Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
spider321

Dynasty Value Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Not saying Kelley will impact Ekeler's receiving role. But IMO Ekeler's receiving role will be reduced, likely by a lot, due to replacing Rivers with Tyrod. The reason Kelley matters is because he will limit the increase in Ekeler rushing that might have helped to offset the expected reduction in his receiving. Hence why I said "full blown RBBC for rushing." Did not reference receiving for Kelley.

I don't see Ekeler having a major uptick in rushing (I do think it increases though) but I would rather have Kelly there then Gordon...he could be good but he is a fourth round pick and far from a definite...if he is nothing special then Ekeler is in a much better situation then last year as far as rushing goes...even if Kelly is just solid Ekeler maybe in a better situation then last year...as far as the QB situation goes that could be the case but I am willing to gamble that it does not go down enough because Gordon also averaged 3.5 receptions per game and there is a good chance that offsets the QB situation.

Edited by Boston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JoeJoe88 said:

I'm at the opposite end of that one.  I wouldn't be able to accept the 1.03 fast enough.  They already tried to move him this year; there were no buyers.  And he'll be approaching 27 by this time next year with a lot of tread and a lot of injuries in his past.  No thanks.

Don't disagree with your overall point on fournette, but this is a bit much. He won't turn 27 until the 2021 season is over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a value point in the Fournette discussion, I drafted him at 5.07 in a 12 team SF/TE premium league. Dobbins (3rd rookie) went 3.05, and 8 rookies went before then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Dr. BD said:

Im not going to try and disguise an assistant coach question here, but I'd like to hope people can gauge value of some players with my question

 

Got a guy willing to do one of the following:

AJB + Hunt or Sutton + Hunt for Tyreek. 

 

Hinderlys april chart says Sutton + Hunt is a better deal for me.

Rbs start 2-3: Zeke, Barkley, Mixon, JT, Dobbins, Hunt, Henderson

WRs start 3-4: Godwin, Kupp, Sutton, AJB, Diggs, Gallup, Unicorn, JJAW, Isabella

 

Not sure I like AJB's long term outlook. I honestly see him as a bit overrated to some degree. A lot of his big games came on long 70ish yard TDs. Disappeared in the playoffs. 

Sutton I love. I own him on all my teams so I'm not sure I want to give him up for the sake of continuity. Probably dumb of me. 

Hunt is dispensable considering my depth and I got him basically for Cameron Brate 2 months ago...

 

Who is better value long term- Sutton or AJB?

ETA: only 3 games did Sutton get less than 7 targets last year. 

AJB had only 4 games with 7 or more targets...

In all honesty it's a wash...you can make a case for either guy...I would jump on either deal right away because both deals are not much to give up for a stud like Hill...not sure what the other guy is thinking at all...let the guy pick who he wants if it means getting Hill but do it now before he reconsiders.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Dr. BD said:

Im not going to try and disguise an assistant coach question here, but I'd like to hope people can gauge value of some players with my question

 

Got a guy willing to do one of the following:

AJB + Hunt or Sutton + Hunt for Tyreek. 

 

Hinderlys april chart says Sutton + Hunt is a better deal for me.

Rbs start 2-3: Zeke, Barkley, Mixon, JT, Dobbins, Hunt, Henderson

WRs start 3-4: Godwin, Kupp, Sutton, AJB, Diggs, Gallup, Unicorn, JJAW, Isabella

 

Not sure I like AJB's long term outlook. I honestly see him as a bit overrated to some degree. A lot of his big games came on long 70ish yard TDs. Disappeared in the playoffs. 

Sutton I love. I own him on all my teams so I'm not sure I want to give him up for the sake of continuity. Probably dumb of me. 

Hunt is dispensable considering my depth and I got him basically for Cameron Brate 2 months ago...

 

Who is better value long term- Sutton or AJB?

ETA: only 3 games did Sutton get less than 7 targets last year. 

AJB had only 4 games with 7 or more targets...

I think the value is on the Hill side but I am a big AJB fan so I would consider that one pretty even.

I would consider Sutton/Hunt for Hill.  I am lower on Hill than most, though.  His only real standout season was when Mahomes threw for 5000/50 so I'm not convinced he's that top 3-5 WR difference maker like some people view him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Dr. BD I appreciate your caution but I can't believe you haven't lost this deal yet, he seems desperate to move Tyreek for a sexy young WR name plus a little value. Oblige him. The guy is killing himself trying to give you a top-3 fantasy WR in Tyreek for cheap, please let him. Especially now that the price has gone down to Sutton + Hunt rather than Sutton + Dobbins. Just do it. Tyreek consistently wins weeks single-handedly with Mahomes and the value of that in his prime is a lot harder to quantify than just looking at total points (which also look good for him).

When you have the RBs you do that gives you a high floor. A guy like Tyreek puts you over the top when you need it. Sutton is great but you're too invested, unless you're the biggest Lock fan on earth this isn't going to be close. AND you get a mystery box 2021 1st back for your trouble? He's pleading with you to let him give you a great deal.

Edit: it took me long enough to type this that you did the deal lol.

Great job! 

Edited by ConnSKINS26
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dr. BD said:

Yes, I've got some reservations that are foolish, but I can be overly cautious. I also tend to believe myself too much and feel like everyone's going to be a stud. That's whar I have all of you for.

Tyreek was wr9 ppg last year, excited to have another top guy for my win now window. 

Tyreek is special and coupled with a special QB. That doesn't come along very often.......

Share this post


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

Tyreek is special and coupled with a special QB. That doesn't come along very often.......

Agreed...when you have a chance to get a legit stud (and there are not many of them) do it and figure out your roster depth later.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Gordon also averaged 3.5 receptions per game and there is a good chance that offsets the QB situation.

i don't think it makes much sense to use last season's Chargers numbers as a point of reference. This year's offense we will be very different. Different QB(s), different philosophy, semi-new OC (took over midseason last year), different OL. Also likely a stronger defense, which will influence the offensive playcalling.

:shrug: 

Share this post


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

i don't think it makes much sense to use last season's Chargers numbers as a point of reference. This year's offense we will be very different. Different QB(s), different philosophy, semi-new OC (took over midseason last year), different OL. Also likely a stronger defense, which will influence the offensive playcalling.

:shrug: 

Could be the case...I will say if Ekeler is not used similarly than you have to question the contract they gave him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 team, not SF:

connor & hunt

for

Ekeler & Jackson, LAC

Who wins this trade?

Share this post


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

12 team, not SF:

connor & hunt

for

Ekeler & Jackson, LAC

Who wins this trade?

I like the Conner & Hunt side. I'm higher on Hunt than anybody though. 

Share this post


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

12 team, not SF:

connor & hunt

for

Ekeler & Jackson, LAC

Who wins this trade?

While I like Hunt, I think Conner's FF starting days are over. I'll take Ekeler side for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, robb said:

12 team, not SF:

connor & hunt

for

Ekeler & Jackson, LAC

Who wins this trade?

Conner and Hunt.

In 2020 I think it's close. Ekeler is best guy to own for 2020 but Conner should remain starter for as long as he is healthy and Hunt is at least a solid flex/low end RB2 type. I think it's close because we saw Jackson with Ekeler last year and what we saw was someone without stand alone value and I also think Ekeler's production is reduced this year since he's so reliant on passing game production.

Forecasting 2021 and beyond it becomes less close.  I forecast Hunt  to land a primary job and replace Ekeler as best guy to own. Not sure if Conner will be able to land a starting RB job again, probably part of a RBBC but I'd still rather own him then Jackson in 2021 and beyond.

So for 2020 I'd rank them: Ekeler, Connor, Hunt and Jackson and call it close.

For 2021 and beyond I'd rank them: Hunt, Ekeler, Connor and Jackson and call it not so close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Conner and Hunt.

In 2020 I think it's close. Ekeler is best guy to own for 2020 but Conner should remain starter for as long as he is healthy and Hunt is at least a solid flex/low end RB2 type. I think it's close because we saw Jackson with Ekeler last year and what we saw was someone without stand alone value and I also think Ekeler's production is reduced this year since he's so reliant on passing game production.

Forecasting 2021 and beyond it becomes less close.  I forecast Hunt  to land a primary job and replace Ekeler as best guy to own. Not sure if Conner will be able to land a starting RB job again, probably part of a RBBC but I'd still rather own him then Jackson in 2021 and beyond.

So for 2020 I'd rank them: Ekeler, Connor, Hunt and Jackson and call it close.

For 2021 and beyond I'd rank them: Hunt, Ekeler, Connor and Jackson and call it not so close.

That is one of the best responses to a question I have seen Menobrown. Not only did you give your answer, but you gave reasoning behind it! Thank you so much.

p.s. I also have Chubb so Hunt would fit in nicely this year as his backup and hopefully a starter in 2021.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, robb said:

12 team, not SF:

connor & hunt

for

Ekeler & Jackson, LAC

Who wins this trade?

Great trade...a lot of moving parts here...gonna have to cop out and say I need to see each teams RB units to fully judge it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dr. BD said:

I see this statement a lot, but I'm not sure how realistic it really is... What teams do you think make sense for Hunt to land a starting role in 2021? Especially considering his FA and incoming rookie competition?

It's a long ways between now and next March but there are a ton of teams that could be in need of a complete, lead back by then.

Jets, Redskins, Texans, Cardinals, Dolphins, Steelers, Titans, Chargers, Bears, Vikings, Seahawks, 49ers, Falcons, Bucs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

It's a long ways between now and next March but there are a ton of teams that could be in need of a complete, lead back by then.

Jets, Redskins, Texans, Cardinals, Dolphins, Steelers, Titans, Chargers, Bears, Vikings, Seahawks, 49ers, Falcons, Bucs.

Good list...a few more...Jags are almost 100% to be looking for a new RB next year...Mixon is a free agent after this year...the Pats could be there as well as White is in the last year of his deal and if Michel looks average again and Harris is still MIA they could be in the market.

Edited by Boston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Dr. BD said:

I'm not so sure about the Redskins, Cardinals, Steelers, Titans, Charger, Bears, Bucs... but I can play along

If the above are looking for backs then the following are FA or expected to be FA:

Gurley, Bell, DJ, Conner, Henry, Cook, Drake, Coleman, Brieda, Mack, A. Jones (?), Hunt, Ingram (?), Fournette. Then you also have ETN, Hubbard, Harris, and I'm sure at least 1 we haven't hyped about yet (Hill? maybe another under classman?)

I think a lot of these guys are done as starting RBs after this year.  In particular Gurley, Bell, DJ, Conner, Coleman, Breida, Jones, Ingram.  If Drake is a FA it likely means he didn't click in Arizona and that was his last chance as a starter as well.

 

Quote

I see these teams as having a long term solution at the RB position:

New England, Buffalo, Baltimore, Cleveland, Cincinnati (unless you add Mixon to the list above), Indianapolis, Kansas City, LA Chargers (I disagree they go veteran as they did sign Ekler to a nice deal), Vegas, Philadelphia, Dallas, New York G, Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, Carolina, LA Rams, 49ers (IMO)

So I just find it interesting that it's thought with certainty that Hunt will go find a gig as the primary back when it's probably not likely going to happen; I could very much see him landing in a favorable position as a pass catching back, but not a primary role I dont think. Especially when teams arent willing to pay big salaries as much to these guys. I'd even add Green Bay to the set list. They used a 2nd round pick on a RB and want to do some ground and pound. 

Just not enough opportunities IMO. I actually think, if tue offense runs well this year, it's a pretty good chance Hunt ends up resigning with Cleveland....

I hope I'm wrong. I own Hunt in a league and I need RB help pretty badly

I think you're underestimating how quickly things change in the NFL.  If at this time last year I told you 4 of the first 5 RBs drafted in the 2020 draft would be by the Colts, Lions, Ravens, and Rams you would have called me crazy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr. BD said:

I see this statement a lot, but I'm not sure how realistic it really is... What teams do you think make sense for Hunt to land a starting role in 2021? Especially considering his FA and incoming rookie competition?

Not sure what you mean by especially his FA? I'm saying because of his FA.

There are new rookie RB's every year, I don't see next years class as that great, top guy on a lot of people's boards would not even come out this year,  and a ton of potential openings. It actually looks like one of the most openings at RB  I can recall in years, the opposite of this year and that's something I've been saying on these boards for months.

The following teams have RB's entering last year of their contract: Steelers, Bengals, Jaguars, Titans, Saints, Vikings, Green Bay, Atlanta, Arizona and Seattle. Some of those teams may resign their RB, some might have heir apparent like Dillon, but several of these jobs will open up.

Then you got a few teams who will likely or possibly want to move on from their current RB due to money. Jets and Texans spring to mind. Jets almost a lock, Texans we'll see with David Johnson, just because BOB traded for him he still is going to need to show something to earn a 2021 spot on the team at 30 years old and  $8M.

Then we got a large amount of teams that the jury is out or from viewpoint of a lot of people don't have a top tier RB on their roster. Those teams are Dolphins, Patriots, Bears with his Nagy connection and Tampa.

Then we got teams like Redskins who have a host of RB's but really I think Guice is only one IMO that has traits of a feature runner and if he can't stay healthy next year I'm sure they'll be in the market, again. The Chargers whose only proven RB I view as more of a third down RB. The 49'ers who have a ton of RB's, but none seem that great and they have got heavily in FA RB market in 2018 and 2019.

Again IMO that's a ton of potential openings and way better to be a FA RB in 2021 then this year.

Hunt's skill set will work for just about any team. He's versatile, good in passing game, can run with power and be a foundation back. He can do it all. He's a stud who led the league in rushing not on the Mahomes Chiefs, but on the Alex Smith version of the  Chiefs. Then he goes to Cleveland and excels in the passing game. There is nothing he can't do. A guy like Fournette, he'll have considerably more difficult time because finding a fit for him is tough. Hunts going to be a starting foundation RB in 2021 as long as he keeps straight off the field.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dr. BD said:

Thanks for the well thought out response. 

One other question- in your opinion why do you think Hunt didnt find a home as a workhorse this offseason? It only cost a 2nd and he is proven as you mentioned above? This was confusing to me, I thought it was a pretty cheap price

Sure thing and to answer your follow up question.

It cost paying him a contract the Browns would not match AND a second.  I would never do that if I ran a team, both pay a RB upper end money and pay a premium draft pick. Question.  Someone told me in history of RFA no one had ever tendered a player at a second round tender and that player got signed by someone else. I did not verify that, but can you or anyone else recall that? I feel like it has happened but I could not recall it to dispute what I was being told.

If you think I'm stumping for Hunt, and you are not saying that, but in case you think I am I'm possibly the first person in the Hunt thread to say when this offseason started that that the Browns were going to retain him, was not sure why everyone was assuming or thinking he'd get out.  Never expected him to get signed by someone else this off-season.  I just don't think teams are paying for RB's AND giving up draft capital. With the RFA tag not an issue next year it's an entirely different ballgame IMO.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Sure thing and to answer your follow up question.

It cost paying him a contract the Browns would not match AND a second.  I would never do that if I ran a team, both pay a RB upper end money and pay a premium draft pick. Question.  Someone told me in history of RFA no one had ever tendered a player at a second round tender and that player got signed by someone else. I did not verify that, but can you or anyone else recall that? I feel like it has happened but I could not recall it to dispute what I was being told.

If you think I'm stumping for Hunt, and you are not saying that, but in case you think I am I'm possibly the first person in the Hunt thread to say when this offseason started that that the Browns were going to retain him, was not sure why everyone was assuming or thinking he'd get out.  Never expected him to get signed by someone else this off-season.  I just don't think teams are paying for RB's AND giving up draft capital. With the RFA tag not an issue next year it's an entirely different ballgame IMO.

Not 100% of the exact details but I think Welker had one when the Pats made him an offer but then it turned into a trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Sure thing and to answer your follow up question.

It cost paying him a contract the Browns would not match AND a second.  I would never do that if I ran a team, both pay a RB upper end money and pay a premium draft pick. Question.  Someone told me in history of RFA no one had ever tendered a player at a second round tender and that player got signed by someone else. I did not verify that, but can you or anyone else recall that? I feel like it has happened but I could not recall it to dispute what I was being told.

If you think I'm stumping for Hunt, and you are not saying that, but in case you think I am I'm possibly the first person in the Hunt thread to say when this offseason started that that the Browns were going to retain him, was not sure why everyone was assuming or thinking he'd get out.  Never expected him to get signed by someone else this off-season.  I just don't think teams are paying for RB's AND giving up draft capital. With the RFA tag not an issue next year it's an entirely different ballgame IMO.

Actually it went down a little different:

On March 1, 2007, the Dolphins offered Welker, a restricted free agent, a second-round tender of $1.35 million for a one-year contract. News reports indicated the New England Patriots, who were interested in Welker, had originally considered signing him to an offer sheet. Miami would have had seven days to match the offer. According to The Boston Globe, that sheet would have contained a poison pill provision that would have made the offer difficult for the Dolphins to match.[63] Ultimately, however, the Patriots decided not to use such an offer and traded their 2007 second-round draft pick and a seventh-round draft pick to the Dolphins for Welker

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dr. BD said:

idk I was one of the few that called for the ravens to pick a rb as early as round 1. I was called crazy...  Colts as well. I was told there was zero chance the Colts would use either of their 2nds on a RB... 

Rams I didnt want to believe, but then I heard they and the Texans were the two teams to meet with RBs the most during the predraft process. 

I get it, turnover is big, but I don't see him going to a team as the primary back... Maybe I'm wrong. I hope so

Remember we are talking about a year ago.  Not a month ago.  We are still a year out from next year's free agency.  TONS will change between now and then.  A year ago the Rams still had Todd Gurley and had just used a day 2 pick on Darrell Henderson.  No one thought there was any chance they'd be drafting one of the top 5 backs in the 2nd round a year later.

There are probably 3-5 teams that we right now think are all locked up at RB for the long-term that will be in the market for a lead RB.  And that's on top of all the ones we've listed that have an obvious path to needing a RB soon.

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the current value on the following receivers... what rookie pick(s) would you give up to acquire them.

courtland Sutton

Tyler Boyd

K’Neal Harry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BigAl21 said:

What the current value on the following receivers... what rookie pick(s) would you give up to acquire them.

courtland Sutton

Tyler Boyd

K’Neal Harry

I wouldn't give first round picks for any of these WRs in this year's class, maybe late like 11th or 12th for Sutton but that's it.  I actually think Harry will be the best of the bunch when we look back a few years from now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s not to like about Sutton? I think he’s an alpha, but appreciate the feedback. I will be targeting one of Sutton or Harry depending on the cost. Thanks for input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BigAl21 said:

What’s not to like about Sutton? I think he’s an alpha, but appreciate the feedback. I will be targeting one of Sutton or Harry depending on the cost. Thanks for input.


IMO, Jeudy > Sutton in PPR and he's being taken around 1.07 on an average.  Then, Jefferson/Reagor/Ruggs are often going in the 8-10 range.  I'd put Sutton in that group.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, menobrown said:

It cost paying him a contract the Browns would not match AND a second.

Not sure I agree with this. If a team really liked Hunt, they could have given a second and just signed him to whatever level contract they wanted to (and Hunt would agree to). I think the Browns would have happily taken a second round pick and let him go without matching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BigAl21 said:

What the current value on the following receivers... what rookie pick(s) would you give up to acquire them.

courtland Sutton

Tyler Boyd

K’Neal Harry

7th overall 

12th overall

15th overall

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Edgar said:

7th overall 

12th overall

15th overall

I wouldn't give up a 1st rd pick for Boyd.  Perhaps a late 2nd in this draft.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I wouldn't give up a 1st rd pick for Boyd.  Perhaps a late 2nd in this draft.

A late second?  Boyd is not a stud but he is 25 years old and here is what he has done the last two years:

76-1025-7

90-1046-5

Also, we now need to add in that his QB situation has a chance to dramatically improve...what do you think the odds are you will do better then that with a late second?  Before it comes up I am not worried about Higgins because on the flip-side Green's days are probably coming to an end with Cincy pretty soon...Boyd is a very solid WR and is a nice addition to any roster that is looking to win a championship.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preferring any of the receivers in this class over Sutton is loopy to me. This is the first time I've seen multiple people value Sutton so low. I don't know what more he could have done last year to justify his ascent to a top ten receiver and now that offense looks like it could be explosive.

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Preferring any of the receivers in this class over Sutton is loopy to me. This is the first time I've seen multiple people value Sutton so low. I don't know what more he could have done last year to justify his ascent to a top ten receiver and now that offense looks like it could be explosive.

I can't answer for anyone else but personally I'm lower on Sutton than most.  1) Jeudy is better than Sutton (IMO),  2) they now have Gordon and Fant to steal away targets, and 3) Denver's offense is just meh - maybe it's Lock not sure.

So in the end I see him as the #2 WR with plenty of viable options to steal targets and with a QB that isn't anything special.

Of course this is my take so I don't expect to convince others and I respect people who see it the other way

My 2 cents.

-DD

 

Share this post


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

I can't answer for anyone else but personally I'm lower on Sutton than most.  1) Jeudy is better than Sutton (IMO),  2) they now have Gordon and Fant to steal away targets, and 3) Denver's offense is just meh - maybe it's Lock not sure.

So in the end I see him as the #2 WR with plenty of viable options to steal targets and with a QB that isn't anything special.

Of course this is my take so I don't expect to convince others and I respect people who see it the other way

My 2 cents.

-DD

 

Fair enough. I suppose the non-starter is that you view Jeudy as better than Sutton. He may well be, but rolling the dice on any rookie who hasn't played yet versus a proven talent who has steadily gotten better seems unnecessarily risky.

Regarding the Denver offense, I think the only thing that held Sutton back was an utter lack of talent around him. There were no credible receivers on the field with him other than a rookie TE who was finding his way. Obviously Denver felt the same way which is why they brought in so many weapons. My money is on the established stud receiver who has a couple years under belt already being the most productive fantasy producer on that offense by a wide margin.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Apple Juice said:

Fair enough. I suppose the non-starter is that you view Jeudy as better than Sutton. He may well be, but rolling the dice on any rookie who hasn't played yet versus a proven talent who has steadily gotten better seems unnecessarily risky.

Regarding the Denver offense, I think the only thing that held Sutton back was an utter lack of talent around him. There were no credible receivers on the field with him other than a rookie TE who was finding his way. Obviously Denver felt the same way which is why they brought in so many weapons. My money is on the established stud receiver who has a couple years under belt already being the most productive fantasy producer on that offense by a wide margin.

 

Agree with this train of thought...if you are looking to add a RB I can see the logic for dealing Sutton...but if you are looking to get a WR what are the odds that the one you drafted will have 72-1,112-6 in their second year...why risk that especially if it's not for a WR that is drafted with a top 10 pick...even if the rookie hits they would have to put up substantially better numbers then Sutton for this risk to really be worth it...just don't see the need to do that, no need to get greedy here.

Edited by Boston

Share this post


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

I can't answer for anyone else but personally I'm lower on Sutton than most.  1) Jeudy is better than Sutton (IMO),  2) they now have Gordon and Fant to steal away targets, and 3) Denver's offense is just meh - maybe it's Lock not sure.

So in the end I see him as the #2 WR with plenty of viable options to steal targets and with a QB that isn't anything special.

Of course this is my take so I don't expect to convince others and I respect people who see it the other way

My 2 cents.

-DD

It's certainly possible that things work out this way but there are a lot of assumptions being made here in the direction that only hurt Sutton.  IE every player that would hurt Sutton works out (Gordon, Fant, Jeudy) while the one player that would help him (Lock) doesn't.

Maybe Fant and/or Jeudy end up being one of the thousands of young players that never become target hogging studs, or maybe it takes them years to get there.  Maybe Gordon's receptions were just a product of the offense he was in rather than him being so good at it he demands targets (I actually think this is the most likely scenario for him).  Or maybe Lock ends up being good enough to support a bunch of guys.  Maybe he becomes that good and Jeudy doesn't work out and Sutton gets the best of both worlds.

There are lots of scenarios for how this Denver offense could work out and the scenario you laid out is basically the worst possible scenario for him.  Again, it's possible, but it's a leap to assume that one particular scenario is going to be the one that hits.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are really overrating this WR class if they think there are going to be 5-6 WRs better than Boyd and Sutton from this group.

And I say that as someone who doesn't necessarily love Boyd and Sutton.

They are already "hits".

They are worth a mid-late first at a minimum.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

People are really overrating this WR class if they think there are going to be 5-6 WRs better than Boyd and Sutton from this group.

And I say that as someone who doesn't necessarily love Boyd and Sutton.

They are already "hits".

They are worth a mid-late first at a minimum.

If I could sell Boyd for a late 1st I'd probably sprain my wrist hitting the accept button.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best WRs from this draft are going to turn out a little better than Boyd, but the misses are going to turn out much worse. Boyd isn't a true WR1 and is really just a depth guy for FF purposes, so there's definitely a modest ceiling there. We may have already seen the best seasons of his career. However, he's a solid second option who has already proven that he can be a 1000 yard guy in the NFL (twice) in the right circumstances. That's more than most of these rookies will ever achieve.

If you have a stacked roster and you want to swing for the fences then it would make some sense to favor the pick, but Boyd's projected remaining career will probably trounce the average yield from the WRs picked between 5-15 in rookie drafts when we look back on their careers as an aggregate. There are inevitably going to be some Sterling Shepard, Corey Coleman, Laquon Treadwell, and Dante Pettis career arcs in there because there always are.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, EBF said:

Boyd isn't a true WR1 and is really just a depth guy for FF purposes

There's a huge difference between wr2/3 and depth guy.  Even if he ends up being a 65/900/5 guy for the rest of his career he's a weekly plug in and forget starter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

There's a huge difference between wr2/3 and depth guy.  Even if he ends up being a 65/900/5 guy for the rest of his career he's a weekly plug in and forget starter.

Teams that win championships don’t have plug and forget starters going 65/900/5. 
 

But if a grade of B is what Boyd is, he’s better than the average rookie, who turns into C+. The downside is there’s no chance of an A+

Share this post


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

There's a huge difference between wr2/3 and depth guy.  Even if he ends up being a 65/900/5 guy for the rest of his career he's a weekly plug in and forget starter.

Not for me. Those guys are everywhere. I would only start Boyd if I had to. He did well mind you and I'm not even knocking him, but the teams winning ships with him are teams that are using him as a 4th WR. Or are simply dominant everywhere else. 

But for me that was before they drafted Higgins. Now Boyd is even lower. He may have some value, but it's quickly fading. 

I would absolutely take the upside of a rookie WR in this draft right now. Probably all the way down to about Claypool who is going 3rd round of rookie drafts. Higgins is going mid 2nd in many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Edgar said:

Teams that win championships don’t have plug and forget starters going 65/900/5. 
 

But if a grade of B is what Boyd is, he’s better than the average rookie, who turns into C+. The downside is there’s no chance of an A+

Yep

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Edgar said:

Teams that win championships don’t have plug and forget starters going 65/900/5

This isn’t entirely true. In my dynasty league, we start a total of 7 players between rb and wr. I finished third last year and by the end of the year Breshad Perriman and Jonnu Smith were in my lineup every week. Guys get hurt, or just simply get replaced. Having a 900 yard WR when you’re starting that many players a week can make a huge difference. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Wow I think people really need to go back and look at the last 10 years of 1st/2nd round NFL WR picks.  These guys hit at what, a 20% rate?  15%?  It's a miserable number.  I'd be pretty surprised if more than 2 of these guys ever do more than what Boyd has done.

Also the notion that his upside is some 900/5 type low WR2 guy is kind of silly.  The dude just put up a nice season on one of the worst offenses in the league and they added a stud QB prospect and revamped the O-line.  What happens to Boyd if this Bengals offense actually ends up being good?  Oh no, Higgins is there.  Higgins and his 15% chance of actually developing into a usable NFL player, and even in that worst case scenario who's to say that Burrow doesn't end up being good enough to support two good fantasy targets.

Half of this past season's WR1 scoring players were guys that people once said had an upside as a boring WR2, and most of them had a lot less convincing reasons on why they may ascend to WR1 scoring than adding a QB that just put together by far the greatest college football season of all-time.

This all becomes doubly true once we get past Jeudy and Lamb.  How many of Pittman, Higgins, Jefferson, Reagor, Aiyuk, Mims will ever put up a season better than 90-1100-5?  I would be pretty surprised if the answer ends up being more than 1.  I think zero is a more likely answer than 2+.

Edited by FreeBaGeL
  • Like 9
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hit rate on 1st round NFL draft picks is about 40-50% IIRC, but there are different levels of hit. Kendall Wright and Michael Floyd are 1,000 yard NFL WRs, but were they hits? Not really. If you raise your standards, the hit rate drops. Then again, Boyd is merely a solid double, and not a home run ala Julio, Fitzgerald, Dez, etc.

As for Higgins, he's obviously the like-for-like replacement for AJ Green, and not for Boyd. Very little overlap between his skill set and Boyd's. FWIW I think Higgins busts, but that's just my take. BTW I own Boyd in exactly zero dynasty leagues. Never been a big fan. Would still comfortably take him over any day two WR in this draft.

I think he's worth more than a late 1st, but if you pick the right player from Aiyuk/Ruggs/Reagor you could end up getting a bigger payout, so I guess I see both sides of the debate. League setup and roster composition may be the deciding factor. In deep leagues where his numbers will carry a lot of value, I'd probably take the bird in hand. For stacked teams or shallow leagues where upside is a bigger consideration, maybe you go with one of the high-ceiling rooks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Teams that win championships don’t have plug and forget starters going 65/900/5. 
 

But if a grade of B is what Boyd is, he’s better than the average rookie, who turns into C+. The downside is there’s no chance of an A+

How shallow are your leagues where you can start top players at every position group?  If 6/900/5 is riding your bench at wr then you're weak at another position.

 

3 hours ago, JoeJoe88 said:

This isn’t entirely true. In my dynasty league, we start a total of 7 players between rb and wr. I finished third last year and by the end of the year Breshad Perriman and Jonnu Smith were in my lineup every week. Guys get hurt, or just simply get replaced. Having a 900 yard WR when you’re starting that many players a week can make a huge difference. 

^This 100%.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boyd is worth more than a late first. I'm the Boyd GM and I wouldn't give him for less than 1.09. But that puts too fine a point on it. Most guys are offering less than that, so you'll have to make up your mind.

Sutton is a mid-first, even with Jeudy and Hamler.

N'Keal Harry I value different than everybody else, so I'll be quiet and let time tell on that. 

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.