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.
I think Guice is most similar to Hunt of this year's backs. Power, speed, and just okay footwork/cuts.
Hit rate for one position in one round is a data point, useful when compared with other rounds, and other positions. History of 2nd round TEs isn't particularly weaker than any other fantasy spot.
Yea, in a start 1 QB/TE league with 10-14 teams, it's pretty likely that almost everybody has a QB/TE they feel good about, which means the trade market for any QB/TE short of the Pro Bowl level is going to be minimal. You're aiming at a pretty small target hoping to get a Graham/Gronk/Olsen/Brees/Rodgers/Peyton. Anything less than that doesn't matter too much.
Definitely. In a deep, IDP dynasty a lot of your top LB's go from around the 1.08 to the end of the first. I've gotten guys like Patrick Willis or CJ Moseley there that are fantasy studs for years.
Debate starts and ends here - regardless of position. Punt these guys first and prioritize the one's who have the game you're buying. The mess in the middle? Positional value, supply vs. demand, your teams needs, etc. - more important criteria when sorting it out. Pick the guys you think will be successful first though.
I have read some folks comparing him to Hunt and I do see some similarities as well, so I was curious what you thought about that comparison.
I haven't watched him at all yet.
Plus side to all that, he can catch. Moore has the dropsies, which I personally hate, to me just as a fan and someone that has watched a lot of tape on all theee guys and by no means do I know crap about player evaluations. I like them in the opposite order drafted, ESB, Scantling and then Moore. Which probably means Moore will be the next Julio and ESB spends his life on the practice squad. I do like the idea of 5 wide sets with three 6’3plus guys that all ran 4.4 or better with Roders at the helm. That could be a scary look for any defense.Kitrick Taylor said:
Possibility their could be something here.
Yeah. I can make a much stronger argument for him than Pettis or freaking Ballage.
Makes sense if you think he has a reasonable chance of hitting a high ceiling, but if you don't think it's really possible then it's still better to go for the solid pick. I'd rather have Chris Cooley's career for my FF team than Jace Amaro's, even if Cooley was never a real difference maker. Better to get a useful player than nothing.
Maybe if he caught more than 42% of his targets over that same 2 years. 14 receptions on 33 targets over two seasons doesn't exactly scream to get this guy more targets.
I know what you mean, but even if 1300 rushing yards at 4.9 YPC is the peak of his career, that's still probably better than I ever thought he was capable of.
Occasionally, a Willie Parker or Travis Henry will rip off a 1400-1500 yard season. Sometimes it takes a guy who has enough skills to have a job and benefits from a lot of unknown variables. But, having a great season is not necessarily something to generalize as a predictor of future success. I would take the ‘under’ on the rest of Hunt’s career, tbh.
Why?
I’m not saying Henry and Parker were garbage or that Hunt is either. But RB15-20 feels more in line with Hunt’s talent over next few years, as were Henry/Parker.Biabreakable said:
Alex Smith did have a fantastic season last year so I would agree its unlikely Mahomes can do as much his first year as a starter.
He was a 3rd round talent. That seems about right. I wasn't blown away watching him last year any more than I was watching Travis Henry drop back-to-back 1300/10 seasons. Neither are/were middling, but not special either.
You really seem offended I don’t see what you see, making the point repeatedly. I don’t know what to tell you, except to say I don’t see it with Hunt, just as I haven’t seen it or trusted it with other RBs who happened to have excellent seasons.
I totally support this take and the process of arriving at it. I think I’ve reached a different conclusion, but totally get why/how you’ve arrived at yours.
Good analysis and appreciate you taking the time to rephrase my point(s) quite nicely. Forte really is the only one I’d write home about from that list. Jury remains out on Howard, obviously.
That's a surprisingly terrible list.
I think this mainly depends on your expectations.
I think this kind of makes @EBF's point more than contradicts it. Most people don't go into these drafts thinking "I really hope I get one good season out of this top 5 pick, and if I get two I'll be super happy!". Everyone is going in hoping to hit on the next career plug and play FF RB1/WR1.
Yeah this is kind of an ongoing conversation EBF have been having for a decade or so now. I am happy to hear him saying pretty much the point I have been trying to make all along. Experience is the best teacher. One of the original conversations about this started with looking at the career expectations of Larry Fitzgerald vs Randy Moss. Now that enough time has passed and Moss has been out of the league now for some time, EBF was right to value Fitzgerald more than Moss, but you put just about any other WR in Fitzgeralds place and not so much.
Yea, that's exactly it. Guys like Doug Martin, Ryan Mathews, and Rashard Mendenhall aren't really busts. They had decent NFL careers, but they fell short of becoming that Lynch/Forte/Steven Jackson type of player that you could just plug into your lineup year after year. When you're sitting there with the 1.01 or 1.02 rookie pick in a strong draft class, you probably expect to get a long-term star, even if it's not realistic. Over the years you kind of see that even the "premium" prospects usually come with an asterisk. I still believe in being bullish when you think it's warranted, but you have to be selective because most of these guys aren't going to be Rodgers/Lynch/Fitzgerald/Witten where they lock down a spot in your FF team for a decade.
It is respectfully submitted that your rebuttal had nothing to do with what I actually said. If your whole attitude wasn’t dripping with toolishness, I’d engage.
