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.
****OFFICIAL DYNASTY TRADES**** (18 Viewers)
- Thread starter Gottabesweet
- Start date
gianmarco
Footballguy
I think you're way underselling what Rudolph accomplished last year. In this scoring format (1.5 ppr for TE), he was the #10 overall WR/TE. He outscored guys like Cooks and Amari Cooper and was only 9 pts behind Julio Jones.
You know who else was relatively average at TE for his first 5 seasons? Greg Olsen. During that time he averaged 48/504/5 or 152 pts/season. He then broke out for 69/843/5 in his 6th season and hasn't looked back since (2 yrs of 800+ yds and then 3 yrs of 1000+ yds) at the same age that Rudolph is now.
Not saying Rudolph will go on to follow exactly in Olsen's footsteps, but writing him off completely because he hasn't been great his first few years is a little premature. He still has room to actually improve.
buck naked
Footballguy
FFPC league, TE premium
J. Howard
for
H. Henry & 2.02
J. Howard
for
H. Henry & 2.02
Warhogs
Footballguy
Next year should be another good year for Rudolph with check down Bradford tossing the football.
Howard vs Henry is close for me, if I was re-doing rookie rankings from last year I'd have Henry 1.3 and Howard 1.4. So by close I mean in re-ranking them, but I got a trade offer about 2 weeks ago asking if I would like to move Henry for Howard and I did not give "yes" any consideration and I truly like Howard and am loaded at TE and still not something I considered. Again really like Howard but he's got a far greater chance to flame out and Henry is someone who I think barring injuries has a real chance to be a 7-10 year type lineup fixture.
So for me this pick is on the wrong side.
Last edited by a moderator:
One More Rep
Footballguy
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Fair enough. I should know the scoring system better before I comment. And sure Rudolph could take off going forward.gianmarco said:
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I'm surprised to see people favoring Henry on the Henry/Howard deal. I'm especially surprised to see the notion that people think Howard is much more likely to flame out.menobrown said:
Henry had a nice rookie season but LOTS, and I mean LOTS of TEs have had a nice year in their first 2 years and then spent their career as a middling TE.
Howard, meanwhile, is in extremely elite company. Here are all the RBs to rush for 1200+ yards as a rookie.
Fred Taylor
Chris Johnson
Ladainian Tomlinson
Matt Forte
Steve Slaton
Marshall Faulk
Adrian Peterson
Jamal Lewis
Eddie George
Doug Martin
Mike Anderson
Curtis Martin
Clinton Portis
Edgerrin James
Alfred Morris
Jordan Howard
There are literally 5x as many all-time fantasy greats on that list as there are fantasy flameouts. That's not to say Howard is on his way to being an all-timer or that he's immune to fading out, but the odds are very much in his favor.
He seems like the buy of the century at these prices.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Cooks, not close.
TheBottomLine
Footballguy
TheBottomLine
Footballguy
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Because I like Cooks a lot more than a guy whose owners pray he is one day as good as Cooks plus a high upside RB prospect. Procise just isn't enough to close the gap. I'll take the sure thing and figure out RB help in a different way if this is me.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I'd take the Cooks side of the deal but I'd agree with this a lot more strongly if Drew Brees were 28 instead of 38.
If Cooks is good for 78-1173-8 on an offense that threw for 5200 yards and 37 TDs, how is that going to work out when the next QB comes in and will be lucky to throw for 3500/20?
There is still plenty of risk in Cooks long-term.
Last edited by a moderator:
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
So you mean Cooks, who has already proven to be a really good football player in the NFL, might some day have a QB situation that probably still won't be as bad as Coleman's?
Howard had a great rookie season, no doubt. So did Henry.
Here are the rookie TE's to catch 8 or more TD's: Ditka, Gronk, Henry, Dave Sanders and Junior Miller. I know nothing about the last two players. The Sanders guy played in the 60's and was listed as a WR and in year two went for over 1300 and 12 TD's but no nothing about him or the Miller guy but obviously other two are strong company. So you used yards, I used TD's and both show a strong rookie season for both players.
Howard was of course more useful to fantasy teams last season but again if you are stressing how they did as rookies relative to their position Henry was actually better if we want to look at this from a fantasy angle. Using this site, which goes back to 1960 and unfortunately does not calculate as PPR it shows me that Howard had the 37th best fantasy rookie season for a RB, which is great. It also shows me Henry had the 12th best fantasy rookie season by a TE. I really don't think this does Henry justice since he had to split time with Gates a lot of the season but it is what it is. Both fantastic rookie seasons relative to their positions.
Looking at the rookie TE's who were better than Henry you'll see names like Ditka, Gronk, Mackey and Hernandez. Also a few guys from 60's-70's era I know nothing about but certainly no evidence I see that suggests based on his rookie season relative to his position vs Howard that he's 5X more likely to flame out, especially when comparing him to more modern era TE's. And I say again I don't think it truly does Henry justice looking at this way as he'd have done a lot better if Gates was not in the picture but even with that he stacks up quite well.
I do like Howard can see a view point to want him over Henry, I struggle to agree with adding 2.2 on top of it in a TE premium league.
Agree. I'll take the soon to be 24 year old WR with back to back 1100 yard seasons over two prospects I found underwhelming last season. And of those two I do like Coleman but I don't see it worth it hoping he'll be at least as good as Cooks just so you can gain Prosise, which is asking a lot, but I also don't get the Prosise affection either.
And I'll add I'm not worried about Brees as it relates to Cooks because I think Cooks can take a step down the QB ladder and be a better fantasy player with more targets which he'll eventually get, just maybe not in New Orleans.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
I have owners that think like this in some of my leagues, and most of them aren't very good. They consistently break down the good young players they do have into even younger players hoping to strike it rich, by having one of the guys they get become a clone of what they gave away, and get the other pieces on top "for free". It almost never works out.
Take Cooks and flip him for an actual RB1 if you need one, rather than gambling that Procise becomes one and Coleman becomes Cooks.
Lots of potential downside in making a trade like this, but the most important point is that Cooks is worth more and you can get more, even if you like the two prospects in question.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Coleman is essentially a complete unknown at this point. He could be QB-proof like Josh Gordon, he could need a great QB just to be rosterable. And of course, he's not the only player on that side of the deal.
I'm fairly confident that Cooks is not QB proof. Cooks gets credit for the performance he has but I'm not that convinced he'll necessarily be better with similar QBs and they may have similar QBs pretty soon here.
As best I can find, not one single receiver/TE has put up better numbers without Brees than he has with him since Brees was in New Orleans. Bad players in New Orleans were quickly out of the NFL once they went elsewhere. Mediocre players in New Orleans were bad elsewhere. Good players in New Orleans were mediocre elsewhere. So if Cooks is starting at only 1173/8 and every player has (typically significantly) regressed when playing with someone else...well, that doesn't exactly leave a lot of room to regress.
I think Cooks is somewhat overrated. His numbers given the offense he played in are pretty pedestrian. You mentioned that he's "proven to be a really good football player". I wouldn't say that's the case at all yet. When "really good football players" play in 5000 yard passing offenses they typically do a lot better than 1173/8. And when I say "typically", I actually mean pretty much always. 1900 yards receiving. 1700 yards receiving. 1600 yards receiving. 1500 yards and 15 TDs. 1500 yards and 14 TDs. These are some of the seasons that really good WRs had in 5000 yard passing offenses.
Cooks' numbers by comparison fit into a bucket with Lance Moore, Marques Colston, Pierre Garcon and Golden Tate. These are the guys that put up similar numbers to Cooks when playing in 5000 yard passing offenses. Still far behind the likes of Emmanuel Sanders (101-1404-9) or Victor Cruz (82-1536-9) when their QBs threw for 5000, much less the insane numbers of the really good WRs when their QBs did.
None of this is to say that Cooks is bad or that he won't be great with another QB, just that catching ~1150 yards with a 5000 yard QB doesn't really mean a whole lot. The list of guys to catch in the 1000-1200 yard range on a 5000 yard passing offense doesn't exactly contain a lot of guys that were still really good fantasy players when they were no longer playing in a 5000 yard passing offense. In fact, it doesn't really contain any. All of the receivers that were good without that 5000 yard passing offense were a LOT better than 1173/8 when they were playing with it. Cooks is young, so that helps in saying that maybe he just wasn't fully developed yet, but so were a lot of the other guys.
Last edited by a moderator:
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Do whatever mental gymnastics you have to, but I watch a lot of football and Cooks is a good football player. With or without a QB, he is what people hope Coleman becomes. I need more than the raw talent of Procise to make that swap, it's not enough incentive.
It's crazy biased to me to say "we know almost nothing about Coleman in the NFL except that he's on an awful team, but I think there's a chance he's QB-proof (despite showing last year when healthy again that he's not)", and then to also basically say "we've seen a lot of Cooks and know that he's productive and explosive, but I think there's a good chance he's not QB-proof (despite zero evidence of this and the reality that he's the highest pedigreed WR to play with Brees in recent memory so his situation is kind of unprecedented compared to guys like Lance Moore).
Coleman owners should be thrilled if he turns into an 1100/8 type of guy. We know Cooks is capable of this and only 24.
It's crazy biased to me to say "we know almost nothing about Coleman in the NFL except that he's on an awful team, but I think there's a chance he's QB-proof (despite showing last year when healthy again that he's not)", and then to also basically say "we've seen a lot of Cooks and know that he's productive and explosive, but I think there's a good chance he's not QB-proof (despite zero evidence of this and the reality that he's the highest pedigreed WR to play with Brees in recent memory so his situation is kind of unprecedented compared to guys like Lance Moore).
Coleman owners should be thrilled if he turns into an 1100/8 type of guy. We know Cooks is capable of this and only 24.
Snorkelson
Footballguy
One thing I've learned in this thread...if someone posts a trade with the descriptor "TE premium" a large number of posters will automatically want the TE side of the deal, whether it makes a lot of sense or not...
Which is surprising, since most of the posters in here are generally levelheaded with good insights.
I think it's similar to how rookie picks get overvalued (and "older" players undervalued) during the offseason.
And I have owners like this in my leagues that sometimes turn Cooks (and his 3ppg more than Adam Theilen) into David Johnson and Stefon Diggs. There's no denying the side with more risk is the one acquiring Prosise and Coleman, which is obvious since they're getting two relatively unproven players instead of one with a bit of a track record. But sometimes deals like that are necessary if you're stuck as a middling team.
FWIW, Prosise averaged 14ppg in the four games he was involved in during the middle of the season. It was 12ppg if you include his first game back during that stretch in which he received just 3 touches. Small sample size, I know. But he's a dynamic pass catching back that should have a role regardless of whether or not they involve him as anything close to a true feature back.
People treat Cooks as if he's some insane difference maker. He's not. He'll win you a game here or there due to his big play ability, but he's never going to be an elite stud due to his size and the type of WR he is. And there's becoming more and more WR's in that 12-16ppg range with the advent of the NFL becoming such a pass heavy league. So while I have no problem with risk averse owners holding onto Cooks and his 80-1100-8 upside, I also don't fault the ones that decide to roll the dice and flip him for two high upside prospects like Prosise/Coleman because quite frankly I don't think Cooks is a player that is going to win or lose championships for people.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
That's a good post SayWhat. I guess I just don't see why Coleman is any more likely to become the league winner that you think Cooks can't be. I'm serious when I say that I think most Coleman owners would see it as a good (if not quite best case scenario) outcome if he became what Cooks is (and here we're pretending that we know this is Cooks' ceiling at 24 years old--we don't).
This may boil down to my feelings about Procise. Maybe I'm just not high enough on him compared to consensus to see him as enough to make me take the risk on Coleman over the safety of Cooks.
This may boil down to my feelings about Procise. Maybe I'm just not high enough on him compared to consensus to see him as enough to make me take the risk on Coleman over the safety of Cooks.
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
He had some nice TD numbers this year but was still 20+ receptions and 200+ yards short of what he did as a raw 2nd year player with Brees.
And I think Stills is an interesting name here. Because if New Orleans had held onto him instead of drafting Cooks there's a pretty decent chance we'd be sitting here having a similar conversation about him instead of Cooks right now.
Sure, I'd agree that there aren't many players capable of 7-186-2 type games, though I guess Coleman put up 5-104-2 in just his second ever game in the NFL.
But it's then also fair to point out that Cooks owners may not have been in the semifinals due to his non-difference making 5-61-0 line in the first round of the playoffs. Or maybe they didn't even make the playoffs because his last six weeks were 4-44-1, 5-66-0, 3-98-1, 7-42-0, 0-0-0 (not a typo), and 7-73-0? In other words, Cooks averaged as much during that six/seven game stretch as CJ Prosise did when he was healthy.
I'm not arguing that Cooks isn't valuable. He's an incredible WR3, a fun WR2, and a player you might want to consider trading if you're relying on him as your WR1. He's not an elite NFL WR, nor an elite fantasy WR. My sole point is that it's not an unreasonable decision to part ways with him for two prospects in the range of Prosise and Coleman. That's not an indictment on Cooks per se.
I would agree with that. If Coleman put up Cooks-type numbers, I think his owners would be pumped. I stated in my original response that Prosise could very well be the most valuable piece out of this deal, as soon as next season. To expand a bit on what I mean, I'll rephrase. If there's one player in this deal with the ability to win leagues, I think it's Prosise. I think the odds of that are relatively low, but if they were to commit to him for 15-18+ touches per game he's immediately a top 5 ppr RB IMO. That's why I don't have even the slightest problem with someone taking the gamble on Prosise/Coleman. Not so much that Coleman is going to = Cooks, but that Prosise could blow both of them away if the chips fall perfectly.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
That depends on your definition of what Cooks is. Yours appears to be a perennial 1150/8 guy, in which case sure, I'd probably be inclined to agree.
However history tells us that if a guy is an 1150/8 guy in a 5000 yard passing offense, he's far less in a normal offense. Not a single one of these guys that had good seasons on 5000 yard passing offenses ever went on to consistently maintain that production afterwards. 1900 yard receivers became 1500 yard receivers. 1500 yard receivers became 1100 yard receivers. 1100 yard receivers became 900 yard receivers. And most of these were going from 5000 yard passing offenses to 4200 yard passing offenses. That seems like an almost best case scenario for New Orleans once Brees is gone.
Like I said this trade would be a blowout if Brees were 28. But he's not, and unless this is a Favre to Rodgers type move it's very likely that Cooks production will not be steady with what it was in a 5000 yard passing offense. If he were starting at 1600/14 that would be one thing. But starting at 1150/8 doesn't exactly leave much room to regress as every player to ever play in a 5000 yard passing offense has in the past (to be fair to Cooks, he probably has another year in a 5000 yard passing offense in 2017). We can talk all we want about more targets or whatever, but the same could have been said for any number of these guys and the fact of the matter is there's just not much that can go right that compares to playing on a team that just threw for the 4th most passing yards in NFL history.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Look at it from the other perspective. Brees spreads the ball around at an incredible level and keeps even his best receivers from amassing ridiculous target numbers even in the midst of 5000 yard seasons because he just takes what's given to him. Who is to say that the next QB won't zone in on his top 2 WRs more, giving them more volume than Brees but at reduced efficiency (which might actually help in PPR). People worried about DT and Sanders post-Manning for the same reason, and others argued that they'd be fine because they'd just suck up a lot of the targets that crappy backup WRs and TEs were getting, from Manning just taking what was there in a way most QBs don't.
Last edited by a moderator:
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Like I said the same could have been said for several of these guys, just ask Jimmy Graham. Like I said, we can talk about targets, QB preferences, and on and on. We've done it before. Now there is room for his targets to increase (28th last year) and every situation is fluid, but in the past when push came to shove in all of those instances any and all of it was a poor substitute for playing on an offense that just put up top 5 all-time passing yards.
Sanders and DT are odd examples for you to cite, as they fit my point to a T. Both Sanders and DT regressed, significantly. That was kind of the point I was making. All of these guys regress a fair amount. If you're DT and you're regressing from 1600/11 that just means you're now a 1300/6 guy now (though he was even worse than that this year). If you're Sanders and you're regressing from 1400/9 then that means you're an 1100/5 guy now, as he has been since then. When I was listing off those numbers in the last post (1900 yard guys become 1500 yard guys, 1500 guys become 1100 yard guys, etc) I wasn't just pulling them off the top of my head. Those were real examples and the examples are pretty one-sided on that front.
So if you're going to regress and your starting point is 1150/8 where does that leave you if you knock off 250 yards and a handful of TDs? Because if that DOESN'T happen, it will be a pretty major exception. It's certainly possible but not something I typically count on and definitely not something I assume is going to happen with the kind of certainty with which you've been describing Cooks.
Last edited by a moderator:
jeaton6
Footballguy
You must not play PPR? Other than the 0 those are solid PPR stats. WR2's aren't a WR2 every week same is true for WR1s but most of these are WR2/3 weeks. 14,12,19,11,0,14. In general he was drafted as a high end WR2 so he's certainly not losing games for you with those weeks other than the 0. Even the top flight guys have down weeks.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
14 team PPR.
We draft before the NFL.
Gave:
1.05, 2.03. 2.05
Got:
Keenan Allen, 2.10
We draft before the NFL.
Gave:
1.05, 2.03. 2.05
Got:
Keenan Allen, 2.10
DropKick
Footballguy
First of all, I concur that there are a few aging TEs around the league so, almost by default, younger guys move up the dynasty list.
Kelce and Ertz for starters. Both are still on the young side. And, even with the injury history, I'll take Gronk - just too good when he is on the field. I actually have to make the choice between Olsen and Eifert in a keeper league. At the start of last season, I thought it would be moving on to Eifert, but now I'm not so sure. Despite the premium dynasty puts on youth, my team is built to win and I can complement Olsen with a TE from a good TE draft class. Speaking of youth, I also like Hunter Henry.
There are other competitive TEs; Fiedorowicz, Walker, maybe Ebron... I'm not discrediting Eifert's ability or potential but he is not good to me if he isn't on the field.
One More Rep
Footballguy
One More Rep
Footballguy
One More Rep
Footballguy
I do play ppr. And in ppr that's 11ppg over a stretch that runs half the regular season. That's replacement level production. If you want to argue that he's not losing you games with those numbers, then that's fine. But he's not winning you games either (which is what my post was in response to).
jeaton6
Footballguy
Closer to 12 PPG and 40% of the fantasy season but whose counting? A 19 "wins you games" just as a zero probably costs you games and his 9 games before this stretch he was winning you a minimum of 3 games with his week 1,6,7 production of 32,30,19 respectively. He threw a couple stinkers in there as well but probably not that far outside of the norm of a high end/mid WR2.
ILUVBEER99
Footballguy
picks. GL with Keenan getting those insane targets with the Gordon emergence and Tyrell Williams looking solid.
70/6 = 11.66, yep your snarkiness got me good there.
6/13 = 46% of the regular season which is closer to half than 40%, as it appears the answer to your question is "not you?"
Well I'm done arguing semantics. I'll let you enjoy your WR that's averaging 11.66ppg over the last half the regular season. I hope his two 30 point outings early in the season won your games for you.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
I can see the risk of Keenan's (mostly freakish) injury history clearly. It's a calculated gamble. But the flip side of the coin is...
"GL with picking the 5th best player in a draft where there's a clear top-4, in a league where we draft before the NFL Draft."
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
jeaton6
Footballguy
Yes as a matter of fact the one league I own him he helped me to a championship and my league playoffs start week 15 thus 6/14=43% though I see how you got your ~50 pct now. Good thing is wins aren't based on averages either. You can keep calling him an incredible WR3 and a fun WR2 but the numbers show he was a mid WR1 in PPR and put up 3 top flight WR1 weeks during the fantasy season. Higher standard deviation then most would like but he's not the WR3 you're suggesting he is either.70/6 = 11.66, yep your snarkiness got me good there.
6/13 = 46% of the regular season which is closer to half than 40%, as it appears the answer to your question is "not you?"
Well I'm done arguing semantics. I'll let you enjoy your WR that's averaging 11.66ppg over the last half the regular season. I hope his two 30 point outings early in the season won your games for you.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
That's what I'm worried about, as a buyer. Was just acknowledging that. The target numbers don't concern me much, I didn't trade for him expecting a top-12 ceiling. Do I still think he's the most talented WR there when healthy? Yes. I don't think it hurts having Williams across from him. I didn't deal for him expecting him to get insane targets and average 22 PPG or whatever like he has when everyone else was injured in the past. The picks I dealt are much riskier in this format, so I decided to gamble on Keenan instead.
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
I would say the opposite. Picks are gambles in themselves. We have seen what Keenan is capable of. Phil loves to throw to Keenan and that won't stop. I would buy Keenan all day at that price.
