Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

Kinda like when Antonio Gates was such a high pick in his day.  The problem is, every time I mock, I find myself playing catch up at RB and/or WR.  I never like my team when I take Kelce, with one exception - if I have a top pick, and get him at the start of the 3rd, but he is only there once in a blue moon.

Drafting at the back half of the first is tough this year for sure. It all comes down to one’s personal philosophy but me I try to get an advantage at every position possible (even K and D).  While you may be chasing a position a bit none of the guys you’d draft at that spot will give you the advance Kelce will.  I’m personally OK with being a bit weaker at a deep position like WR vs an extremely thin position like TE.  Your chances of finding replacement level talent at WR is infinitely higher.  I’m sure others will chime in and counter what I’m saying but that’s the best thing about FF, the ability to construct your team the way you want.  

Also on a side note it’s also why I much prefer auctions vs snake.  Can eat my cake and have it too!!   

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been mocking redrafts at 1.07, and he's almost always taken within the first 4 picks of the 2nd round.  If he somehow slides to me at 2.06 I always take him just to get a feel for what my team would look like afterward.  Usually I don't like it, and I end up thin at RB. 

BUT, if I mock going zero RB, he's a great grab.  I end up with a team that looks like Hopkins, Kelce, Diggs, Mahomes, Fitz, then just start bombing RB lotto tickets.  If I try to "draft straight" after taking Kelce in the 2nd, I feel like I end up chasing RBs the rest of the draft, which causes me to end up with QB leftovers like Jameis or Cousins (blech).  Committing to zero RB and going for Mahomes/Luck/ARod early makes me feel better about it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wlwiles said:

I've been mocking redrafts at 1.07, and he's almost always taken within the first 4 picks of the 2nd round.  If he somehow slides to me at 2.06 I always take him just to get a feel for what my team would look like afterward.  Usually I don't like it, and I end up thin at RB. 

BUT, if I mock going zero RB, he's a great grab.  I end up with a team that looks like Hopkins, Kelce, Diggs, Mahomes, Fitz, then just start bombing RB lotto tickets.  If I try to "draft straight" after taking Kelce in the 2nd, I feel like I end up chasing RBs the rest of the draft, which causes me to end up with QB leftovers like Jameis or Cousins (blech).  Committing to zero RB and going for Mahomes/Luck/ARod early makes me feel better about it. 

I could not imagine getting Mahomes in the 4th round of any draft. In my league (12 teams, 6 points for passing TDs) he will likely go in the top 15 picks (probably in the 1st round).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dkp993 said:

Drafting at the back half of the first is tough this year for sure. It all comes down to one’s personal philosophy but me I try to get an advantage at every position possible (even K and D).  While you may be chasing a position a bit none of the guys you’d draft at that spot will give you the advance Kelce will.  I’m personally OK with being a bit weaker at a deep position like WR vs an extremely thin position like TE.  Your chances of finding replacement level talent at WR is infinitely higher.  I’m sure others will chime in and counter what I’m saying but that’s the best thing about FF, the ability to construct your team the way you want.  

WR is the one spot on the wire that is always there for me. The others not so much.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Buck Bradcanon said:

I can make a strong case for Kelce at 1.05 after the big 4 RBs are gone.  I think he will go first round in like 90% of drafts.

I took him there in an FBG draft recently. Team turned out pretty good I think. It is TE premium so a *few* players will slide a little farther than usual because people are drafting TEs earlier than they normally would. But the slide effect isn't huge. 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Keith1 said:

I could not imagine getting Mahomes in the 4th round of any draft. In my league (12 teams, 6 points for passing TDs) he will likely go in the top 15 picks (probably in the 1st round).

I don’t expect to in my real leagues either, this is in Yahoo and ESPN mocks only. I think i got him in the 4th in one mock out of about 12 so far. My general point was more towards going WR/Kelce/WR/Top QB first four picks, not necessarily targeting PM in the 4th, bc as you said he’s never going to be there in a real league 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2019 at 7:39 PM, Leroy Hoard said:
On 7/19/2019 at 11:49 AM, dkp993 said:

Drafting at the back half of the first is tough this year for sure. It all comes down to one’s personal philosophy but me I try to get an advantage at every position possible (even K and D).  While you may be chasing a position a bit none of the guys you’d draft at that spot will give you the advance Kelce will.  I’m personally OK with being a bit weaker at a deep position like WR vs an extremely thin position like TE.  Your chances of finding replacement level talent at WR is infinitely higher.  I’m sure others will chime in and counter what I’m saying but that’s the best thing about FF, the ability to construct your team the way you want.  

WR is the one spot on the wire that is always there for me. The others not so much.

I'm drafting 10th this year and find I'm never happy with mocks when I grab Kelce at either 1.10 or (more commonly) 2.03. It's an an old dilemma going back 15+ years when - in theory - Gates gave you a significant advantage over every other team. Can't tell you how many mediocre teams I've seen that spent a first or second rounder on Gronk.

The problem is it reverberates through your entire draft. Your end up with one other stud - RB1 or WR1 - and a relatively weak RB2 or WR2. Then as you advance into the middle rounds your WR2/WR3 and RB2/RB3 is noticeably weaker than the other astute teams, often a full Tier or two down.

Especially this season, I feel like a much sounder strategy is to take the BPA through 4-5 rounds and then grab Howard, Engram or Henry at the 5/6 turn. I am much more comfortable with those three than the next grouping (in any order: Cook, Ebron, Njoku.)

My objective through four rounds is to mitigate risk. From the 5th round on, I'm much more inclined to reach a round early for guys I like. Drafts are a fluid thing and as you mock over the next six weeks you should experiment with different strategies. Try taking Kelce and see how it looks. Grab an early QB like Luck or Watson in the 4th if they fall a bit. Try going WR/WR or RB/RB, often, just so you have a good sense of how that will play out. I never start out thinking, for instance, "I'm going zero RB this year", but I'm fully prepared to do so if I get to the 15th pick and people have slid Mixon and Chubb and/or Cook + Williams into the Top 14. By the same token, I'm not really a RB-RB-RB kinda guy (it's full PPR, 4-pt passing TD) but I can make it work if the rest of the league goes WR heavy.

But I know my league pretty well, we've been together 25 years, and can look at the board and predict how most of a round is going to progress. Which is why I love being on the ends, I have a pretty good feel for the opportunity cost of my even round picks, when I'll be waiting for 18 players to come off the board before the odd-numbered round comes back to me.

Edited by BobbyLayne
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I'm drafting 10th this year and find I'm never happy with mocks when I grab Kelce at either 1.10 or (more commonly) 2.03. It's an an old dilemma going back 15+ years when - in theory - Gates gave you a significant advantage over every other team. Can't tell you how many mediocre teams I've seen that spent a first or second rounder on Gronk.

The problem is it reverberates through your entire draft. Your end up with one other stud - RB1 or WR1 - and a relatively weak RB2 or WR2. Then as you advance into the middle rounds your WR2/WR3 and RB2/RB3 is noticeably weaker than the other astute teams, often a full Tier or two down.

Especially this season, I feel like a much sounder strategy is to take the BPA through 4-5 rounds and then grab Howard, Engram or Henry at the 5/6 turn. I am much more comfortable with those three than the next grouping (in any order: Cook, Ebron, Njoku.)

My objective through four rounds is to mitigate risk. From the 5th round on, I'm much more inclined to reach a round early for guys I like. Drafts are a fluid thing and as you mock over the next six weeks you should experiment with different strategies. Try taking Kelce and see how it looks. Grab an early QB like Luck or Watson in the 4th if they fall a bit. Try going WR/WR or RB/RB, often, just so you have a good sense of how that will play out. I never start out thinking, for instance, "I'm going zero RB this year", but I'm fully prepared to do so if I get to the 15th pick and people have slid Mixon and Chubb and/or Cook + Williams into the Top 14. By the same token, I'm not really a RB-RB-RB kinda guy (it's full PPR, 4-pt passing TD) but I can make it work if the rest of the league goes WR heavy.

But I know my league pretty well, we've been together 25 years, and can look at the board and predict how most of a round is going to progress. Which is why I love being on the ends, I have a pretty good feel for the opportunity cost of my even round picks, when I'll be waiting for 18 players to come off the board before the odd-numbered round comes back to me.

Derrick Henry's ADP is 39. I want to join your league if you are "getting him at the 5/6 turn."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Keith1 said:

Derrick Henry's ADP is 39. I want to join your league if you are "getting him at the 5/6 turn."

Hi.

We’re discussing Travis Kelce and related TE drafting strategy.

There’s a TE who plays for the Chargers who has an ECR of TE5/6 with an ADP of roughly 60.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

I'm drafting 10th this year and find I'm never happy with mocks when I grab Kelce at either 1.10 or (more commonly) 2.03. It's an an old dilemma going back 15+ years when - in theory - Gates gave you a significant advantage over every other team. Can't tell you how many mediocre teams I've seen that spent a first or second rounder on Gronk.

The problem is it reverberates through your entire draft. Your end up with one other stud - RB1 or WR1 - and a relatively weak RB2 or WR2. Then as you advance into the middle rounds your WR2/WR3 and RB2/RB3 is noticeably weaker than the other astute teams, often a full Tier or two down.

Especially this season, I feel like a much sounder strategy is to take the BPA through 4-5 rounds and then grab Howard, Engram or Henry at the 5/6 turn. I am much more comfortable with those three than the next grouping (in any order: Cook, Ebron, Njoku.)

My objective through four rounds is to mitigate risk. From the 5th round on, I'm much more inclined to reach a round early for guys I like. Drafts are a fluid thing and as you mock over the next six weeks you should experiment with different strategies. Try taking Kelce and see how it looks. Grab an early QB like Luck or Watson in the 4th if they fall a bit. Try going WR/WR or RB/RB, often, just so you have a good sense of how that will play out. I never start out thinking, for instance, "I'm going zero RB this year", but I'm fully prepared to do so if I get to the 15th pick and people have slid Mixon and Chubb and/or Cook + Williams into the Top 14. By the same token, I'm not really a RB-RB-RB kinda guy (it's full PPR, 4-pt passing TD) but I can make it work if the rest of the league goes WR heavy.

But I know my league pretty well, we've been together 25 years, and can look at the board and predict how most of a round is going to progress. Which is why I love being on the ends, I have a pretty good feel for the opportunity cost of my even round picks, when I'll be waiting for 18 players to come off the board before the odd-numbered round comes back to me.

great points. it's very hard to assemble a winning team when you select a TE in the first round. you'll spend bigtime on waivers and you'll usually have to bust a trade or two during the season to correct the lineup.

bpa for 4-5 rounds is great advice! hold off on TE and QB till then. grab 2 really good RBs and 2 really good WRs. then start building around that. Kelce has an advantage over all other TEs for sure, but when he's just as likely to throw up his typical stinkers where he goes 7-133-2 one week, and 1-6 the next. and 2018 was a historical record for him and the TE position. fair to say there is a regression coming. he'll still be the #1 guy, but it won't be by last years stats where he was head and shoulders above all others.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tanner9919 said:

great points. it's very hard to assemble a winning team when you select a TE in the first round. you'll spend bigtime on waivers and you'll usually have to bust a trade or two during the season to correct the lineup.

bpa for 4-5 rounds is great advice! hold off on TE and QB till then. grab 2 really good RBs and 2 really good WRs. then start building around that. Kelce has an advantage over all other TEs for sure, but when he's just as likely to throw up his typical stinkers where he goes 7-133-2 one week, and 1-6 the next. and 2018 was a historical record for him and the TE position. fair to say there is a regression coming. he'll still be the #1 guy, but it won't be by last years stats where he was head and shoulders above all others.

This is the great thing about FF.  The different strategies.

Btw for the record the 1-6 type game you mentioned Kelce has is true, with one major distinction.  It was the first game of the year and the only game he had all year even remotely like that.  In a PPR he didn’t score under double digits the rest of the year.  1, 30, 20, 20, 16, 11, 14, 19, 28, 10, 29, 39, 20, 13, 10, 11 was his game splits.  He out scored the number 5 TE on the year by 100pts.  100!   I’ll take this positional advantage everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dkp993 said:

This is the great thing about FF.  The different strategies.

Btw for the record the 1-6 type game you mentioned Kelce has is true, with one major distinction.  It was the first game of the year and the only game he had all year even remotely like that.  In a PPR he didn’t score under double digits the rest of the year.  1, 30, 20, 20, 16, 11, 14, 19, 28, 10, 29, 39, 20, 13, 10, 11 was his game splits.  He out scored the number 5 TE on the year by 100pts.  100!   I’ll take this positional advantage everyday of the week and twice on Sunday.  

Tony Gonzales had consecutive seasons of dominance over the TE5 - over 100 in 2003, and 95 in 2004. Gates never came close, and Gronk accomplished it exactly once, his 17-TD rookie season of 2011.

Kelce has been the TE1 three times in a row, which matches Gonzales longest streak (2002-04), exceeds Gates (2005-06 were his only years as the TE1), and matches Gronk's career total (2014-15 consecutively.) We consider it a foregone conclusion Kelce is about to embark on the fourth year of his TE1 reign, and while there is no evidence to the contrary, it's also never happened in the previous 99 NFL seasons. To be fair, TEs have only been a thing for roughly the last 60 years.

Should we bank a first rounder on something unprecedented happening this year? I think I'll go a different route.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On one hand I really enjoy these threads but on the other, they are almost pointless. So many things factor into a successful fantasy season that this bit of strategy doesn’t cover it. I’ve won a lot leagues taking Gronk high. I’ve lost leagues as well. I’ve won leagues where I had the classic two RBs first 3-4 rounds and also lost a ton of leagues when one or both of those RBs got hurt (which they do more than any other positions).

Last year I took Kelce high in two leagues and made the playoffs in both. In another league, I had Barkley and some guy named Mahomes that I grabbed late. Team didn’t even sniff the playoffs. Again, I’m not trying to be a clown—I appreciate the threads but at the end of the day, an entire season is too complex to break down on wether or not the “positional advantage” works or not.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Should we bank a first rounder on something unprecedented happening this year? I think I'll go a different route.

Certainly a fair question.  Considering his age and the situation I think outside of the top 4/5 RB’s and Nuk he’s the safest no QB to return on his ADP.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Kwai Chang Caine said:

On one hand I really enjoy these threads but on the other, they are almost pointless. So many things factor into a successful fantasy season that this bit of strategy doesn’t cover it. I’ve won a lot leagues taking Gronk high. I’ve lost leagues as well. I’ve won leagues where I had the classic two RBs first 3-4 rounds and also lost a ton of leagues when one or both of those RBs got hurt (which they do more than any other positions).

Last year I took Kelce high in two leagues and made the playoffs in both. In another league, I had Barkley and some guy named Mahomes that I grabbed late. Team didn’t even sniff the playoffs. Again, I’m not trying to be a clown—I appreciate the threads but at the end of the day, an entire season is too complex to break down on wether or not the “positional advantage” works or not.

For sure, and none of us claim to have all the answers (at least I certainly don’t).  It’s just fun to discuss strategy while we await the season.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Tony Gonzales had consecutive seasons of dominance over the TE5 - over 100 in 2003, and 95 in 2004. Gates never came close, and Gronk accomplished it exactly once, his 17-TD rookie season of 2011.

Kelce has been the TE1 three times in a row, which matches Gonzales longest streak (2002-04), exceeds Gates (2005-06 were his only years as the TE1), and matches Gronk's career total (2014-15 consecutively.) We consider it a foregone conclusion Kelce is about to embark on the fourth year of his TE1 reign, and while there is no evidence to the contrary, it's also never happened in the previous 99 NFL seasons. To be fair, TEs have only been a thing for roughly the last 60 years.

Should we bank a first rounder on something unprecedented happening this year? I think I'll go a different route.

His consistency the last 3 years is a negative now because no one’s ever done it 4 times in a row? That seems odd to me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

His consistency the last 3 years is a negative now because no one’s ever done it 4 times in a row? That seems odd to me.

Inductive reasoning takes specific information and makes a broad generalization that is considered probable, allowing for the fact that the conclusion may not be accurate. This type of reasoning usually involves a pattern or rule being established based on a series of repeated experiences. This was the type of argument I was presenting.

Not just TE; no position has ever seen the same player achieve four straight years of being #1 in FF. Jerry Rice, who dominated his position more than any player ever, was WR1 three straight years twice - but never four times.

A Straw Man is a logical fallacy which oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument. This is what you used this morning. It’s pretty weak sauce because you’re not actually presenting any counter argument or alternative explanation.

Kelce may end up being TE1 once again, but past performance is no a guarante of future results. It should not surprise anyone if it doesn’t happen because, again, not because it’s rare, but because it hasn’t happened in a century  of league history.

Maybe 2019 will be the exception that proves the rule.

 

Share this post


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

Inductive reasoning takes specific information and makes a broad generalization that is considered probable, allowing for the fact that the conclusion may not be accurate. This type of reasoning usually involves a pattern or rule being established based on a series of repeated experiences. This was the type of argument I was presenting.

Not just TE; no position has ever seen the same player achieve four straight years of being #1 in FF. Jerry Rice, who dominated his position more than any player ever, was WR1 three straight years twice - but never four times.

A Straw Man is a logical fallacy which oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument. This is what you used this morning. It’s pretty weak sauce because you’re not actually presenting any counter argument or alternative explanation.

Kelce may end up being TE1 once again, but past performance is no a guarante of future results. It should not surprise anyone if it doesn’t happen because, again, not because it’s rare, but because it hasn’t happened in a century  of league history.

Maybe 2019 will be the exception that proves the rule.

 

All very true.  The history is clear here.  And he could very well end up #2.   But nothing about the situation is scary.  In fact other then the history every other factor lines up positively for Kelce to finish #1.  

Side not.  Didn’t AB have a long run at the top of the WR ranks? I’m not in a spot I can look it up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dkp993 said:

Side not.  Didn’t AB have a long run at the top of the WR ranks? I’m not in a spot I can look it up.  

Last 5 yrs WR ranks:

1-1-3-2-2

(was also WR8 in his breakout year, 2013)

ETA: wonder if the site I pulled that from is 0.5PPR. In our full PPR he went 3-1-1-1-2-5 over the last six seasons.

Edited by BobbyLayne

Share this post


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

Last 5 yrs WR ranks:

1-1-3-2-2

(was also WR8 in his breakout year, 2013)

ETA: wonder if the site I pulled that from is 0.5PPR. In our full PPR he went 3-1-1-1-2-5 over the last six seasons.

I just checked and I’m my league, full PPR with a bonus point for +50yrd TD’s, AB was first in ‘14,’15,’16 and ‘17 (he was 5 pts ahead of Nuk).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

Inductive reasoning takes specific information and makes a broad generalization that is considered probable, allowing for the fact that the conclusion may not be accurate. This type of reasoning usually involves a pattern or rule being established based on a series of repeated experiences. This was the type of argument I was presenting.

Not just TE; no position has ever seen the same player achieve four straight years of being #1 in FF. Jerry Rice, who dominated his position more than any player ever, was WR1 three straight years twice - but never four times.

A Straw Man is a logical fallacy which oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument. This is what you used this morning. It’s pretty weak sauce because you’re not actually presenting any counter argument or alternative explanation.

Kelce may end up being TE1 once again, but past performance is no a guarante of future results. It should not surprise anyone if it doesn’t happen because, again, not because it’s rare, but because it hasn’t happened in a century  of league history.

Maybe 2019 will be the exception that proves the rule.

 

A Straw Man? Whether you used the actual word “consistency” or not, the piece of your argument that I disagreed with was you saying that Kelce finishing te1 3 years in a row somehow makes it less likely that he’ll have a strong year this year. I’d call that history pretty consistent thus the use of my word to describe your argument. 

A longer version: You’re saying that since Kelce has been TE1 3 years in a row and historically no TE has ever done that 4 times in a row that him finishing TE1 this year is less likely. That’s a logical fallacy. The more difficult part of that equation is the part he’s already accomplished- finishing TE1 3 years in a row. In fact according to your numbers it’s only happened once ever. So it would be a sample size of exactly one when looking at doing it a 4th time in a row after having already done it 3 times.

At this point he only has to finish TE1 this year to accomplish that and as the guy whose been TE1 3 years in a row, with no significant changes to his team situation he is the favorite to do it this year. History of a TE1 4-peat has no bearing on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cobbler1 said:

A Straw Man? Whether you used the actual word “consistency” or not, the piece of your argument that I disagreed with was you saying that Kelce finishing te1 3 years in a row somehow makes it less likely that he’ll have a strong year this year. I’d call that history pretty consistent thus the use of my word to describe your argument. 

A longer version: You’re saying that since Kelce has been TE1 3 years in a row and historically no TE has ever done that 4 times in a row that him finishing TE1 this year is less likely. That’s a logical fallacy. The more difficult part of that equation is the part he’s already accomplished- finishing TE1 3 years in a row. In fact according to your numbers it’s only happened once ever. So it would be a sample size of exactly one when looking at doing it a 4th time in a row after having already done it 3 times.

At this point he only has to finish TE1 this year to accomplish that and as the guy whose been TE1 3 years in a row, with no significant changes to his team situation he is the favorite to do it this year. History of a TE1 4-peat has no bearing on that.

I’ll leave @BobbyLayne to answer for himself but imo his position is not out of line. There is inherent risk with expecting someone to do something that hasn’t been done before. This coupled with not being excited about his roster after mocking with Kelce at the 1/2 turn makes the decision for him (and others obviously) easier.  I’m in agreement with you that I think the odds favor Kelce and as I’ve said I like the positional advantage, but I understand the counter argument.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Kwai Chang Caine said:

On one hand I really enjoy these threads but on the other, they are almost pointless. So many things factor into a successful fantasy season that this bit of strategy doesn’t cover it. I’ve won a lot leagues taking Gronk high. I’ve lost leagues as well. I’ve won leagues where I had the classic two RBs first 3-4 rounds and also lost a ton of leagues when one or both of those RBs got hurt (which they do more than any other positions).

Last year I took Kelce high in two leagues and made the playoffs in both. In another league, I had Barkley and some guy named Mahomes that I grabbed late. Team didn’t even sniff the playoffs. Again, I’m not trying to be a clown—I appreciate the threads but at the end of the day, an entire season is too complex to break down on wether or not the “positional advantage” works or not.

Great post....seriously great post.....

if your first or seconded rounder goes down at any position you are behind the 8 ball...”possibly” a little less at RB/WR where you can maybe hit on somebody else/sleeper that keeps you afloat....there aren't as many options at TE....

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

I’ll leave @BobbyLayne to answer for himself but imo his position is not out of line. There is inherent risk with expecting someone to do something that hasn’t been done before. This coupled with not being excited about his roster after mocking with Kelce at the 1/2 turn makes the decision for him (and others obviously) easier.  I’m in agreement with you that I think the odds favor Kelce and as I’ve said I like the positional advantage, but I understand the counter argument.  

I can understand the counter arguments against drafting Kelce in the first or early second. I’m not debating that. I’m debating his logic that Kelce is less likely to be the TE1 this year because he’s been the last 3 years and no one has ever done 4 straight. It’s akin to saying that the odds of flipping a coin on heads 4 times in a row are 1 in 16 after you’ve already hit heads 3 times in a row . Going into your 4th flip your odds are now 1 in 2 that the final outcome of your trial is 4 heads. The prior 3 flips don’t matter anymore, only the final one. We already have Kelce as TE1 3 times in row. The history of how hard that is doesn’t matter. Only what you think happens this year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

it's also never happened in the previous 99 NFL seasons.

Don Hutson was the #1 fantasy WR for his entire career - 11 straight seasons from 1935 thru 1945.  Some guy made it close one year, but other than he, he dominated.

  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheWinz said:

Don Hutson was the #1 fantasy WR for his entire career - 11 straight seasons from 1935 thru 1945.  Some guy made it close one year, but other than he, he dominated.

Def the closest thing to Baba Ruth in the leather helmet era. Was a great DB & the placekicker. Retired his last three years in a row but then decided to play anyway (& you thought Favre was tiresome lol.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

I can understand the counter arguments against drafting Kelce in the first or early second. I’m not debating that. I’m debating his logic that Kelce is less likely to be the TE1 this year because he’s been the last 3 years and no one has ever done 4 straight. It’s akin to saying that the odds of flipping a coin on heads 4 times in a row are 1 in 16 after you’ve already hit heads 3 times in a row . Going into your 4th flip your odds are now 1 in 2 that the final outcome of your trial is 4 heads. The prior 3 flips don’t matter anymore, only the final one. We already have Kelce as TE1 3 times in row. The history of how hard that is doesn’t matter. Only what you think happens this year.

Absolutely.  But there’s a reason it’s never been done before, it’s really hard.  My money is on it happening but Kittle could challenge 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

I can understand the counter arguments against drafting Kelce in the first or early second. I’m not debating that. I’m debating his logic that Kelce is less likely to be the TE1 this year because he’s been the last 3 years and no one has ever done 4 straight. It’s akin to saying that the odds of flipping a coin on heads 4 times in a row are 1 in 16 after you’ve already hit heads 3 times in a row . Going into your 4th flip your odds are now 1 in 2 that the final outcome of your trial is 4 heads. The prior 3 flips don’t matter anymore, only the final one. We already have Kelce as TE1 3 times in row. The history of how hard that is doesn’t matter. Only what you think happens this year.

100% on board with this line of thinking.....

many drafters/experts make a lot of their projections/basis on what other people have or have not done in the past...”Mahomes can’t possibly throw for 50 again because its never been done, has to be regression ”....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

I can understand the counter arguments against drafting Kelce in the first or early second. I’m not debating that. I’m debating his logic that Kelce is less likely to be the TE1 this year because he’s been the last 3 years and no one has ever done 4 straight. It’s akin to saying that the odds of flipping a coin on heads 4 times in a row are 1 in 16 after you’ve already hit heads 3 times in a row . Going into your 4th flip your odds are now 1 in 2 that the final outcome of your trial is 4 heads. The prior 3 flips don’t matter anymore, only the final one. We already have Kelce as TE1 3 times in row. The history of how hard that is doesn’t matter. Only what you think happens this year.

I remember arguing with this guy who said the Cavs wouldnt win game 7 against Golden State because no team had ever come back from down 1-3. But I kept saying they're tied 3-3 now, so that doesn't matter anymore. 

But yeah, you're right. Independent events and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this runs counter to what most people are saying, but for me my best redraft teams over the years (and best ball) have been ones where I took Kelce, Gronk, or got super lucky by picking the Kittles and Jordan Camerons out there.

There is no question that taking an elite TE early affects the rest of your draft, and it reduces the room for error. But WRs can be had, and you should be able to draft a stud TE and still be strong at RB. You can even go TE RB WR or TE WR RB and be off to a very strong start. 

It is *hard* to replace quality starters at RB or WR, but it can be done. TE is much more difficult and the positional advantage that Kelce gives is second to none. We can debate about albatrossing it with Ertz or Kittle in the 2nd/3rd but personally I think it's worth taking those guys early. And then confidently nailing the rest of your draft. 

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


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

I guess this runs counter to what most people are saying, but for me my best redraft teams over the years (and best ball) have been ones where I took Kelce, Gronk, or got super lucky by picking the Kittles and Jordan Camerons out there.

There is no question that taking an elite TE early affects the rest of your draft, and it reduces the room for error. But WRs can be had, and you should be able to draft a stud TE and still be strong at RB. You can even go TE RB WR or TE WR RB and be off to a very strong start. 

It is *hard* to replace quality starters at RB or WR, but it can be done. TE is much more difficult and the positional advantage that Kelce gives is second to none. We can debate about albatrossing it with Ertz or Kittle in the 2nd/3rd but personally I think it's worth taking those guys early. And then confidently nailing the rest of your draft. 

:goodposting:

Share this post


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

I also like drafting a top TE early if there are real standouts available like Kelce.  It's so much easier to find an out of nowhere stud at other positions. 

True but it's still possible at Tight End as well. Look at Kittle and Ebron last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about shallow leagues?

The DD really elevates TE, But last year I took Gronk at 9 and it flamed out   I pick 6 this year. Would be the earliest a TE has ever been picked in our 15 years. Our league run on TE is normally the 3-5th

We start QB-RB-WR-TE and two flex (RB/WR/TE). It’s 12 teams. 12 rounds (only 4 bench) it’s a 6 pt per TD PPR league  

the DD really elevates TEs 

Kelce 6, Ertz 17, Kittle 22

Mahomes is 19 but I’d anticipate he goes in the top 15 and the other three in round 3. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gottabesweet said:

What about shallow leagues?

The DD really elevates TE, But last year I took Gronk at 9 and it flamed out   I pick 6 this year. Would be the earliest a TE has ever been picked in our 15 years. Our league run on TE is normally the 3-5th

We start QB-RB-WR-TE and two flex (RB/WR/TE). It’s 12 teams. 12 rounds (only 4 bench) it’s a 6 pt per TD PPR league  

the DD really elevates TEs 

Kelce 6, Ertz 17, Kittle 22

Mahomes is 19 but I’d anticipate he goes in the top 15 and the other three in round 3. 

 

Put me in the camp that I've never quite liked my team the years I've take Gronk or Jimmy Graham late Round 1 or Round 2. Like others have said, I've always felt like I was playing catch up and it just seemed like I was trying too hard to be the smartest guy in the room. 

I know VBD says Kelce is surely worth a late first but if he's there at pick 10 or at 2.03 I'll pass. While he does give you positional advantage it's at a position where 80% of the rest of the league will be in the same boat as the rest - and the rest of your line-up suffers (and WR is not as deep as is being stated, not when looking at top guys versus the rest of the field).

I have Kelce in one dynasty so I'll hope he still finishes TE1 but I'd rather double up on WRs or RBs at 1.10 and 2.03.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also with the camp that tends to lose with TE picks in the first rounds. That said, numbers don't lie. I'm sure lots of people win with it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying I would draft a TE early in every league but I'm definitely not afraid to. I also agree there is not as much depth at the top of the WR ranks. The only real change in my draft performance if I take Kelce in the top 10 is that I have to work a little harder on my WR2. If I draft well enough I feel this is doable. 

Shallow league might be a different story. I've never done one with only 12 rounds. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve had the same perception as well that when I draft a TE early I feel like I’m weaker at a bunch of other positions. But reality is that you’re only weaker at either RB1 or WR1 when compared to other teams depending what direction they went in the first round. And that should be offset by your edge at TE. An advantage is that if you end up weaker at wr for example it’s easier to chase talent there IMO (excluding super shallow leagues). In leagues with 6 or more bench spots I’m probably going to have 3 or 4 wrs on my bench if I have a legit starting TE so that’s 3-4 dart throws at improving my wrs or my flex. If I’m chasing TE late I might end up with 1 or 2 TE on my bench so it’s less dart throws hoping to find that diamond in the rough and it’s also less likely to help my flex. Does that make sense? 

Edited by Cobbler1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you draft Kelce, in theory you get a big advantage over every other team in your league at TE, in exchange for a big disadvantage at RB1 or WR1, unless you get lucky and draft a player lower in the draft who outperforms his draft position. But if you don't draft Kelce, you only have a big disadvantage at TE to 1 team in your league, the Kelce owner, and you are as good or better than other teams at RB1 and/or WR1.

I drafted Kelce last year, and ultimately felt it hurt my roster more than helped with the positional advantage. I'm with the group that will pass on him this year unless he falls much further than expected.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

When you draft Kelce, in theory you get a big advantage over every other team in your league at TE, in exchange for a big disadvantage at RB1 or WR1, unless you get lucky and draft a player lower in the draft who outperforms his draft position. But if you don't draft Kelce, you only have a big disadvantage at TE to 1 team in your league, the Kelce owner, and you are as good or better than other teams at RB1 and/or WR1.

I drafted Kelce last year, and ultimately felt it hurt my roster more than helped with the positional advantage. I'm with the group that will pass on him this year unless he falls much further than expected.

If we’re considering all other TEs equal in this exercise then yes you’ll only be at a disadvantage to the Kelce owner but you’re in theory only better than 1 team (Kelce team) at RB/WR. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kelce right now is a 6.08 point advantage over the average tight ends per the football guys draft app, he was up to 7.14 points prior to the hill news. 

I think that is a great advantage to have for a particular position especially when there are wr and rb that always come out of no where to make an impact later in the year due to injuries.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two major components to consider every time you make a draft pick: 1) are you drafting the most valuable player available? and 2) are you maximizing future draft flexibility? (i.e. are you making it more or less likely to make good future picks). I feel like some fantasy owners put tons of energy into the first component and give component #2 only minor consideration and that can be a mistake.

Many strategy games have a phenomenon that we can call “high wire act play.” For example, in poker creative players will open raise out of position with 7 9 even though it’s mathematically unsound because they believe it will create situations where they can out-read and outmaneuver their opponents later. In chess some players will use unconventional, less sound openings in hopes of putting their opponents in uncommon, uncomfortable positions where an advantage can be achieved later. These kinds of swashbuckling tactics are often irresistible to players because they are fun and because they feel very satisfying when executed successfully, but they require a lot of skill and more often than not they are misused, especially at the hobbyist level.

While taking an elite TE like Kelce early doesn’t feel like daring play and is perfectly sound from a VBD standpoint, it often creates a kind of high wire act play scenario in which you increase the difficulty of future decisions and future play (particularly when you don’t pair Kelce with a RB). If you’re an original thinker and a great talent evaluator and have player valuations that tend to deviate a lot from ADP it can be a great approach, but for many players it’s a mistake to put yourself in a position where you need to find productive RBs when all of the RBs with obvious pedigree or high volume projections are off the board.

Another thing that should be considered is the relationship between your draft strategy and agency. At the later draft positions like 9-12 when you bypass a RB for say Kelce + a WR you have to endure an agonizing amount of picks between your round 2 and round 3 selection. If a greater than expected run on RBs occurs—which is totally outside of your control—often you’re F-ed. In addition to that, if you take Kelce and end up going Zero RB and relying on a bunch of “lotto ticket” RBs the viability of your season often hinges on whether or not RB injuries occur that elevate your players. There are certainly conditions where Zero RB works and sometimes you can make those kind of injury gambles profitably. But fantasy football has so much randomness already, I generally prefer strategies that don’t consciously invite in more of it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, electric Ape said:

There are two major components to consider every time you make a draft pick: 1) are you drafting the most valuable player available? and 2) are you maximizing future draft flexibility? (i.e. are you making it more or less likely to make good future picks). I feel like some fantasy owners put tons of energy into the first component and give component #2 only minor consideration and that can be a mistake.

Many strategy games have a phenomenon that we can call “high wire act play.” For example, in poker creative players will open raise out of position with 7 9 even though it’s mathematically unsound because they believe it will create situations where they can out-read and outmaneuver their opponents later. In chess some players will use unconventional, less sound openings in hopes of putting their opponents in uncommon, uncomfortable positions where an advantage can be achieved later. These kinds of swashbuckling tactics are often irresistible to players because they are fun and because they feel very satisfying when executed successfully, but they require a lot of skill and more often than not they are misused, especially at the hobbyist level.

While taking an elite TE like Kelce early doesn’t feel like daring play and is perfectly sound from a VBD standpoint, it often creates a kind of high wire act play scenario in which you increase the difficulty of future decisions and future play (particularly when you don’t pair Kelce with a RB). If you’re an original thinker and a great talent evaluator and have player valuations that tend to deviate a lot from ADP it can be a great approach, but for many players it’s a mistake to put yourself in a position where you need to find productive RBs when all of the RBs with obvious pedigree or high volume projections are off the board.

Another thing that should be considered is the relationship between your draft strategy and agency. At the later draft positions like 9-12 when you bypass a RB for say Kelce + a WR you have to endure an agonizing amount of picks between your round 2 and round 3 selection. If a greater than expected run on RBs occurs—which is totally outside of your control—often you’re F-ed. In addition to that, if you take Kelce and end up going Zero RB and relying on a bunch of “lotto ticket” RBs the viability of your season often hinges on whether or not RB injuries occur that elevate your players. There are certainly conditions where Zero RB works and sometimes you can make those kind of injury gambles profitably. But fantasy football has so much randomness already, I generally prefer strategies that don’t consciously invite in more of it.

Admittedly, I haven't done the mock drafts to see what a team looks like when you take Kelce in the late 1st or early 2nd, but I trust what the posters above have written.

To me it all comes down to a few factors. 
1) What are the starting requirements of your league?  Eschewing a stud RB in a league where you only have to start 1 is very different from starting 2 (or more). 
2) How deep are the benches in your league?  If you have a short bench, you lose the ability to grab and stash RB lottery tickets. 
3) What's the scoring system in your league?  I can make the argument that Kelce is the single most valuable player in some formats, based on his value over the rest of the TE field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cobbler1 said:

If we’re considering all other TEs equal in this exercise then yes you’ll only be at a disadvantage to the Kelce owner but you’re in theory only better than 1 team (Kelce team) at RB/WR. 

I'm not saying they are all equal, just that Kelce theoretically provides a disproportionate advantage. So not taking him means you are only at a disproportionate disadvantage to 1 team.

For a given league and draft position, regardless of what that draft position is, one can perform multiple mock drafts in which they take Kelce at the latest reasonable draft slot and others where they purposely do not. My expectation is that the latter teams will compare more favorably to the rest of the league's teams and will stand a better chance of winning.

Share this post


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

I'm not saying they are all equal, just that Kelce theoretically provides a disproportionate advantage. So not taking him means you are only at a disproportionate disadvantage to 1 team.

For a given league and draft position, regardless of what that draft position is, one can perform multiple mock drafts in which they take Kelce at the latest reasonable draft slot and others where they purposely do not. My expectation is that the latter teams will compare more favorably to the rest of the league's teams and will stand a better chance of winning.

Right but where you said if you don’t draft Kelce you are only disadvantaged to one team while being as good as or better than every other team is misleading. You would have an advantage over one team, a disadvantage over one team, (the Kelce team in each case), and be on equal footing with the other 10.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, electric Ape said:

 

While taking an elite TE like Kelce early doesn’t feel like daring play and is perfectly sound from a VBD standpoint, it often creates a kind of high wire act play scenario in which you increase the difficulty of future decisions and future play (particularly when you don’t pair Kelce with a RB). If you’re an original thinker and a great talent evaluator and have player valuations that tend to deviate a lot from ADP it can be a great approach, but for many players it’s a mistake to put yourself in a position where you need to find productive RBs when all of the RBs with obvious pedigree or high volume projections are off the board.

Another thing that should be considered is the relationship between your draft strategy and agency. At the later draft positions like 9-12 when you bypass a RB for say Kelce + a WR you have to endure an agonizing amount of picks between your round 2 and round 3 selection. If a greater than expected run on RBs occurs—which is totally outside of your control—often you’re F-ed.

I do feel I am a creative or smart enough (or whatever it is) owner to nail a draft despite putting myself into a more difficult situation by taking an elite TE early. I usually evaluate RBs pretty hard and can find value RB picks in the 4th thru 10th rounds. Even if there is a run in that 2nd to 3rd like you mentioned. And that does happen. But, for me I would be happy to take Chubb at 2.03 even though there is likely a stud WR on the board. Go Kelce and a RB and you are probably better off than Kelce and a WR, strictly in terms of the level of difficulty for the rest of the draft. Ingram is typically there at the end of the 3rd. I think he makes a fine RB1. Montgomery and Ingram make a fine RB 1/2 at the 3nd and 4th round turn. There are other names there, too. I'm not stoked about the WRs in that area so going Kelce RB RB seems right and maybe even Mahomes. But I wouldn't be opposed to Kelce RB RB RB. In all reality I probably take OBJ or Julio or someone like that at 2.03 if they are there and I think a RB will be there in the 3rd/4th. I have typically always done very well with teams like this. 

I'm just saying I think there are lots of options even with picking a TE early, but as I've said before I do this *some* of the time. I've played a lot of FBG where it is TE premium so I have a lot of midstakes experience drafting early TEs. Yes the boards are different but taking an early TE still reverberates through the rest of your draft. Many of the same patterns apply. 

Edited by barackdhouse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2019 at 9:18 AM, Gottabesweet said:

What about shallow leagues?

The DD really elevates TE, But last year I took Gronk at 9 and it flamed out   I pick 6 this year. Would be the earliest a TE has ever been picked in our 15 years. Our league run on TE is normally the 3-5th

We start QB-RB-WR-TE and two flex (RB/WR/TE). It’s 12 teams. 12 rounds (only 4 bench) it’s a 6 pt per TD PPR league  

the DD really elevates TEs 

Kelce 6, Ertz 17, Kittle 22

Mahomes is 19 but I’d anticipate he goes in the top 15 and the other three in round 3. 

Your DD is elevating the TEs because your lineups are so shallow. The first guy off the bench in your format is going to be ~RB20 / ~WR28 or TE13. Last year in full-PPR RB20 scored 175 points, WR28 scored 172, and TE13 racked up all of 122. DD compares the 300 or so points it expects from a mid-1st rounder to each of those and sees TE as the clear winner by VBD.

Even so, I probably wouldn't jump on Kelce that high in a 12-teamer. With only 4-man benches I can't imagine there will be too many (if any) backup TEs rostered, so the opportunity cost of Kelce in the 1st would be way too high for me knowing I could pretty easily stream / throw darts at the position all season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mr. Irrelevant said:

Your DD is elevating the TEs because your lineups are so shallow. The first guy off the bench in your format is going to be ~RB20 / ~WR28 or TE13. Last year in full-PPR RB20 scored 175 points, WR28 scored 172, and TE13 racked up all of 122. DD compares the 300 or so points it expects from a mid-1st rounder to each of those and sees TE as the clear winner by VBD.

Even so, I probably wouldn't jump on Kelce that high in a 12-teamer. With only 4-man benches I can't imagine there will be too many (if any) backup TEs rostered, so the opportunity cost of Kelce in the 1st would be way too high for me knowing I could pretty easily stream / throw darts at the position all season.

Yeah, I agree here. Good points.  Normally 16-18 QBs are rostered and 14-16 TEs. 

So because of the shallowness I should be more conserved with the best 4 RB/WR combo I can find? Likely RB,WR,WR,WR

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.