what was he..? The 4th or 5th RB off the board?). I had my doubts about him, but I've got to admit he looks legit. I think they will start to utilize him more in that intended role next year (assuming health). If 92 is the correct number then RBs accounted for 16.3% of all targets. I'd wager that % goes up next season. And as you mentioned, they had 80 targets in 2015, but given that they threw fewer passes that year, that actually lands right at 16.4%. Do you really think they spent that relatively high pick on Prosise to keep doing what they've always done? Personally, I think it was a sign they intend to change things, but the guy only played 147 snaps so they weren't able to implement it this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah this is Wilson's team now. The offense will run through him moving forward. Baldwin is his #1 WR and they have a great relationship on the field. With Graham leaving I see the number of the targets staying the same or going up next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

What are you talking about in regard to Lockett? He broke his shin. Badly. Both bones. But it's not like he's getting his ankle fused or had a complete tear of the achilles (things that would limit range of motion and speed). If you've got a source that backs up that statement it genuinely would be appreciated because I had not heard that. I don't own him, but had been thinking about buying, so that would be crucial information. The last time I checked, he was expected to be back at training camp with a full recovery.

My mistake, I was under the impression he had both leg and ankle injuries. I just did some Googling on it and agree it sounds much better than I had thought. However, if he is back at full speed, IMO whatever boost in targets he gets will generally be at the expense of Richardson and Kearse moreso than Baldwin.

3 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

Richardson was a 2nd round pick who had a slow start (and missed almost an entire season, so it is deceiving to say those stats are spread out over 3 seasons). He looks the part now that he's getting a shot and that's all that matters.

No, it isn't deceiving, it is a fact. This is his third NFL season. I know where he was drafted, and I know that he has struggled to stay healthy for much of his career to date. I follow the Seahawks.

Richardson has looked fine recently, but you are talking about a very small and relatively unimpressive sample size for your "now that he's getting a shot" comment. He had 24 targets for 13/200/0 through the first 14 games this season. In the past 3 games he has 11/130/2 on 16 targets, but one of his TDs should have been negated because he grabbed and twisted the DB's facemask.

4 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

Don't blame Lockett's injury for Kearse's role. Kearse began the season as the starting WR2 and Lockett was playing WR3 snaps BEFORE the injury. I agree Kearse is not a special talent, but he plays a large enough role that we should not ignore him like people try to do. I think I read he maintained his starting job due to his superior blocking. He was very efficient in 2015, so maybe he was the one whose quality of targets suffered.

This is false. Carroll named Lockett a starter in mini-camp and that held throughout preseason. In the first game, both played 47 passing snaps; Lockett had 8 targets, compared to Kearse's 7. In the second game, Lockett had 3/46 on 3 targets when he injured his knee in the 2Q. So in the one full game before the injury, Lockett did not play "WR3 snaps." Agree Kearse is a better blocker and thus will continue to get snaps. That does not equate to Kearse taking targets away from Baldwin or Lockett going forward. Targeting Kearse this year worked out very poorly for Seattle, and his role in the passing game should be reduced accordingly if the other targets are healthy. I mean, Tanner McEvoy outplayed Kearse, albeit in a much smaller sample.

4 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

As for RB targets, Prosise was drafted specifically to be a backfield receiving threat (what was he..? The 4th or 5th RB off the board?). I had my doubts about him, but I've got to admit he looks legit. I think they will start to utilize him more in that intended role next year (assuming health). If 92 is the correct number then RBs accounted for 16.3% of all targets. I'd wager that % goes up next season. And as you mentioned, they had 80 targets in 2015, but given that they threw fewer passes that year, that actually lands right at 16.4%. Do you really think they spent that relatively high pick on Prosise to keep doing what they've always done? Personally, I think it was a sign they intend to change things, but the guy only played 147 snaps so they weren't able to implement it this year.

In 2013, Lynch had 44 targets. In 2014, he had 48 targets. In 2015, Fred Jackson had 41 targets. Those were the primary receiving RBs in the few seasons prior to drafting Prosise. Both of them are gone now. Rawls only has 28 targets in 22 career games.

I agree the Seahawks will change what they did in 2012-2014, as they were forced to do starting in 2015. They don't have Lynch any more, who was not only a great primary runner, but also a very underrated receiver. When Lynch struggled to stay healthy in 2015, the team was forced to split the running and receiving RB roles between Rawls and Jackson, respectively. Given how 2015 went, Lynch's retirement, and Jackson's age, the receiving role had to be replaced, so they drafted Prosise.

Prosise could easily have 50 targets next season without the overall RB target percentage going up. Maybe even 60.

It also remains to be seen just how good Prosise really is. He flashed this year, but in a small sample size.

4 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

it would be foolish to bet a top 12 WR pick on that

I already agreed with you that Baldwin is not good value if taken within the top 12 WRs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

My mistake, I was under the impression he had both leg and ankle injuries. I just did some Googling on it and agree it sounds much better than I had thought. However, if he is back at full speed, IMO whatever boost in targets he gets will generally be at the expense of Richardson and Kearse moreso than Baldwin.

No, it isn't deceiving, it is a fact. This is his third NFL season. I know where he was drafted, and I know that he has struggled to stay healthy for much of his career to date. I follow the Seahawks.

Richardson has looked fine recently, but you are talking about a very small and relatively unimpressive sample size for your "now that he's getting a shot" comment. He had 24 targets for 13/200/0 through the first 14 games this season. In the past 3 games he has 11/130/2 on 16 targets, but one of his TDs should have been negated because he grabbed and twisted the DB's facemask.

This is false. Carroll named Lockett a starter in mini-camp and that held throughout preseason. In the first game, both played 47 passing snaps; Lockett had 8 targets, compared to Kearse's 7. In the second game, Lockett had 3/46 on 3 targets when he injured his knee in the 2Q. So in the one full game before the injury, Lockett did not play "WR3 snaps." Agree Kearse is a better blocker and thus will continue to get snaps. That does not equate to Kearse taking targets away from Baldwin or Lockett going forward. Targeting Kearse this year worked out very poorly for Seattle, and his role in the passing game should be reduced accordingly if the other targets are healthy. I mean, Tanner McEvoy outplayed Kearse, albeit in a much smaller sample.

In 2013, Lynch had 44 targets. In 2014, he had 48 targets. In 2015, Fred Jackson had 41 targets. Those were the primary receiving RBs in the few seasons prior to drafting Prosise. Both of them are gone now. Rawls only has 28 targets in 22 career games.

I agree the Seahawks will change what they did in 2012-2014, as they were forced to do starting in 2015. They don't have Lynch any more, who was not only a great primary runner, but also a very underrated receiver. When Lynch struggled to stay healthy in 2015, the team was forced to split the running and receiving RB roles between Rawls and Jackson, respectively. Given how 2015 went, Lynch's retirement, and Jackson's age, the receiving role had to be replaced, so they drafted Prosise.

Prosise could easily have 50 targets next season without the overall RB target percentage going up. Maybe even 60.

It also remains to be seen just how good Prosise really is. He flashed this year, but in a small sample size.

I already agreed with you that Baldwin is not good value if taken within the top 12 WRs.

I agree that Lockett, Kearse, and Richardson will be battling for WR2 and WR3 targets, but that doesn't mean their good play won't make them the 1st read on certain play calls or gain Wilson's trust so he checks down to Baldwin less. If Lockett and/or Richardson become the players we thought they could be, it most definitely will eat into Baldwin's targets. 

It can be both. What you said was both a fact and deceiving. To the casual observer it sounds like those stats were from 48 games, but you and I both know they were not.

You are correct that Richardson's sample of late has been small. I'm not saying anything conclusive here, just that he's looking good and making a case for more targets next year.

You can play name games all you want... maybe Lockett started the game in a 3WR set, but the fact of the matter is that Kearse played more snaps than Lockett beginning in week 1 when Lockett was healthy. This is a rather minor point, though. 

I don't care how many targets Lynch had or who the primary receiving RB was in 2013-2015. The past two years have seen a bit over 16% of targets go to RBs. I'm telling you they drafted Prosise to throw him the ball and now that Prosise has flashed some NFL talent, I'd be willing to bet more than 16% of targets will go to RBs in 2017. I'm sure there is a way to make it work that he gets 50-60 targets and the overall RB targets stays the same, but that's very, very unlikely. Last season 9 different RBs/FBs got a target. I'm glad you've come down off your Rawls high, though. I think I recall you had him projected for a silly amount of receptions in 2016. As you said back then, his hands aren't terrible. He'll still get some passes thrown his way. Just spitballing, I'd guess Rawls and Prosise combine for 85-90 targets if they play 16 games, but the backups will get a few as well.

I find it odd that you basically disagree with everything I'm saying when I try to 'show my work' behind why I won't draft Baldwin if he's ~WR12 next year, but then agree with my conclusion. If you think I'm wrong and Baldwin will get 125+ targets next year then you should think he's a great guy to target at ~WR12 prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

You can play name games all you want... maybe Lockett started the game in a 3WR set, but the fact of the matter is that Kearse played more snaps than Lockett beginning in week 1 when Lockett was healthy.

More snaps, yes. Not more passing snaps. There is a difference for the purposes of what is being discussed here.

1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

I'd be willing to bet more than 16% of targets will go to RBs in 2017.

I'm fine agreeing to disagree on this.

1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

Last season 9 different RBs/FBs got a target.

That happens when RB1 (Rawls) and RB2 (Prosise) are hurt most of the season, RB3 (Michael) is released midseason, and the only FB on the roster (Tukuafu) gets hurt. I don't think it is meaningful to this discussion. As recently as 2014, the Seahawks had 5 RB/FBs who received targets, but only 2 of them (Lynch and Turbin) got more than 2 targets on the season.

1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

I'm glad you've come down off your Rawls high, though. I think I recall you had him projected for a silly amount of receptions in 2016. As you said back then, his hands aren't terrible. He'll still get some passes thrown his way. Just spitballing, I'd guess Rawls and Prosise combine for 85-90 targets if they play 16 games, but the backups will get a few as well.

I projected him for 30/240/1 receiving if he played 16 games. He had 13/96/0 on 17 targets, so he definitely wasn't as effective as I expected, but the numbers weren't that far off given he missed playing time due to injury and played quite a bit at less than 100%. He only played 22 and 16 snaps, respectively in games 1 and 2, because he was just coming back from the injury from last season and suffered another injury in the second game; then he missed 7 straight games; and he missed the entire second half in week 16 and played just 20 snaps in week 17 due to a shoulder injury. He played about the equivalent of 7 games at most.

I certainly don't think that was a "silly" number of receptions to project for him. I'd project about the same for next season if he stays healthy and plays 16 games.

1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

I find it odd that you basically disagree with everything I'm saying when I try to 'show my work' behind why I won't draft Baldwin if he's ~WR12 next year, but then agree with my conclusion. If you think I'm wrong and Baldwin will get 125+ targets next year then you should think he's a great guy to target at ~WR12 prices.

I said I don't think he is a good value if taken in the top 12 WRs. I could see him finishing as high as WR10 if things break right, but I wouldn't necessarily expect that. There is a lot of competition for the top 10 WR spots, including some players who outscored Baldwin even in his big 2015 season who could easily rebound (e.g., Allen, Watkins, Jeffery, Hopkins, Marshall, Robinson), plus whatever rookies emerge as strong scorers.

I also wouldn't necessarily expect 125 targets for Baldwin; a lot depends on what happens with the Seahawks' passing attempts.

Aside from that, I think a lot of the reasons you are providing for downgrading him are overstated or off base. :shrug:

Edited by Just Win Baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

More snaps, yes. Not more passing snaps. There is a difference for the purposes of what is being discussed here.

I'm fine agreeing to disagree on this.

That happens when RB1 (Rawls) and RB2 (Prosise) are hurt most of the season, RB3 (Michael) is released midseason, and the only FB on the roster (Tukuafu) gets hurt. I don't think it is meaningful to this discussion. As recently as 2014, the Seahawks had 5 RB/FBs who received targets, but only 2 of them (Lynch and Turbin) got more than 2 targets on the season.

I projected him for 30/240/1 receiving if he played 16 games. He had 13/96/0 on 17 targets, so he definitely wasn't as effective as I expected, but the numbers weren't that far off given he missed playing time due to injury and played quite a bit at less than 100%. He only played 22 and 16 snaps, respectively in games 1 and 2, because he was just coming back from the injury from last season and suffered another injury in the second game; then he missed 7 straight games; and he missed the entire second half in week 16 and played just 20 snaps in week 17 due to a shoulder injury. He played about the equivalent of 7 games at most.

I certainly don't think that was a "silly" number of receptions to project for him. I'd project about the same for next season if he stays healthy and plays 16 games.

I said I don't think he is a good value if taken in the top 12 WRs. I could see him finishing as high as WR10 if things break right, but I wouldn't necessarily expect that. There is a lot of competition for the top 10 WR spots, including some players who outscored Baldwin even in his big 2015 season who could easily rebound (e.g., Allen, Watkins, Jeffery, Hopkins, Marshall, Robinson), plus whatever rookies emerge as strong scorers.

I also wouldn't necessarily expect 125 targets for Baldwin; a lot depends on what happens with the Seahawks' passing attempts.

Aside from that, I think a lot of the reasons you are providing for downgrading him are overstated or off base. :shrug:

Well, either way Lockett didn't take over the WR2 job as many anticipated if he was never on the field in 2WR sets.

I agree that there won't be 9 RB/FB types getting targets next year if Rawls and Prosise stay healthy, but it is worth noting for projections that you'll need to keep in mind there will be targets to more than just two RBs. The days of Lynch/Turbin are over.

Ah, ok, I was wrong about your Rawls targets. I really thought I remembered you projecting him for more catches than Lynch for some reason, despite Lynch being a very good pass catcher and blocker, but Rawls being fairly unproven in both aspects and Prosise being drafted specifically to catch passes. I don't see how you could project 30 rec for him next year, with a healthy Prosise, and not expect the RB corps to get over 16% of the targets. You must be expecting 600 PA.

Like you, I can see a scenario in which Baldwin puts up WR10 number next year, but I hate drafting players near their ceiling.

Keep in mind, I'm listing multiple factors which all could contribute to a small decrease in targets for Baldwin. It's kind of dumb to say I'm overstating these factors when I'm talking about several factors which, when combined, only TOTAL a decrease of 10-25 targets. Each factor alone only has to make a very small change... a few less passes, a few more targets for other WRs, a few more targets for the RBs... No one factor alone represents a huge red flag, but the aggregate is why I loved him at WR24, but can't justify WR12 prices.

Side note: I appreciate the way you take time to break out the quotes so it's obvious which aspect you're replying to. Sorry I'm not reciprocating. The only way I know how to do that would be kind of laborious. Is there an easy way to do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

I don't see how you could project 30 rec for him next year, with a healthy Prosise, and not expect the RB corps to get over 16% of the targets.

First off, the RBs got 17% of the targets this year when you count total targets and not pass attempts. PFR has Seattle with 567 pass attempts and 548 targets.

Assume 530 targets, targets broken down as follows: 325 WR (61%), 115 TE (22%), 90 RB (17%). Those percentages are all in line with this season. RB targets could break down as follows: 45 Prosise, 35 Rawls, 10 others. This breakdown only makes sense if Prosise and Rawls stay healthy.

I will admit, giving Prosise 50-60 targets and Rawls 30 receptions probably will not work unless pass attempts hold steady or go up (though 600 pass attempts certainly aren't required) or increasing the percentage of RB targets.

2 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

It's kind of dumb to say I'm overstating these factors when I'm talking about several factors which, when combined, only TOTAL a decrease of 10-25 targets.

See, this is where some of our exchanges have gone south in the past. The "kind of dumb" part. You are writing things, and I am commenting on them individually, not collectively. It's fine to disagree, but comments like these undermine the exchange.

3 hours ago, FF Ninja said:

Side note: I appreciate the way you take time to break out the quotes so it's obvious which aspect you're replying to. Sorry I'm not reciprocating. The only way I know how to do that would be kind of laborious. Is there an easy way to do that?

Highlight the text you want quoted and hit Quote This, and you get the subquote. You do have to do this for each subquote, so it is more effort than just quoting the whole post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Just Win Baby said:

First off, the RBs got 17% of the targets this year when you count total targets and not pass attempts. PFR has Seattle with 567 pass attempts and 548 targets.

Assume 530 targets, targets broken down as follows: 325 WR (61%), 115 TE (22%), 90 RB (17%). Those percentages are all in line with this season. RB targets could break down as follows: 45 Prosise, 35 Rawls, 10 others. This breakdown only makes sense if Prosise and Rawls stay healthy.

I will admit, giving Prosise 50-60 targets and Rawls 30 receptions probably will not work unless pass attempts hold steady or go up (though 600 pass attempts certainly aren't required) or increasing the percentage of RB targets.

That's weird. FBG lists 564 PA in Seattle team stats. Ah, they don't list PA by non-QB positions so there must've been 3 trick plays. I guess this means Wilson had 19 throw-aways? Either way, the % doesn't matter so long as it is measured the same way each time. I'm saying the ratio of RB targets vs. total targets (or vs. total attempts) is likely to increase relative to the past 2 years.

1 hour ago, Just Win Baby said:

See, this is where some of our exchanges have gone south in the past. The "kind of dumb" part. You are writing things, and I am commenting on them individually, not collectively. It's fine to disagree, but comments like these undermine the exchange.

Yes, I'm writing things and you are commenting on them individually but claiming I'm overstating them is "kind of a reach" (is that better? my bad.) when I've clearly been asserting from the beginning that each aspect added together, collectively only reduces his targets by 10-25. I'm not saying Lockett and Richardson are going to steal 25 targets from him or the RBs are going to steal 25 targets from him. I'm saying, as a whole, Baldwin stands to lose a few targets next year rather than gain some, so if his draft stock rises much, based on back-to-back top 12 finishes, his ADP will be at or near his ceiling unless Seattle drastically changes their offensive philosophy.

1 hour ago, Just Win Baby said:

Highlight the text you want quoted and hit Quote This, and you get the subquote. You do have to do this for each subquote, so it is more effort than just quoting the whole post.

I had never highlighted text before, so I didn't even know a "quote this" option would pop up. That is awesome. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only Doug Baldwin topic I could find, so here we are: wtf is going on with him this week?

a friend who also has him texted me last night to ask if I thought he'd play this Sunday. 

I was like, wait, what? 

Seems he's listed as DNP all week, and the only news I can find says he was "attending to a family matter, but expected back Thursday" - except apparently he didn't come back Thursday, since it's DNP for Thursday & Friday. :o 

anyone have any local Seattle or other news or insight on this? 

Non-injury related absences can be tricky. I'm a little nervous as my other options at WR are a bit shaky with Cobb doubtful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Only Doug Baldwin topic I could find, so here we are: wtf is going on with him this week?

a friend who also has him texted me last night to ask if I thought he'd play this Sunday. 

I was like, wait, what? 

Seems he's listed as DNP all week, and the only news I can find says he was "attending to a family matter, but expected back Thursday" - except apparently he didn't come back Thursday, since it's DNP for Thursday & Friday. :o 

anyone have any local Seattle or other news or insight on this? 

Non-injury related absences can be tricky. I'm a little nervous as my other options at WR are a bit shaky with Cobb doubtful. 

I see no evidence of this claim on the innerwebs, nor anything else suggesting Baldwin is anything other than a 100% go against a soft Titans D.

linkage?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SeniorVBDStudent said:

I see no evidence of this claim on the innerwebs, nor anything else suggesting Baldwin is anything other than a 100% go against a soft Titans D.

linkage?

 

That's what my friend texted me. Said it was Seahawks practice report or injury report?

hopeful it's not the case. I did find the link to him being away for a family matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

That's what my friend texted me. Said it was Seahawks practice report or injury report?

hopeful it's not the case. I did find the link to him being away for a family matter. 

Yeah I saw the "excused through Thursday" but can't find anything to substantiate DNP Friday...even without linkage you have to wonder when there is NOTHING on the web....if he was out Friday rotoworld etc would have flagged it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SeniorVBDStudent said:

Yeah I saw the "excused through Thursday" but can't find anything to substantiate DNP Friday...even without linkage you have to wonder when there is NOTHING on the web....if he was out Friday rotoworld etc would have flagged it.

I would have thought the same. S'why I asked in here. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to his verified twitter account, his last post was 19 hours ago thanking everyone for his birthday wishes.  I checked and he was born on September 21.  Hopefully, he has been away for some sort of birthday bash. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Silver & Black said:

According to his verified twitter account, his last post was 19 hours ago thanking everyone for his birthday wishes.  I checked and he was born on September 21.  Hopefully, he has been away for some sort of birthday bash. 

classic pete carroll.  can you imagine bellichick, coughlin or reid's expression when they hear "hey coach, can I have time off to go party on my birthday?".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if he doesn't play it won't hurt my team much seeing as how his weekly 4 pts in standard scoring doesn't really make or break it for me lol.  I can grab a wr5 off the ww RT now who can do that for me.  

Such a shame.  Hope that sea offense gets it together.  Wilson and Baldwin are destroying me. 

Edited by rickyg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, rickyg said:

Even if he doesn't play it won't hurt my team much seeing as how his weekly 4 pts in standard scoring doesn't really make or break it for me lol. I can grab a wr5 off the ww RT now who can do that for me.

Such a shame. Hope that sea offense gets it together. Wilson and Baldwin are destroying me.

He's certainly playing and he has a very exploitable match-up versus Logan Ryan this week. Ryan has been burned by Holmes/Crabtree in week 1 and Hurns last week. I don't know if SEA's offense will get back on track this week but if they do Baldwin should be the primary beneficiary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per Rotoworld:

Coach Pete Carroll said the Seahawks are planning for Doug Baldwin (groin) to play this week.
The Seahawks are expected to hold Baldwin out of practice until Friday as he recovers from a strained groin. Despite the comments, he's looking questionable for Week 4 against the Colts.

He could have a nice game against the Colts...I hope he plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, boilerdave said:

Per Rotoworld:

Coach Pete Carroll said the Seahawks are planning for Doug Baldwin (groin) to play this week.
The Seahawks are expected to hold Baldwin out of practice until Friday as he recovers from a strained groin. Despite the comments, he's looking questionable for Week 4 against the Colts.

He could have a nice game against the Colts...I hope he plays.

If Vontae Davis is back, it makes it a bit worse of a matchup, but I still kind of like him this week if he (Baldwin) plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Rushmore said:

If Vontae Davis is back, it makes it a bit worse of a matchup, but I still kind of like him this week if he (Baldwin) plays.

Not worried about any cb.  I think baldwin can get open on any of them.  More worried about his crotch.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baldwin will never see Davis in coverage. Baldwin lines up in the slot. Davis coming back is a boost for Baldwin as there is a correlation between teams with top CBs seeing passes funneled in other directions (obviously, QBs don't throw in the direction of stud CBs). 

All that matters is the injury, which is a very legitimate concern. The truth is that if he has a groin strain of literally any severity he won't be anywhere close to 100% if he suits up this week. It will take a full participation from him on Friday for me to even consider starting him this week.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point.  You're probably right, although the Colts did use Davis in shadow coverage a handful of matchups last season, but likely on more outside Wrs (so this will likely not be a battle of the groin injuries between the two).   Assume he ends up matched w/ Richardson.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, GrantK said:

Last I saw he's be a GTD, for the late game that sucks....

Yep. I don't have any snf or MNF options in the league I have Baldwin either. I'm afraid Im going to have to sit him this week.

Sucks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Practiced without restriction but still a GTD, sounds a lot like Carroll is FOS. 

Im going with Smallwood. I'm also tempted to start Wentz instead of Wilson, but I keep getting that one wrong. :doh: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

Yep. I don't have any snf or MNF options in the league I have Baldwin either. I'm afraid Im going to have to sit him this week.

Sucks 

If Richardson is available he might be worth a pickup just in case. Big drop-off from Baldwin, but viable replacement. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.