What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

TE Rob Gronkowski, TB (7 Viewers)

Week 3 (9/22) gives him almost four more weeks from today, and Week 4 (9/29) gives him a little over a month.

Sounds like he'll play 13 or 14 games this year barring re-injury/injury.

 
wdcrob said:
Week 3 (9/22) gives him almost four more weeks from today, and Week 4 (9/29) gives him a little over a month.

Sounds like he'll play 13 or 14 games this year barring re-injury/injury.
Click to expand...
When I drafted him I was assuming missing the first 6, so as long as they let him get to 100%, anything better than that is gravy. Real good news. Feeling much better since the draft getting some positive news on Gronk and Nelson. Knock on wood they continue to progress well, especially Gronk. For all the guys who got him late above, if he only misses 3 games, you guys got ridiculous value.

 
Again, there is playing and then there is playing. The Pats averaged nearly 75 plays a game on offense last year. If Gronk comes back and they have him on a 20-25 play snap count for a couple weeks and then slowly work him back to a bigger workload (maybe never a full workload to save him for the playoffs), even though he would be "back," he could still conceivably be producing nowhere near his usual self for half the year.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Again, there is playing and then there is playing. The Pats averaged nearly 75 plays a game on offense last year. If Gronk comes back and they have him on a 20-25 play snap count for a couple weeks and then slowly work him back to a bigger workload (maybe never a full workload to save him for the playoffs), even though he would be "back," he could still conceivably be producing nowhere near his usual self for half the year.
Click to expand...
Good point. A lot may depend on how the rookies play. If Sudfeld and Thompkins underwhelm, the Pats might be more motivated to use Gronk a higher %. Even of Gronk is only in on 25% of the plays, those will be high value red zone plays.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
Again, there is playing and then there is playing. The Pats averaged nearly 75 plays a game on offense last year. If Gronk comes back and they have him on a 20-25 play snap count for a couple weeks and then slowly work him back to a bigger workload (maybe never a full workload to save him for the playoffs), even though he would be "back," he could still conceivably be producing nowhere near his usual self for half the year.
Click to expand...
You are one dark cloud re: Gronk David. First it was that Gronk and his agent were underselling the extent of the surgery. The it was 12 weeks in a hyperbaric chamber, where his only motion would be to blink his eyes five times a day. Now it's half a season with the team treating him with kid gloves.

The sun is out, the sky is blue -- believe!

 
wdcrob said:
Anarchy99 said:
Again, there is playing and then there is playing. The Pats averaged nearly 75 plays a game on offense last year. If Gronk comes back and they have him on a 20-25 play snap count for a couple weeks and then slowly work him back to a bigger workload (maybe never a full workload to save him for the playoffs), even though he would be "back," he could still conceivably be producing nowhere near his usual self for half the year.
Click to expand...
You are one dark cloud re: Gronk David. First it was that Gronk and his agent were underselling the extent of the surgery. The it was 12 weeks in a hyperbaric chamber, where his only motion would be to blink his eyes five times a day. Now it's half a season with the team treating him with kid gloves.

The sun is out, the sky is blue -- believe!
Click to expand...
I'm not saying Gronk will bomb, but I think those expecting him to hit a home run the first pitch may be fooling themselves. When people start with, "Gronk averaged X fantasy ppg in 2011, so if he plays 14 games, his fantasy total will be X times 14," well yeah, I think that is being overly optimistic.

If I had to guess what Gronk would do, it would be first 2 games DNP, next 2 games 25% of regular production, next 4 games 50% of regular production, next 4 games 75% of production, last 4 games 100% of regular production (assuming of course he does not miss time for anything else). Obviously it will never work out exactly like that, but my point was his role will increase as the year progresses.

That schedule may be adjusted based on how well or how poorly the team plays and what their record is. If they are winning without him playing a big role, it's in their best interest to take their time.

If he normally averaged 15 ppg in 0 ppr leagues, that would work out to 142 fantasy points on the season, which last year would have ranked as TE3 overall. However, that would still be close to no production for the first month of the season and it could be Kyle Rudolph level production for a month.

So basically Gronk would not really be a fantasy advantage until the second half of the NFL season (say Game 9 and beyond). Hopefully fantasy owners were effective enough to still be in the playoff hunt (and he stays healthy enough to play every week).

 
Ilov80s said:
Anarchy99 said:
Again, there is playing and then there is playing. The Pats averaged nearly 75 plays a game on offense last year. If Gronk comes back and they have him on a 20-25 play snap count for a couple weeks and then slowly work him back to a bigger workload (maybe never a full workload to save him for the playoffs), even though he would be "back," he could still conceivably be producing nowhere near his usual self for half the year.
Click to expand...
Good point. A lot may depend on how the rookies play. If Sudfeld and Thompkins underwhelm, the Pats might be more motivated to use Gronk a higher %. Even of Gronk is only in on 25% of the plays, those will be high value red zone plays.
Click to expand...
Yeah, even if he is on a snap count like this early on, its likely many are RZ snaps, and he would still get 6-8 targets per game regardless of snap count because they probably get him on the field in instances where he is a primary target on the play.

 
I also can't think of an instance where a team behaved as described above. Generally speaking if guys aren't ready to play they don't play, and if they are they do. I can see a couple weeks of lowered snap counts, but if he's healthy I think he'll be on the field.

 
wdcrob said:
I also can't think of an instance where a team behaved as described above. Generally speaking if guys aren't ready to play they don't play, and if they are they do. I can see a couple weeks of lowered snap counts, but if he's healthy I think he'll be on the field.
Click to expand...
Well, here's the question. Have the Pats learned anything with Gronk over the years? He performed well in the regular season and in their recent post season runs, they fell flat with him unable to play or do anything. You don't win the SB in Sept or Oct. The Pats NEED Gronk healthy in January. We can debate how best that is accomplished and if rushing him back or immediately giving him a full workload is advisable or not.

Other than the first few games where I think Gronk will be on a limited snap count, the reason for his limited production as I listed was more him getting re-acclimated to playing football, getting stronger, getting more reps, etc.

Teams aren't stupid. They will see when Gronk comes in and have to modify their coverage accordingly. They'll know that he's out there as a primary target initially and I suspect it will be harder for Gronk to do well because of it. At least when he is in on every down the Pats would not be telegraphing that he was the target on that specific play.

I know the big phrase is "if Gronk is 100% healthy" . . . I actually wonder what that means. Does that mean healthy enough where he can play . . . or does that really actually mean 100% healthy. Between the arm, the back surgeries, the ankle issues, etc. will there be some limitations in his speed, his mobility, his ability to take a hit, his ability to get separation, his ability to recover week to week, etc. No one has an answer to that yet, as he hasn't had any contact yet.

Maybe I am being skeptical, but I still wonder how long it will take Gronk to produce at the level he was producing, which was pretty much at the highest level of any TE to play the game. Call me crazy for wondering if he can step back in and continue on like nothing ever happened. A case could even be made that he might see his production drop off some even if he were healthy and didn't have multiple off season surgeries. His production was off the charts high.

 
Save him for the playoffs, I can't let that go anymore.

The Pats will be thinking about home field advantage. They will be thinking about not going to Denver, or Baltimore. They will want all hands on deck to get the #1 seed.

They sure as heck aren't thinking, ' Take your time, Gronk, we have Tompkins and Sudfeld. We good!'

 
massraider said:
Save him for the playoffs, I can't let that go anymore.

The Pats will be thinking about home field advantage. They will be thinking about not going to Denver, or Baltimore. They will want all hands on deck to get the #1 seed.

They sure as heck aren't thinking, ' Take your time, Gronk, we have Tompkins and Sudfeld. We good!'
Click to expand...
This is a regime that keeps their Billion dollar QB out there up by 40 with two minutes left.

 
Koya said:
massraider said:
Save him for the playoffs, I can't let that go anymore.

The Pats will be thinking about home field advantage. They will be thinking about not going to Denver, or Baltimore. They will want all hands on deck to get the #1 seed.

They sure as heck aren't thinking, ' Take your time, Gronk, we have Tompkins and Sudfeld. We good!'
Click to expand...
This is a regime that keeps their Billion dollar QB out there up by 40 with two minutes left.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I'd have a much easier time believing the Patriots were going to treat Gronk with the kid gloves if I thought Bill Belichick had any idea what kid gloves were.

 
Agreed with the last few posts, if we've learned anything from the Pats and Belichick..

It's that they'll play Anyone that can walk on the field in Any situation no matter the "long term" goal or what situation there in.

If Gronk is healthy enough to play, there will be little to No "easing" him into there lineup....

 
I agree that when players are healthy they will leave people in up by 40 points. I do not agree that they will run a guy out on the field and leave him there if he is severely hurt. Look at Gronk in the SB as an example. He was severely hampered, did very little on the field, and played a very small fraction of snaps.

There were only 2 NE players that I remember that played hurt (at least that I remember). One was Ellis Hobbs, who played the playoffs with a variety of injuries, and Logan Mankins, who played the playoffs one year with a partially torn ACL (and it's debatable if they knew his injury was that severe, as I don't think they even checked for a tear until over a month after the original injury).

The Gronk situation is a bit unusual, as I can't think of other players that were in similar situation. I remember Vollmer tried playing with back issues, and he was in and out of the lineup. BUt they did not just throw him out there 75 plays a game week in and week out.

 
kegger said:
Agreed with the last few posts, if we've learned anything from the Pats and Belichick..

It's that they'll play Anyone that can walk on the field in Any situation no matter the "long term" goal or what situation there in.

If Gronk is healthy enough to play, there will be little to No "easing" him into there lineup....
Click to expand...
Are you referencing Ted Johnson? Or other players?

 
Anarchy99 said:
I agree that when players are healthy they will leave people in up by 40 points. I do not agree that they will run a guy out on the field and leave him there if he is severely hurt. Look at Gronk in the SB as an example. He was severely hampered, did very little on the field, and played a very small fraction of snaps.

There were only 2 NE players that I remember that played hurt (at least that I remember). One was Ellis Hobbs, who played the playoffs with a variety of injuries, and Logan Mankins, who played the playoffs one year with a partially torn ACL (and it's debatable if they knew his injury was that severe, as I don't think they even checked for a tear until over a month after the original injury).

The Gronk situation is a bit unusual, as I can't think of other players that were in similar situation. I remember Vollmer tried playing with back issues, and he was in and out of the lineup. BUt they did not just throw him out there 75 plays a game week in and week out.
Click to expand...
Didn't they bring back Gronk for week 17 last year and basically get him hurt again and in effect lose him for the playoffs? If he didn't play week 17, he would have had 2 more weeks to get healthy.

Also, your example of the Super Bowl is more proof on playing guys hurt. Gronk was hurt before the SB, so they played him hurt again. He played a low number of snaps because he was hurt and ineffective. Look at Terrell Owens in the SB years ago when he was clearly still hurt. He played through it and was the best player for the Eagles.

Anyway, I agree that they will probably ease him back in, but your whole saving him for the playoffs makes no sense. I think he will have to be healthy enough to not get hurt again (like last year), but once he is past that, I would think the first game or two might be when he doesn't play a full game. I don't see any reason why they would rest him or his production won't be the same as always. From the end of his rookie year through last year, he has been pretty freaking consistent. I don't understand the thought that he will start with 2 games of 25%, then 4 games of 50%, 4 games of 75% and then 4 games of 100%. If he is healthy and not suffering a setback, I would think after his first two games back (let's call it getting the rust off) he might have 2 more not great games. After 4 games of playing, he should be at 100% production.

 
He's probably underrated at this point. The timeline for recover puts him right at week 1, and I think a pessimistic view is that he misses three games.

The only thing suggesting he won't be 100% in a regular scheduled, timely fashion--is conjecture, guessing. Discussion about game shape, etc, but that is true of ANY player that comes back from any surgery. Why should we tack on two months of exercise to this one particular guy?

We didn't get weekly updates, of course, but what news we have gotten recently has been good. The best news was Belichick blowing off Gronk working out, and saying, that's nothing new, that's what he's been doing.

It's not an experimental surgery, it's been common for ever, and was done to ease the pain because he played through this thing last year. This guy wasn't 100% LAST YEAR! Could he feel better this year than last year? :shock:

Pierre-Paul had the same thing two weeks before, and there isn't talk about longer than expected recovery time, or holding him back once he is activated.

So, for the sake of argument, let's say he misses three, and is good to go week 4. 75%--80%--100%. Let's say he's ready to go week 4.

I submit you take him in the 4th round, and build your draft strategy around that. Consider:

Draft strategy this year, is as herd mentality as I have ever seen.

Take 2 RB back to back, Clavin and Graham are exceptions.

Bryant and Green are strong 2nd rounders.

Depth at WR is insane.

After the top TEs, there's a bunch of guys everyone kind...of....likes.

Wait on QB.

Grabbing Gronk in the 4th fits this strategy so nicely.

Round 1: RB

Round 2: RB

Round 3: WR/stud QB

Round 4: Gronk

Round 5 WR/QB

Man, I wish I still did redraft. Especially if you picking at the end of the 1st. The WRs in the 5th/6th don't take a backseat to many WRs going in the 3rd 4th.

You're getting WR1 numbers (and the guy who scored more TDs than anyone in the last two years) in the 4th. And his situation has improved, from a target standpoint. What till the Italian Darren McFadden gets hurt in a month or so! His biggest competition for catches will be Shane Vereen!

So you start Cook/Cameron/Fred Davis for a few weeks. No guarantee they don't have nice weeks for you. Maybe you hedge and jump on another TE around TE8 or so, I would do that actually.

it's one of the few moves allowing you to go big at RB, and separate yourself from the herd.

 
stbugs said:
Anarchy99 said:
I agree that when players are healthy they will leave people in up by 40 points. I do not agree that they will run a guy out on the field and leave him there if he is severely hurt. Look at Gronk in the SB as an example. He was severely hampered, did very little on the field, and played a very small fraction of snaps.

There were only 2 NE players that I remember that played hurt (at least that I remember). One was Ellis Hobbs, who played the playoffs with a variety of injuries, and Logan Mankins, who played the playoffs one year with a partially torn ACL (and it's debatable if they knew his injury was that severe, as I don't think they even checked for a tear until over a month after the original injury).

The Gronk situation is a bit unusual, as I can't think of other players that were in similar situation. I remember Vollmer tried playing with back issues, and he was in and out of the lineup. BUt they did not just throw him out there 75 plays a game week in and week out.
Click to expand...
Didn't they bring back Gronk for week 17 last year and basically get him hurt again and in effect lose him for the playoffs? If he didn't play week 17, he would have had 2 more weeks to get healthy.

Also, your example of the Super Bowl is more proof on playing guys hurt. Gronk was hurt before the SB, so they played him hurt again. He played a low number of snaps because he was hurt and ineffective. Look at Terrell Owens in the SB years ago when he was clearly still hurt. He played through it and was the best player for the Eagles.

Anyway, I agree that they will probably ease him back in, but your whole saving him for the playoffs makes no sense. I think he will have to be healthy enough to not get hurt again (like last year), but once he is past that, I would think the first game or two might be when he doesn't play a full game. I don't see any reason why they would rest him or his production won't be the same as always. From the end of his rookie year through last year, he has been pretty freaking consistent. I don't understand the thought that he will start with 2 games of 25%, then 4 games of 50%, 4 games of 75% and then 4 games of 100%. If he is healthy and not suffering a setback, I would think after his first two games back (let's call it getting the rust off) he might have 2 more not great games. After 4 games of playing, he should be at 100% production.
Click to expand...
My point was that even if he is back, I am not sure he will be able to play 100% of the time at 100% effectiveness. Certainly out of the gate I doubt he plays 100% of the time. The ramp up to how soon he gets to a full workload is one variable that is a big unknown. The other one, at least to me, is how close he will be to 100% this year in terms of total health and capability.

I realize that this is not a great example, but look at Wes Welker. He got hurt in Week 17 of one year and then rushed back to play in Week 1 the following year. WR is not the same as TE, and a torn ACL is different than back and arm surgery. I get that.

Welker the season before averaged 8.8 receptions and 96 yards per game. The year he came back from ACL surgery he averaged 5.7 catches and 56 yards per game. He played fewer snaps to start and then ultimately was not the same player that year even getting back to a high snap count (and obviously stepped it up the follow year and thereafter).

I think some are missing my intent. I don't suggest that the Pats will hold out Gronk until the playoffs or will limit his usage all season to have him for the playoffs. But there is no doubt they need him to win in the playoffs. People saying the Pats will throw him out there if he can breathe and walk upright are missing them big picture. NE has proven they can win in the regular season. But they have proven they have trouble going the distance in the playoffs. Over the past 3 seasons, they've played .813 ball in the regular season but have been .500 in the post season.

Maybe Gronk will start the season at 100% health and have no residual issues from his multiple surgeries. But as a surgeon told me once, the more surgeries you have, the more of a net negative cumulative impact it will have on the body. I would feel more confident in Gronk in 2014 if he can make it through 2013 without any new injuries (or setbacks to older ones).

 
Gronk did just fine with a jacked up forearm last year before breaking it again. The dude is a beast, no worries here.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
massraider said:
He's probably underrated at this point. The timeline for recover puts him right at week 1, and I think a pessimistic view is that he misses three games.

The only thing suggesting he won't be 100% in a regular scheduled, timely fashion--is conjecture, guessing. Discussion about game shape, etc, but that is true of ANY player that comes back from any surgery. Why should we tack on two months of exercise to this one particular guy?

We didn't get weekly updates, of course, but what news we have gotten recently has been good. The best news was Belichick blowing off Gronk working out, and saying, that's nothing new, that's what he's been doing.

It's not an experimental surgery, it's been common for ever, and was done to ease the pain because he played through this thing last year. This guy wasn't 100% LAST YEAR! Could he feel better this year than last year? :shock:

Pierre-Paul had the same thing two weeks before, and there isn't talk about longer than expected recovery time, or holding him back once he is activated.

So, for the sake of argument, let's say he misses three, and is good to go week 4. 75%--80%--100%. Let's say he's ready to go week 4.

I submit you take him in the 4th round, and build your draft strategy around that. Consider:

Draft strategy this year, is as herd mentality as I have ever seen.

Take 2 RB back to back, Clavin and Graham are exceptions.

Bryant and Green are strong 2nd rounders.

Depth at WR is insane.

After the top TEs, there's a bunch of guys everyone kind...of....likes.

Wait on QB.

Grabbing Gronk in the 4th fits this strategy so nicely.

Round 1: RB

Round 2: RB

Round 3: WR/stud QB

Round 4: Gronk

Round 5 WR/QB

Man, I wish I still did redraft. Especially if you picking at the end of the 1st. The WRs in the 5th/6th don't take a backseat to many WRs going in the 3rd 4th.

You're getting WR1 numbers (and the guy who scored more TDs than anyone in the last two years) in the 4th. And his situation has improved, from a target standpoint. What till the Italian Darren McFadden gets hurt in a month or so! His biggest competition for catches will be Shane Vereen!

So you start Cook/Cameron/Fred Davis for a few weeks. No guarantee they don't have nice weeks for you. Maybe you hedge and jump on another TE around TE8 or so, I would do that actually.

it's one of the few moves allowing you to go big at RB, and separate yourself from the herd.
Click to expand...
Did something similar from the 10 slot in a 16 team redraft last night. Richardson-Julio Jones-Luck-Gronk-Vereen-Shorts-etc. Took Dwayne Allen in the 13th round to play until Gronk is back.

I would have gone RB-RB to open, but the value just wasn't there, with 16 RBs drafted by the time of my second round pick.

I had the opportunity to take Witten in the 4th but took Gronk instead... higher risk, higher potential reward.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just Win Baby said:
Did something similar from the 10 slot in a 16 team redraft last night. Richardson-Julio Jones-Luck-Gronk-Vereen-Shorts-etc. Took Dwayne Allen in the 13th round to play until Gronk is back.

I would have gone RB-RB to open, but the value just wasn't there, with 16 RBs drafted by the time of my second round pick.

I had the opportunity to take Witten in the 4th but took Gronk instead... higher risk, higher potential reward.
Click to expand...
Man, in a 16 team league, having your top three targets be Julio, Gronk, Shorts is pretty good. PPR even better, with Vereen.

 
Anarchy99 said:
stbugs said:
Anarchy99 said:
I agree that when players are healthy they will leave people in up by 40 points. I do not agree that they will run a guy out on the field and leave him there if he is severely hurt. Look at Gronk in the SB as an example. He was severely hampered, did very little on the field, and played a very small fraction of snaps.

There were only 2 NE players that I remember that played hurt (at least that I remember). One was Ellis Hobbs, who played the playoffs with a variety of injuries, and Logan Mankins, who played the playoffs one year with a partially torn ACL (and it's debatable if they knew his injury was that severe, as I don't think they even checked for a tear until over a month after the original injury).

The Gronk situation is a bit unusual, as I can't think of other players that were in similar situation. I remember Vollmer tried playing with back issues, and he was in and out of the lineup. BUt they did not just throw him out there 75 plays a game week in and week out.
Click to expand...
Didn't they bring back Gronk for week 17 last year and basically get him hurt again and in effect lose him for the playoffs? If he didn't play week 17, he would have had 2 more weeks to get healthy.

Also, your example of the Super Bowl is more proof on playing guys hurt. Gronk was hurt before the SB, so they played him hurt again. He played a low number of snaps because he was hurt and ineffective. Look at Terrell Owens in the SB years ago when he was clearly still hurt. He played through it and was the best player for the Eagles.

Anyway, I agree that they will probably ease him back in, but your whole saving him for the playoffs makes no sense. I think he will have to be healthy enough to not get hurt again (like last year), but once he is past that, I would think the first game or two might be when he doesn't play a full game. I don't see any reason why they would rest him or his production won't be the same as always. From the end of his rookie year through last year, he has been pretty freaking consistent. I don't understand the thought that he will start with 2 games of 25%, then 4 games of 50%, 4 games of 75% and then 4 games of 100%. If he is healthy and not suffering a setback, I would think after his first two games back (let's call it getting the rust off) he might have 2 more not great games. After 4 games of playing, he should be at 100% production.
Click to expand...
My point was that even if he is back, I am not sure he will be able to play 100% of the time at 100% effectiveness. Certainly out of the gate I doubt he plays 100% of the time. The ramp up to how soon he gets to a full workload is one variable that is a big unknown. The other one, at least to me, is how close he will be to 100% this year in terms of total health and capability.

I realize that this is not a great example, but look at Wes Welker. He got hurt in Week 17 of one year and then rushed back to play in Week 1 the following year. WR is not the same as TE, and a torn ACL is different than back and arm surgery. I get that.

Welker the season before averaged 8.8 receptions and 96 yards per game. The year he came back from ACL surgery he averaged 5.7 catches and 56 yards per game. He played fewer snaps to start and then ultimately was not the same player that year even getting back to a high snap count (and obviously stepped it up the follow year and thereafter).

I think some are missing my intent. I don't suggest that the Pats will hold out Gronk until the playoffs or will limit his usage all season to have him for the playoffs. But there is no doubt they need him to win in the playoffs. People saying the Pats will throw him out there if he can breathe and walk upright are missing them big picture. NE has proven they can win in the regular season. But they have proven they have trouble going the distance in the playoffs. Over the past 3 seasons, they've played .813 ball in the regular season but have been .500 in the post season.

Maybe Gronk will start the season at 100% health and have no residual issues from his multiple surgeries. But as a surgeon told me once, the more surgeries you have, the more of a net negative cumulative impact it will have on the body. I would feel more confident in Gronk in 2014 if he can make it through 2013 without any new injuries (or setbacks to older ones).
Click to expand...
Understood and while Welker is a bad example because ACLs are different, Welker still played the entire year at 100%. He wasn't 100% as good as normal, but he didn't get reduced snaps or get saved for the playoffs. He was just less effective, but that was 100% due to coming back from an ACL. I don't think I have seen anything talking about how after Gronk is recovered that he won't be 100% effective like Welker. Personally, the only objection I had was your long ramping up to the playoffs. I could see an initial ramp up in the first couple games, but I think once the rust is off, I don't see the 25% to 50% to 75% to 100%, he is going to start playing when he is ready and I would bet he would be 100% by his 3rd game back.

Also, as a note, I think your talk about the Pats playoff failures is a bit overblown. Yes, they haven't done as well, but guess what, that is the playoffs. The Pats were one or two plays away from two more SB wins. Last year, Denver could have won the SB, but they lost on a terrible play by a safety and/or a conservative call to close out the game. Atlanta also almost beat SF and might have won it all. The Giants won two SBs recently at 10-6 or 9-7, just barely making the playoffs (I am going off memory, but pretty sure they weren't thhe favorites. Playoffs are the best teams and as the say on any given sunday and that applies way more in the playoffs where one play often determines the winner with as many close games as we have had recently.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, the biggest reason the Pats won titles early on and did not later on was health. For the most part, the main guys were healthier in their earlier runs and in recent years they had some guys that were banged up. The Pats SB games were close and could have gone either way. But the years they did not get to the SB their playoff losses were ugly.

 
massraider said:
He's probably underrated at this point. The timeline for recover puts him right at week 1, and I think a pessimistic view is that he misses three games.

The only thing suggesting he won't be 100% in a regular scheduled, timely fashion--is conjecture, guessing. Discussion about game shape, etc, but that is true of ANY player that comes back from any surgery. Why should we tack on two months of exercise to this one particular guy?

We didn't get weekly updates, of course, but what news we have gotten recently has been good. The best news was Belichick blowing off Gronk working out, and saying, that's nothing new, that's what he's been doing.

It's not an experimental surgery, it's been common for ever, and was done to ease the pain because he played through this thing last year. This guy wasn't 100% LAST YEAR! Could he feel better this year than last year? :shock:

Pierre-Paul had the same thing two weeks before, and there isn't talk about longer than expected recovery time, or holding him back once he is activated.

So, for the sake of argument, let's say he misses three, and is good to go week 4. 75%--80%--100%. Let's say he's ready to go week 4.

I submit you take him in the 4th round, and build your draft strategy around that. Consider:

Draft strategy this year, is as herd mentality as I have ever seen.

Take 2 RB back to back, Clavin and Graham are exceptions.

Bryant and Green are strong 2nd rounders.

Depth at WR is insane.

After the top TEs, there's a bunch of guys everyone kind...of....likes.

Wait on QB.

Grabbing Gronk in the 4th fits this strategy so nicely.

Round 1: RB

Round 2: RB

Round 3: WR/stud QB

Round 4: Gronk

Round 5 WR/QB

Man, I wish I still did redraft. Especially if you picking at the end of the 1st. The WRs in the 5th/6th don't take a backseat to many WRs going in the 3rd 4th.

You're getting WR1 numbers (and the guy who scored more TDs than anyone in the last two years) in the 4th. And his situation has improved, from a target standpoint. What till the Italian Darren McFadden gets hurt in a month or so! His biggest competition for catches will be Shane Vereen!

So you start Cook/Cameron/Fred Davis for a few weeks. No guarantee they don't have nice weeks for you. Maybe you hedge and jump on another TE around TE8 or so, I would do that actually.

it's one of the few moves allowing you to go big at RB, and separate yourself from the herd.
Click to expand...
That is real similar to what I did in my 12 team PPR (1.5 PPR for TE). I made a trade so I moved up from my 6th to the other teams 3rd, but here is what I did:

Note that I kept Morris (17th) and Sproles (8th) since so many RBs were kept.

1.12 Brees

2.1 Chris Johnson

3.2 (trade) Bowe

3.12 Wayne

4.1 Gronk

5.12 Nelson

I took Cook and Sudfeld later. I actually took Cook thinking Gronk was going to miss 6 due to PUP and 1 or 2 more games worst case. I figured with the extra 3rd, I would take a flier on Gronk in the hopes that he would be 100% in the second half through the fantasy playoffs.

 
massraider said:
Just Win Baby said:
Did something similar from the 10 slot in a 16 team redraft last night. Richardson-Julio Jones-Luck-Gronk-Vereen-Shorts-etc. Took Dwayne Allen in the 13th round to play until Gronk is back.

I would have gone RB-RB to open, but the value just wasn't there, with 16 RBs drafted by the time of my second round pick.

I had the opportunity to take Witten in the 4th but took Gronk instead... higher risk, higher potential reward.
Click to expand...
Man, in a 16 team league, having your top three targets be Julio, Gronk, Shorts is pretty good. PPR even better, with Vereen.
Click to expand...
It's 0.5 ppr. I'm feeling cautiously optimistic. But end of :hijacked:

 
Anarchy99 said:
IMO, the biggest reason the Pats won titles early on and did not later on was health. For the most part, the main guys were healthier in their earlier runs and in recent years they had some guys that were banged up. The Pats SB games were close and could have gone either way. But the years they did not get to the SB their playoff losses were ugly.
Click to expand...
the reason the pats won the early superbowls were a good defense that could scheme to beat people. this defense, not so much. This team has to put up alot of points to win

 
in my main re--draft i'm picking at the end of the 4th and am hoping he's still there. i live in boston though so i doubt he will be.

 
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Anarchy99 said:
IMO, the biggest reason the Pats won titles early on and did not later on was health. For the most part, the main guys were healthier in their earlier runs and in recent years they had some guys that were banged up. The Pats SB games were close and could have gone either way. But the years they did not get to the SB their playoff losses were ugly.
Click to expand...
the reason the pats won the early superbowls were a good defense that could scheme to beat people. this defense, not so much. This team has to put up alot of points to win
Click to expand...
In their two recent SB runs, the defense allowed the same or fewer points in the post season as the years they won titles.

 
massraider said:
He's probably underrated at this point. The timeline for recover puts him right at week 1, and I think a pessimistic view is that he misses three games.

Draft strategy this year, is as herd mentality as I have ever seen.

Take 2 RB back to back, Clavin and Graham are exceptions.

Bryant and Green are strong 2nd rounders.

Depth at WR is insane.

After the top TEs, there's a bunch of guys everyone kind...of....likes.

Wait on QB.

Grabbing Gronk in the 4th fits this strategy so nicely.

Round 1: RB

Round 2: RB

Round 3: WR/stud QB

Round 4: Gronk

Round 5 WR/QB

Man, I wish I still did redraft. Especially if you picking at the end of the 1st. The WRs in the 5th/6th don't take a backseat to many WRs going in the 3rd 4th.

You're getting WR1 numbers (and the guy who scored more TDs than anyone in the last two years) in the 4th. And his situation has improved, from a target standpoint. What till the Italian Darren McFadden gets hurt in a month or so! His biggest competition for catches will be Shane Vereen!

So you start Cook/Cameron/Fred Davis for a few weeks. No guarantee they don't have nice weeks for you. Maybe you hedge and jump on another TE around TE8 or so, I would do that actually.

it's one of the few moves allowing you to go big at RB, and separate yourself from the herd.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much what I ended up doing in my draft last night.

1: Rice

2: CJ2K

3: Lacy

4: Jordy (Im higher on him than most. I have him as WR11)

5: Gronk

6: DJax

7: Romo

I also got Vereen later which I think is a nice "combo" with Gronk. Cameron is my other TE until Gronk is back (and if he plays like I expect him to maybe becomes trade material when that time comes). Also picked Luck who dropped insanely far and have him as trade value. Already got a trade offer for Luck from the guy who has Dalton as his starter.

Im not quite as happy as with my team namely because of my WR corps (which also includes Jeffery, Roberts, Little, Stills), but when you go TE earlier than everyone but the Graham owner, youre gonna be a little short somewhere.

ETA: Also, Im confident in all my picks before Gronk not busting, so if he does so be it, and I still have another TE Im confident in. IMO huge value if you can get him there based on the current news.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
My point was that even if he is back, I am not sure he will be able to play 100% of the time at 100% effectiveness. Certainly out of the gate I doubt he plays 100% of the time. The ramp up to how soon he gets to a full workload is one variable that is a big unknown. The other one, at least to me, is how close he will be to 100% this year in terms of total health and capability.
Click to expand...
And if you're a Pats fan, this is a legitimate concern.

But for fantasy purposes, I'm not nearly as worried. Gronk is the best red-zone target the Pats have on the roster, quite possibly the best the Pats have ever had in the history of their franchise. If he gets "ramped up," you can bet Bill Belichick's hoodie it'll be via red-zone opportunities - which is where he's historically scored nearly half his fantasy points.

The minute Gronk steps on the field, he becomes a top-3 TE for fantasy purposes. Draft accordingly.

(Thinly veiled brag: Just returned from an auction draft where I scored Gronk for $10 on a $200 cap.) :headbang:

 
Mr. Irrelevant said:
Anarchy99 said:
My point was that even if he is back, I am not sure he will be able to play 100% of the time at 100% effectiveness. Certainly out of the gate I doubt he plays 100% of the time. The ramp up to how soon he gets to a full workload is one variable that is a big unknown. The other one, at least to me, is how close he will be to 100% this year in terms of total health and capability.
Click to expand...
And if you're a Pats fan, this is a legitimate concern.

But for fantasy purposes, I'm not nearly as worried. Gronk is the best red-zone target the Pats have on the roster, quite possibly the best the Pats have ever had in the history of their franchise. If he gets "ramped up," you can bet Bill Belichick's hoodie it'll be via red-zone opportunities - which is where he's historically scored nearly half his fantasy points.

The minute Gronk steps on the field, he becomes a top-3 TE for fantasy purposes. Draft accordingly.

(Thinly veiled brag: Just returned from an auction draft where I scored Gronk for $10 on a $200 cap.) :headbang:
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, I looked it up. 215 of Gronkowski's 501 career points in standard have come in the red zone, so about 43%. In PPR leagues, it's 255 out of 688, or 37%- so limited snaps in the red zone is a bigger deal in PPR leagues than standard (which makes sense).

Also, interestingly enough, Rob Gronkowski has scored more fantasy points in the red zone as a member of the Patriots than Randy Moss (215 vs. 208), and he's done it with 30% fewer targets (60 vs. 85- and yes, I'm counting his one "rushing" attempt as a pass target, because it was). Since 2002, here are New England's leaders in red zone touchdowns: Corey Dillon (36), Wes Welker (30), Rob Gronkowski (30), Randy Moss (29), and... BenJarvus Green-Ellis (28?!).

 
Leonidas said:
Bigboy10182000 said:
Does ANYONE here think he'll be back in week 1? or would you be shocked?
Click to expand...
I don't think he will be.

I would not be shocked.

The real question for me is, if he is active for week 1...would I start him.
Click to expand...
I've been buying Gronk all offseason long, as high as the early 3rd round, and I would be shocked if Gronk was good to go in week 1. With that said, if he's playing, I'm starting him. It's not like I backed him up with Jason Witten or Tony Gonzalez anywhere. I can live with benching Greg Olsen or Jared Cook to roll the dice on the upside of Rob Gronkowski. Now, if he's back and he struggles for a week or two, maybe I move him to the bench... but until I see him clearly limited with my own eyes, if he's playing, he's starting.

 
Rotoworld:

NFL Network's Albert Breer reports the Patriots are "leaning toward" activating Rob Gronkowski (back) from the active/PUP list on Saturday.
Activating Gronk from PUP would mean not only that he's been cleared to practice, but would confirm he'll avoid reserve/PUP to open the season. Per Breer, Gronk remains unlikely to play in football games before "at least" late September. Still, signs point toward Gronkowski missing no more than four games, and we wouldn't be surprised if he returned after two or three. We'll have many more Gronk updates leading up to Week 1 and beyond.

Source: Albert Breer on Twitter
Click to expand...
 
I think I'm going to take a more conservative approach with him. Yudkin has made the point about him possibly being on a limited snap count so I would need to see what happens first before putting him in my lineup. I guess I'd prefer the week too late as opposed to the week too early mistake especially If I have a reasonably viable option at TE that I could roll with.

 
So the Pats cut two TEs today, Ballard and Fells....... I can only see this as more good news for Gronk.

 
The thing about Gronk and his being on a snap count when he gets back that doesnt bother me at all is which snaps will they decide to play him? I would suggest the most important snaps, the snaps in the red zone. A few yards and a touchdown each week makes him more valuable that 90% of tight ends each week. While that may not make him the uber stud all of us owners are hoping for it will be plenty to make him a must start even on a snap count. Assuming he can play he will STILL be one of the best red zone targets in the NFL.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Th

KellysHeroes said:
ahartig said:
So the Pats cut two TEs today, Ballard and Fells....... I can only see this as more good news for Gronk.
Click to expand...
They both sucked and Sudfeld already passed both of them. But it could mean Gronk is being moved to the active roster
Click to expand...
This could also signify a change in the base offense. 2 TE formation was mostly a myth anyway. Hernandez lined up 2/3 to 3/4 of the time as a WR or in the slot.
Click to expand...
NE running a 2 TE set the past couple of years was mostly a myth anyway. The Pats used Hernandez as a WR or in the slot 70% of the time. So they frequently used 3 receiver sets with Welker, Hernandez, and Lloyd last year with Gronk at TE and a single RB.

Once Gronk comes back, we may see a few different wrinkles, as Sudfeld is much more like Gronk than Hernandez, so they may run sets with 2 down TEs more often.

 
Gronk will be listed as questionable every week and we probably won't know before the game when he is going to play knowing Bill.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
TE Cade Otton, TB
Replies
32
Views
2K
Faust
Faust
Ministry of Pain
How can an NFL team have WR be their No 1/2/3 priority when you just watched the Chiefs win B2B Super Bowls without them?
2
Replies
55
Views
1K
FairWarning
FairWarning
T
Travdogg's 3 round mock draft
2
Replies
75
Views
2K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 8 (members: 0, guests: 8)
Top