2013 Rookie 1.03 (1 Viewer)

[Faust]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=681113

2013 Rookie 1.01

2013 Rookie 1.02

Standard Scoring

1.01 RB Eddie Lacy, Packers (42%)

1.02 RB Giovani Bernard, Bengals (36%)

PPR Scoring

1.01 WR Tavon Austin, Rams (45%)

1.02 RB Giovani Bernard, Bengals (48%)

Start 2 QB Scoring

1.01 RB Eddie Lacy, Packers (19%)

1.02 QB E.J. Manuel, Bills (28%)

 

[Sake-Bombers]

In my 2 QB league, nobody wanted to touch Geno. He fell to no. 8 before someone finally took him.

 

[cstu]

In PPR, Austin, Bernard and Patterson are my top 3. Austin will produce barring injury but I'd be tempted to go Patterson at 1.01.

 

[Faust]

Wednesday Night Bump.

 

[Ray Finkle]

In my 2 QB league, nobody wanted to touch Geno. He fell to no. 8 before someone finally took him.

Went at 2 and 5 in the 2 QB leagues I'm in.

 

[finito]

In PPR, Austin, Bernard and Patterson are my top 3. Austin will produce barring injury but I'd be tempted to go Patterson at 1.01.

I'd take Austin at #1 just because I think he's "safer", but Patterson would be right behind him. I'd take either over a RB at this point.

 

[Faust]

It is very close in 2 of 3 polls.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I wonder how people would vote if you assumed it was a TE required league.

I'm starting to consider Eifert at 1.1 in Zealots (TE required, non-ppr).

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I wonder how people would vote if you assumed it was a TE required league.

I'm starting to consider Eifert at 1.1 in Zealots (TE required, non-ppr).

Since most leagues are TE required I would imagine most people are voting as if it's TE required.

That said, I think Eifert is a bad pick at 1.1 in that league. As I outlined in another thread, the only way that pick ends up working out is if he becomes the next Gronk/Graham. If he's merely a "good" TE then he's a huge bust at 1.01 because, with 15+ good TEs and only 12 TEs required to start, "good" tight ends have zero value.

You're likely banking on him as a "safer" choice but he's not, because good=bust in this scenario. If you want a good TE you can probably move a 2nd/3rd round pick for one and be done with it. By drafting him at 1.01 you're banking on him becoming Gronk/Graham and that is a huge risk because finding a TE like that is extremely rare.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I wonder how people would vote if you assumed it was a TE required league.

I'm starting to consider Eifert at 1.1 in Zealots (TE required, non-ppr).

Since most leagues are TE required I would imagine most people are voting as if it's TE required.

That said, I think Eifert is a bad pick at 1.1 in that league. As I outlined in another thread, the only way that pick ends up working out is if he becomes the next Gronk/Graham. If he's merely a "good" TE then he's a huge bust at 1.01 because, with 15+ good TEs and only 12 TEs required to start, "good" tight ends have zero value.

You're likely banking on him as a "safer" choice but he's not, because good=bust in this scenario. If you want a good TE you can probably move a 2nd/3rd round pick for one and be done with it. By drafting him at 1.01 you're banking on him becoming Gronk/Graham and that is a huge risk because finding a TE like that is extremely rare.

But I think the bust factor for all these guys is about equal this year.

And in Zealots leagues the flex spots now include TE. So even if he's merely a "good" TE he could be a more than good WR2.

If any of the RBs are merely "good" (high likelihood this year) then they're going to be mired in a RBBC.

If any of the WRs are merely good, then they're not going to hold a lot of value in non-ppr leagues.

Sucks having the 1.1 this year. But that just means that you should swing for the fences for the guy that has the highest upside in the draft.

I probably won't do it, but there are good reasons to.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I meant "good" in fantasy terms.

A "good" running back is worth a ton. A "good" TE is worth nothing. Greg Olsen is a good TE. Brent Celek is a good TE. They have no value because everyone has one (or two).

I disagree that bust factor is equal, because the definition of what qualifies them as a bust is so different. Eifert is a bust at 1.01 if he gives you 700/6 every year. He's a bust if he gives anything less than Gronk/Graham. In that sense, his bust factor is huge because getting 1300/10 production out of a TE is extremely rare and unlikely.

Meanwhile, a RB that gives you something like 1200/9 (pretty pedestrain for a RB) is still worth a lot in both trade value (especially as a young RB) and actual value/VBD.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Agree some, disagree some.

Really, this year I would prefer someone offering me a veteran of some value for the pick rather than roll the dice on these rookies.

I think I'm learning that Zealots leagues aren't a good gauge for trades. More people seem to NOT get the concept behind trading than do.

 

[SayWhat?]

FreeBaGel is spot on. Nonsensical to talk about Eifert at 1.01 this year, ppr or non. And IMO it'd be an even worse decision in non-ppr due to the premium of RB's. While there may be something like a 50% chance that the player you take at 1.01 is a bust, that risk is 95% if you grab Eifert there since there's little to no hope that he puts up production on par with Gronk and Graham that you'd need to justify a TE that high in the draft.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Okay, okay. You convinced me.

 

[smashingsilver]

Agree some, disagree some.

Really, this year I would prefer someone offering me a veteran of some value for the pick rather than roll the dice on these rookies.

I think I'm learning that Zealots leagues aren't a good gauge for trades. More people seem to NOT get the concept behind trading than do.

Depends on the Zealots league, IMO. Some leagues tend to follow general consensus, others have odder results. I think the fact that there are so many Zealots leagues in total lends to the belief that general trading sense is disparate from the rest of the dynasty football community, especially when we have a constantly updated list highlighting all the bad trades, lol. It makes them stand out.

 

[eNdblu]

Love the polls!Was wondering if you could show the Pre and Post draft winners to see where the major swings would be?

 

[5Rings]

I wonder how people would vote if you assumed it was a TE required league.

I'm starting to consider Eifert at 1.1 in Zealots (TE required, non-ppr).

Trade down to 5 and take Eifert.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I wonder how people would vote if you assumed it was a TE required league.

I'm starting to consider Eifert at 1.1 in Zealots (TE required, non-ppr).

Trade down to 5 and take Eifert.

What if he goes 1.4?

 

[Faust]

Solid leaders have emerged in this set of polls. I will try to get Rookie 1.04 up tonight.

 

[BlackMamba24]

my rookie draft just ended tonight (ppr) and i was really surprised that Austin fell to 1.07, especially after seeing almost 50% of the vote here had him going 1.01. I guess his size scared people away.

 

[gianmarco]

While I agree that I wouldn't take Eifert that high, I will disagree that he has to hit Gronk/Graham levels to work out. Right now, there's Gronk/Graham/Hernandez in terms of value and everyone else. The everyone else is for the following 2 reasons:

1) The young guys are decent but not great. There's not much separation between guys like Rudolph/Gresh and other guys like Olsen/Pitta/Pettigrew.

2) The previous top TEs are getting older (Witten, Gonzo, Gates).

There is a tier of production that is and can be quite valuable. Look at the numbers Witten puts up. He's had 90-100 catches and 900-1000 yards for the last several years. Gonzo the same. Gates was doing it recently except for injuries, esp on a per game basis. These guys all score much more than the rest of the pack. The reason they don't have the increased value is age.

If Eifert is the next Witten or Gonzo, there is definitely value in that. He may not approach Gronk/Graham in terms of beastly numbers but he can still easily separate himself from the other guys if he starts putting up 80-90 catches for 800-900 yards and 7+ TDs. And Eifert has that kind of talent.

So, while I still wouldn't take him at 1.1 and think that's a mistake, this argument that he'll be a bust unless he becomes the next Gronk/Graham doesn't make sense to me. While Graham had > 5 ppg advantage over #10 TE Pitta in 1 ppr leagues, he was just over 1 ppg better than Witten and Gonzo. Owning him as a TE would give you a decent advantage over 3/4th of your leaguemates and would allow you to compete against Gronk/Graham/Hernandez owners.

 

[SayWhat?]

So, while I still wouldn't take him at 1.1 and think that's a mistake, this argument that he'll be a bust unless he becomes the next Gronk/Graham doesn't make sense to me. While Graham had > 5 ppg advantage over #10 TE Pitta in 1 ppr leagues, he was just over 1 ppg better than Witten and Gonzo. Owning him as a TE would give you a decent advantage over 3/4th of your leaguemates and would allow you to compete against Gronk/Graham/Hernandez owners.

But that's exactly what the argument was. That if you take Eifert at 1.01, he IS a bust unless he becomes the elite of the elite TE's. Because all the other TE's simply aren't valuable, especially in non ppr as was being discussed.

 

[gianmarco]

So, while I still wouldn't take him at 1.1 and think that's a mistake, this argument that he'll be a bust unless he becomes the next Gronk/Graham doesn't make sense to me. While Graham had > 5 ppg advantage over #10 TE Pitta in 1 ppr leagues, he was just over 1 ppg better than Witten and Gonzo. Owning him as a TE would give you a decent advantage over 3/4th of your leaguemates and would allow you to compete against Gronk/Graham/Hernandez owners.

But that's exactly what the argument was. That if you take Eifert at 1.01, he IS a bust unless he becomes the elite of the elite TE's. Because all the other TE's simply aren't valuable, especially in non ppr as was being discussed.

I understand that, but I was mostly referencing this post:

If he's merely a "good" TE then he's a huge bust at 1.01 because, with 15+ good TEs and only 12 TEs required to start, "good" tight ends have zero value.

You're likely banking on him as a "safer" choice but he's not, because good=bust in this scenario. If you want a good TE you can probably move a 2nd/3rd round pick for one and be done with it. By drafting him at 1.01 you're banking on him becoming Gronk/Graham and that is a huge risk because finding a TE like that is extremely rare.

He could be more than the 15+ good TEs and carry solid value. And if he does become the next Witten, I wouldn't call that a bust at all and could actually end up justifying the pick if the others don't pan out.

Let's put the hypothetical another way:

If you KNOW Eifert is the next Witten reincarnate and is going to give you 80-90/900-1000 for the next 7 yrs and consistently rank anywhere from TE3-5 on a yearly basis, outscoring the other "good" TEs by 4-5 ppg, would you consider him at 1.1? Would he be considered a bust if that's "all he did"?

The reason I don't think it's a good idea to take him at 1.1 is because I actually like some of the top end talent this year in the draft. It's not because I don't think Eifert could end up justifying it. There's a difference.

I think Eifert's FLOOR is the ceiling for most of these other TEs like Rudolph/Gresham/Pettigrew/Pitta. I think his upside is Gonzo/Witten type numbers. So while that isn't Gronk/Graham type territory (I don't see him catching double digit TDs consistently or going for 1300 yards), it's still quite valuable.

Finally, in non-ppr, different story, but that's not the only situation that was being discussed.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Thanks Gianmarco .That was the point I was trying to make but you stated it much better.

 

[Faust]

CLOSED