stuckinthemuck
Footballguy
Gronk's value over all other TE's makes him the #1 pick, right?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
1.01 Dynasty startup. HAS to be Gronk (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter stuckinthemuck
- Start date
Uncle Grandpa
Footballguy
Depends on your league's starting lineup and scoring rules. In all of my leagues, no.
stuckinthemuck
Footballguy
Let;s go with FBG rules - 1.5 PPR for TEs. Even without 1.5 PPR for TEs there is silly separation between Gronk and the rest. At age 25 you draft him and leave him in your lineup until 2025.
Uncle Grandpa
Footballguy
It all comes down to VBD. Gronk is obviously a beast at the TE position, but in most leagues, only 1 starting TE is required. Therefore, Gronk's advantage extrapolates just once per team. But for a WR, where the starting requirements may be 3 or flexed up to 4, your top WR (let's just call him Antonio Brown) has an advantage 3-4 times the number of players compared to Gronk.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
lod01
Footballguy
So you are saying he's going to catch 16 TDs a year with Garoppolo at QB? Yeah he will get his but Garoppolo is not Tom Brady. The same way Russell Wilson is not Drew Brees. His numbers will not stay at the current levels.
Mister CIA
Footballguy
OBJ ectively speaking, no.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
If anything a younger, inferior QB might lock in on his best target rather than spread the ball to a bunch of mediocre WR's because that's what the coverage dictates, which is what Brady does and why he's so great.
lod01
Footballguy
That's true but the D also knows that so the QB has to be really accurate in his throw since Gronk will certainly face double coverage with a lesser QB. I just don't see TD passes from G-polo inside the 10 like Brady did. I see them trying to run it in more....unless G-polo becomes a stud QB. I say this based on Belicheck begin the HC. When Brady was out,, the dropoff that year was significant with Cassel at QB. I say the same thing happens when G-polo takes over. Nearly a thousand yards and 7 TDs were lost without Brady at QB compared the 2009 season with Brady back in at QB. He will still be the top TE but the gap will narrow.
Brady is making Gronk way more than Gronk is making Brady.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
lod01
Footballguy
???? Are you comparing Grbac to Andrew Luck? If you are, I would suggest leaving fantasy football forever and don't look back.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Tony Gonzalez put up 242-2969-26 over three years with Elvis Grbac as his QB. Gronk's destroying Gonzo's pace -- by about 2 yards/reception and double the TDs.
He's not going to 'fall back to the pack' once Brady retires. The TDs might tail off, but if he's healthy he's going to produce.
He's not going to 'fall back to the pack' once Brady retires. The TDs might tail off, but if he's healthy he's going to produce.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
You are aware he was barely even able to play to start the year coming off a destroyed knee, right?
No, but you can make the case for top-5. Gronk will remain elite without Brady - just not as elite.
If you think your league will really last 10-15 years, Luck as 1.01 is a no-brainer.
LittlePhatty
Footballguy
Who will be elite for the longest period of time? It's Luck at 1.01 for me, no doubts.
I don't think Gronk would be in my Top 10, even in a mandatory TE league.
I don't think Gronk would be in my Top 10, even in a mandatory TE league.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
There are a few players that could go 1.1 in a start up and in wouldn't argue with it.
Gronk
OBJ
Bell
Luck, although with standard scoring I wouldn't take him even in the first
And about 3 or 4 receivers other receivers.
Gronk
OBJ
Bell
Luck, although with standard scoring I wouldn't take him even in the first
And about 3 or 4 receivers other receivers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Spike
Footballguy
I like this because, with your 1.01 pick in a startup, you really just want someone who is (whether arguably or inarguably) at the top AND who you are jazzed about. As msudaisy listed, any of those 3 (and others, depending on the person) would be someone you'd be happy with. It's not completely necessary to get someone who, 5 years later, DID outscore everyone but to get someone who is at least in the top 5-10 for that 5 year span.
Last edited by a moderator:
Uncle Grandpa
Footballguy
This is not the correct way to look at it. If you take Gronk at # 1, you have to wait until the end of the second to get your top WR, which is around WR 18. Or you could take the top WR and take your TE at the end of the second which is TE 3. So it's more like Gronk plus WR18 (475 = 275 + 200) vs WR1 plus TE3 (540 = 327 + 213)*.
* Used averages going back to 1980.
Omniscient Deity
Footballguy
I have Luck at #1 myself. He'll only become more valuable once Brady/Peyton/Brees retire. Call me crazy, but I don't see Winston and Bortles filling their shoes.
Plus I don't think Gronk stays healthy once he hits his later 20's or 30 y/o. I know some people dismiss the "injury-prone label" but that's just my personal worry.
Would still take Gronk pretty early though.
Plus I don't think Gronk stays healthy once he hits his later 20's or 30 y/o. I know some people dismiss the "injury-prone label" but that's just my personal worry.
Would still take Gronk pretty early though.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sabertooth
Footballguy
First pick for me, without reading others choices would be Andrew Luck.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
I agree it is a bad way to think, but I disagree that only 5 picks will be non receivers before it gets back to him. In a start up I think all these guys go in the top 2 rounds that aren't receivers.
Bell
Gronk
Luck
Lacy
Gurley
Gordon
Charles
plus these guys on the fringe and could go
Gordon
McCoy
Graham
Rodgers
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
1.5 ppr for TEs, yeah he'd be my #1
Uncle Grandpa
Footballguy
Stream QB ftw, ill pass on Luck. It would be Gronk or a WR for me, but its a tough call. Position scarcity and dominance is on Gronks side but, even though hes young, how many more elite years does he have? I liked him as a buy last year when his stock was down, but now ppl are so high on him he may be a sell while hes healthy. I most certainly will not take Luck though. Easiest position to replace and even elite QBs throw up duds (shoutout to the week 16 donut).
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
A QB at #1??? Do you realize just how crazy of numbers he would have to put up to make that worth it?
Regarding 12 team start one qb
Regarding 12 team start one qb
blardorg
Footballguy
Yeah, I'm shocked so many people think Luck is 1.01. He's a late 1st for me (1.10+) at the highest, but I personally wouldn't take him there. I'd rather have Rodgers at mid/late 2nd if I was going to reach for a QB.
Pipes
Footballguy
Disagree completely. With the turnover at RB position and the seemingly constant influx of talent at the WR position lately Luck is an automatic for me. He's a top 3 QB now and should be for the next 10+ years. Take Luck and you don't have to worry about the QB position for a long time. Plus like ESPN Mike mention a number of the current top QBs are nearing the end of their careers and there doesn't appear to be the young guys to step into the shoes of a Manning, Brees or Brady. The gap from Luck, not even in his prime yet over even QB5 over the next 5 or 6 years is going to be huge...much bigger than it is now. Can we say the same thing with the same amount of certainty with a guy like Gronk or Leveon Bell? I dont think so.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Yeah, I mean I get the longevity factor, but if you take Luck at #1 then you are essentially weak regarding at least two out of the three RB/WR/TE positions for a while, unless of course you have one hell of a draft.
QB is pretty much the one area where I am pretty comfortable saying that you can get pretty solid points in the 7th-8th round at that position.
If I thought Luck would be a more dominant scoring QB, then maybe. Two QB league?? Sure, Luck #1 easily
Pipes
Footballguy
In 3 years I'm confident Luck is a top 3 QB easily and will be for a long, long time. I can't say that about any RB, WR or TE currently in the league.
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
As long as you are willing to enter rebuild mode years 1 and 2, then I can't argue to terribly much
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Unless you guys love owning timebombs in Brady, Brees, Manning there is no one in Luck's class. Great QBs are not just flooding the league right now with guys like Bortles and Winston (you kidding me?). Rivers, Big Ben and Rodgers are 34+ by 2017. There are some hopefuls like Wilson, but who are you guys getting in the 7th-8th that Luck won't be outscoring by 100+ points a year? You can have Jay Cutler and Matt Stafford. I'll take a 5-6 ppg advantage here for the next decade plus while getting a WR in the 2nd.
Taking Luck doesn't devaule the advantage of having an eliete TE. No One is saying that. I've been drafting TE first since Gates. I'm starting to sour on TEs. Graham and Gronk are starting to be banged up like RBs. I'm getting sick of reading they will used as a decoy this week. J. Thomas flopped on me last year. If I could get 16 games out of Gronk then I'm all for it. But, I'm not paying up for 10ish games a year anymore. I'll still value stashing Eifert's, L. Green's ect.. As much as possible.
If you had a million to bet who would still be at the top of their position in total points again this year between Gronk, Murray, A. Brown and Luck, who would you take?
Taking Luck doesn't devaule the advantage of having an eliete TE. No One is saying that. I've been drafting TE first since Gates. I'm starting to sour on TEs. Graham and Gronk are starting to be banged up like RBs. I'm getting sick of reading they will used as a decoy this week. J. Thomas flopped on me last year. If I could get 16 games out of Gronk then I'm all for it. But, I'm not paying up for 10ish games a year anymore. I'll still value stashing Eifert's, L. Green's ect.. As much as possible.
If you had a million to bet who would still be at the top of their position in total points again this year between Gronk, Murray, A. Brown and Luck, who would you take?
Last edited by a moderator:
Borden
Footballguy
I would bet on Gronk. Gronk vs Graham and a random that pops up. Luck vs Arod, Manning, Wilson, Brees, Ben plus the random. WR there's too many studs. RBs are too impacted by change (coaching, players, etc.)
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Right before he blows out his elbow or something. Risky proposition*Murray and Brown ruled out completely. I can't see Big Ben or a random outpacing Luck entering his prime.
Last edited by a moderator:
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
You have to be an ### not to make the playoffs with Rodger, Bees, Manning, Brady in the past.
blardorg
Footballguy
Aaron Rodgers won't turn 32 until December. His ADP is ~20 going by DLF. That means you have a reasonable shot of taking your pick of Dez, Brown, Julio, Gronk, whoever, at 1.01, and still getting Rodgers at 2.12 (or reaching a little and taking Russell Wilson at 2.12 if Rodgers is off the board). If you take Luck at 1.01, you're looking at Jamaal Charles, Amari Cooper, Keenan Allen, TY Hilton, etc., at 2.12. I'd bet on the (Dez, Julio, or Gronk) + (Rodgers or Wilson) side scoring more for the next 3+ years than Luck + (Charles, Cooper, or Hilton) side. Wouldn't you? Obviously depends on exact scoring settings, but assuming 1QB and typical passing scoring settings, I don't think you can really argue with that, can you?
The thing that you are all failing to realize is that there is a huge difference between NFL dominance and fantasy dominance. Yes, Luck is not yet in the prime of his career and will be amongst the best QB's in the league for a decade (and probably the best once Rodgers enters a downslope). However, that does not mean he cant already be at or close to his peak statistically. Luck in fantasy is aided by the fact that he has had literally zero run game and the opportunity to throw the ball almost 40 times a game. That isn't going to last his entire career. 616 attempts, 40 TD to go along with another 273/3 on the ground is an incredibly rare season. The idea that anyone can keep that up for 10 years is absurd, and the idea that he's bound to improve upon that consistently is outright ridiculous. Andrew Luck is an amazing player and probably the safest investment you can make in dynasty right now, but he is not dynasty's best player. You lose more at the skill positions by drafting him first than you do by taking a QB later or streaming them all the time.
Of course, this is for your standard 12 team league. The bigger the league gets, or smaller the starting roster (or if it's 2QB), the more valuable he gets.
Of course, this is for your standard 12 team league. The bigger the league gets, or smaller the starting roster (or if it's 2QB), the more valuable he gets.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
While I agree with you that Luck shouldn't go first overall, I do think he can sustain the 4500 yards 35 touchdown pace. Right now he is doing it on volume, but as he gets a better team and develops as a qb he will become more efficient and won't need that many pass attempts each game.
I agree, but that is still 30 less fantasy points than he scored last season. He wouldn't have even been QB1 with that stat-line, let alone the dominant QB1
Last edited by a moderator:
