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!
Denver TE - is Dreessen or Tamme the play (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Tiger Fan
- Start date
Lavachebeadsman
Footballguy
Dreesen is listed as the starter on the Depth Chart, but I think this is a platoon situation, and probably one to avoid.
thx. Te2, so hopefully won't be an issue
Mr. Soup Nazi
Footballguy
My BIL isn't a local, but is a monster Bronco's homer...hangs out on their message boards every day, reads every piece of news written about training camp, watches every down of their preseason, etc.
He told me weeks ago the Dressen was the guy there. That Tamme was showing some "dropsies" and Broncs fans were thinking Dressen was the TE to have for fantasy.
He told me weeks ago the Dressen was the guy there. That Tamme was showing some "dropsies" and Broncs fans were thinking Dressen was the TE to have for fantasy.
Over the last three years, they have about equally good hands (approximately 90 receptions on 133 targets). Tamme managed 843 yards and 5 touchdowns with his opportunities. Dreessen managed 1190 yards and 11 touchdowns.
I'd guess that Tamme serves more of a 3rd down move-the-chains role and Dreessen is more of a big play tight end. Because of that I would lean toward Dreessen.
I'd guess that Tamme serves more of a 3rd down move-the-chains role and Dreessen is more of a big play tight end. Because of that I would lean toward Dreessen.
Frank Black
Footballguy
I'm mystified at the situation because I don't know whether the TE value is tied more to John Fox or to Manning. If it's tied more to Fox, not good for either TE because Fox's offenses typically don't feature the TE. If the TE value in Denver is tied more to Manning than to Fox, think back to the days when both D. Clark and Marcus Pollard had successful seasons at the same time. It could be possible too with Tamme and Dressen but unpredictable.
Shutout
Footballguy
Two things: Paraphrasing here but when John Fox was asked about Manning coming to Denver to run the offense, he said something to the effect of "I'm real excited to see what his offense looks like." Message there being, don't kid yourself, this is Manning's show.The other thing: When has a TE NOT been fantasy-relevant in a big way with Manning?
Frank Black
Footballguy
You may be right about this and I hope so because a Manning inspired offense would be more exciting to watch than a Fox offense. However, could Fox's statement only mean that he's excited to see how the Fox offense looks with the new personnel of Manning, Tamme and Dressen along with the WRs having more experience? In other words, I see 2 different ways to interpret Fox's comment.
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR
Footballguy
I think Dreessen's ability in the passing game is often underrated. I don't think he's as good a receiver as Tamme, but I think the difference is probably much less than most people assume.
Between that, and Dreessen being much better at run blocking, I could see Dreessen being the guy on the field a lot more and so end up being the better producer if mainly for that reason. I was able to get him much later than Tamme in a 2 TE, PPR league where I drafted him as a TE4. But I won't be surprised if he's in the mix near equally with Marcedes Lewis and Ed Dickson as my TE2.
Between that, and Dreessen being much better at run blocking, I could see Dreessen being the guy on the field a lot more and so end up being the better producer if mainly for that reason. I was able to get him much later than Tamme in a 2 TE, PPR league where I drafted him as a TE4. But I won't be surprised if he's in the mix near equally with Marcedes Lewis and Ed Dickson as my TE2.
The Jerk
Footballguy
I think this is the key issue. At least it is for me. Dreessen is a much better value play, and given the uncertainty, I wouldn't want to go with Tamme unless I've got better info that suggests he will clearly and distinctly outperform Dreessen. Dreessen did a lot to damage Owen Daniels value last season. In heavy TD leagues, I think Dreessen was actually more productive, in particular in the second half of the season. Of course the situation he's in is now drastically different, but if history repeats, Tamme could be a mild to moderate bust.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
I think the assumption all along was that Tamme would be the guy, simply because he was the one skill position player on the Broncos who had played with Peyton before, but he has not been very good in the preseason, and Dressen appears to the better tight end in all areas, so unless Tamme suddenly gets over his case of the drops, I definitely think Dressen will outperform him.
Fantasy Benchwarmer
Footballguy
Both will play alot. Dressen is a much better run blocker so he will be on the field more than Tamme. Tamme gives Manning a better pass catching te. Both will have chances to score. Just how much is the big question. Remember Manning has to stay on the field or both guys are worthless.
Preseason didn't show alot of the Broncos offense. They will run more than people think. Manning is going to dump the ball to the te alot.
Tamme is the one to own in fantasy football. Tamme will get the long catches on 3rd downs and end zone looks.
Dressen will catch some balls but not as many as Tamme, Dreessen is probably a better value but I don't think I would start him every week. Dreessen is a great sleeper if you have to start 2 TE's
Tamme 800 yards 6 TD's
Dressen 450 yards 4 TD's
Preseason didn't show alot of the Broncos offense. They will run more than people think. Manning is going to dump the ball to the te alot.
Tamme is the one to own in fantasy football. Tamme will get the long catches on 3rd downs and end zone looks.
Dressen will catch some balls but not as many as Tamme, Dreessen is probably a better value but I don't think I would start him every week. Dreessen is a great sleeper if you have to start 2 TE's
Tamme 800 yards 6 TD's
Dressen 450 yards 4 TD's
GregR
Footballguy
I agree that's the main issue. Even pessimistically for Dreessen, they might be in the realm of fairly equal chances of being a worthwhile fantasy starter with Peyton at QB, so Dreessen makes such a better value pick.My league has enough of an unusual setup it's hard to relate rounds drafted directly to standard leagues, but Tamme went in the 9th and I got Dreessen in the 19th. Just checked some ADPs and I see 25th and 32nd rounds for Dreessen in more standard formats, and 9 to 12 for Tamme.
moleculo
Footballguy
they will both see the field a lot. Denver will be in the 2 TE set quite a bit this year, looking to throw. IMO Tamme will be a better down-field threat, whereas Dreessen will be the guy staying in to help out and then releasing when he can.
Both will be used, but I still believe Tamme is the one to have, despite his dropsies in pre-season.
Both will be used, but I still believe Tamme is the one to have, despite his dropsies in pre-season.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
To clarify my point here, my last comment is in reference to the ADP of both. Tamme has been a top 10 TE in most drafts/auctions, while Dressen has been either not going or going for almost nothing.
Tamme vs. Dreessen discussion
Things move slow in the SP. This news in the OP shouldn't come as a surprise, yet the tired old line of thinking of "Tamme has the Manning chemistry" voided all actual analysis on the two players.
One guy can block and averages over 12 ypr.
One guy can't block and averages 9 ypr.
Which one is the one to own? Oh, right the guy who previously played with Manning because Dreessen is obviously incapable of learning a playbook or developing rapport with Manning in the preseason.
Things move slow in the SP. This news in the OP shouldn't come as a surprise, yet the tired old line of thinking of "Tamme has the Manning chemistry" voided all actual analysis on the two players.
One guy can block and averages over 12 ypr.
One guy can't block and averages 9 ypr.
Which one is the one to own? Oh, right the guy who previously played with Manning because Dreessen is obviously incapable of learning a playbook or developing rapport with Manning in the preseason.
MAC_32
Footballguy
Dreesen may play more snaps, but Tamme will have more passing plays designed for him. Less snaps is a modest hit to Tamme's value, but he's still the TE to own in Denver if you're going to own one. He had a rough August which probably caused the demotion, but he's still going to be a big part of the gameplan. The offense typically has 4 passing options and a single back - Decker and Demaryius are 2 of the options and it sounds like Dreesen will get the 3rd most snaps. That leaves Tamme battling with a bunch of mediocre WR's for that 4th spot, my $ is on Tamme over Stokely, Caldwell, and camp fodder. If he can't beat them out for snaps then that's all on him. If he's seeing the 4th most snaps then he's seeing the 3rd most targets among WR's and TE's. A lot of Dreesen snaps makes sense as a chip blocker to keep the pass rush more neutralized as minimizing the # of hits on Manning is a priorty and Dreesen is the superior blocker.
All that said, something like this is why in the leagues I picked up Tamme I backed him up with Rudolph, I think they're both in for big years but understand the risk associated with both. In the end, I think at least one of them emerges so if I throw both darts I'll hit with one.
All that said, something like this is why in the leagues I picked up Tamme I backed him up with Rudolph, I think they're both in for big years but understand the risk associated with both. In the end, I think at least one of them emerges so if I throw both darts I'll hit with one.
Shutout
Footballguy
Usually, with so many people always making references in their posts about passing "the eyeball test", It surprises me some that people doubt Tamme is the guy here. After all, we have seen him with our eyeballs playing with Manning.
Also, for the few people here trying to play down the factor of Manning and Tamme having chemistry, I think you're WAY under estimating the value of that. Look at the Eagles last year: Talent is talent, but production does not occur until you have chemistry. Anyone who has followed manning in his career knows very well the stories of his meticulous preparation. It is what made Harrison and Wayne so good. Their trustworthiness to Manning allowed him to rely on them...to be in exactly the right place and run the right route and, simply, be there when it mattered. When Manning wants to move the chains or get that 6 yards on a third down, he's bringing that ball out quickly and tamme is a prime option every time because he's NOT going to be the blocking TE (so, he's going to be in an active route) and he meets all the previous criteria.
Also, for the few people here trying to play down the factor of Manning and Tamme having chemistry, I think you're WAY under estimating the value of that. Look at the Eagles last year: Talent is talent, but production does not occur until you have chemistry. Anyone who has followed manning in his career knows very well the stories of his meticulous preparation. It is what made Harrison and Wayne so good. Their trustworthiness to Manning allowed him to rely on them...to be in exactly the right place and run the right route and, simply, be there when it mattered. When Manning wants to move the chains or get that 6 yards on a third down, he's bringing that ball out quickly and tamme is a prime option every time because he's NOT going to be the blocking TE (so, he's going to be in an active route) and he meets all the previous criteria.
MAC_32
Footballguy
One issue that arose this preseason, Tamme's unreliability in situations in which he was relied on in his one partial season with Peyton. He had a few of bad drops and routes in bad spots. Preseason, yes, but a couple of repeats in real games and his production going forward becomes a bigger question mark. Not something I downgraded him over, but it absolutely makes him more volatile.
You're right. The simplest answer is always right. Please, people, don't bother to do anything real thinking or analysis. The answer is always right there on the surface waiting for you. Those fools in the minority are clearly missing that half a season's worth of chemistry is more valuable than talent and a complete game.I mean, after all, who needs a complete game? Blocking is for offensive linemen only. We all know that Manning does not like to audible so it makes sense that he'd want a one dimensional player in the game. I'm sure he'd hate to have the option of changing the play from a running play or max protect to a play in which he can pass to his TE. He'll probably never do that.
matuski
Footballguy
Are you capable of posting without being a complete dbag? I ask because I haven't seen it yet.You seem to occasionally have something to add, but I'm guessing you eliminate half or more of your audience with this garbage.
Last edited by a moderator:
Are people in the SP capable of actual analysis or am I going to continue to be disappointed by hearing news of a more talented player being named #1 on the depth chart discounted based solely on silly crap like half a season's worth of chemistry?
It's like this place wants to promote group think so that everyone can feel right rather than consider non-consensus opinions. It's dumb and irritating. So sometimes I'm going to break out some sarcasm to make a point. Ignore my point and call me a dbag if it makes you feel good. Fact is, I pointed out that Tamme wasn't anything special over a month ago and was met with the same lame crap argument. Now that Denver has actually named Dreessen the starter the SP is still too stubborn to change its tune.
It's like this place wants to promote group think so that everyone can feel right rather than consider non-consensus opinions. It's dumb and irritating. So sometimes I'm going to break out some sarcasm to make a point. Ignore my point and call me a dbag if it makes you feel good. Fact is, I pointed out that Tamme wasn't anything special over a month ago and was met with the same lame crap argument. Now that Denver has actually named Dreessen the starter the SP is still too stubborn to change its tune.
MAC_32
Footballguy
The point being made is there are better ways to make your point than how you have. Dreesen having a meaningful role doesn't surprise me, it's why he was signed on. I'm surprised he's being penciled in above Tamme, but because of the lack of alternatives behind them and the type of offense the Broncos run I'm not concerned with Tamme losing snaps and targets - yet. All that's changed this offseason is Dreesen has earned more snaps among the heap of marginal WR's in camp. More concerned, a little yeah, it's why I have backup plan's in case he continues his shaky August play. I put more stock in actual season play than August though, a couple of good games out of the gate and we forget about the down August quickly. A couple of bad games and diminished playing time and hello waiver wire.
Mr. Soup Nazi
Footballguy
All signs THIS year point to Dressen being the guy.
Since we are talking about this season, I'll go with Dressen.
Since we are talking about this season, I'll go with Dressen.
The Jerk
Footballguy
I'm not sure why some posters believe that talking down to the Shark Pool masses somehow makes them look bigger or better. It doesn't make their points any more meaningful, and it doesn't make them look smarter. All it does is make them look like they are incapable of interacting civilly on a message board.At least for me, I can't remember being undecided on a given debate, such as this one on Dreessen and Tamme, sifting through numerous posts, some detailed others not, some looking at player history, others projecting what may change with the upcoming season, but all of it still leaving me fairly ambivalent. But then, because someone rips the intelligence of the shark pool because everyone isn't agreeing with them, I realize, oh, of course I should think the way that poster does. To disagree with him obviously makes me stupid.Maybe, just maybe, if someone with a long history of respectful debate suddenly goes ballistic, it could make a point. However, for FF Ninja, this is the second time just today that insult has replaced content as the main thrust of an argument, and that proves nothing, except perhaps that FF Ninja does not actually have any more meaningful content to add to the discussion.For what it's worth, I'm on FF Ninja's side on this issue. I might take Dreessen before Tamme in a draft, in particular if it's non-PPR and especially if it's TD-heavy. Given the significantly different ADP, my play is purely Dreessen.Something I learned a long time ago is that people who are truly smart don't need to tell everyone how smart they are, because everyone else can figure that out for themselves. Certainly that applies here in the Shark Pool. Nearly all of the truly informative and insightful posters aren't trying to impress everyone with how smart they are. They just share their thoughts.
Last edited by a moderator:
Shanahanigans
Footballguy
I listened to Dreesen on the radio today, and from his perspective it sounds like he thinks he will be on the field a lot. Initially I thought Tamme was due for a huge year, based on the reports by Cecil Lammey and his history with Manning. However, in the 3rd preseason game I felt it became clear that the Broncos will use a tandem approach with both Dreesen and Tamme. I think both of their values are capped by the other person.
Worthless tidbit: my cousin played high school football with Dreesen, and he says he was a great guy.
Worthless tidbit: my cousin played high school football with Dreesen, and he says he was a great guy.
moleculo
Footballguy
IMO, they will both see the field alot, often times together. Here's the difference: Dreessen is more likely to motion into the backfield to become a FB, where Tamme is more likely to motion into the slot as a WR.
I could be wrong though, and now I have both until this settles down a bit, just to hedge my bet. I will be starting Tamme this week, for what that's worth.
I could be wrong though, and now I have both until this settles down a bit, just to hedge my bet. I will be starting Tamme this week, for what that's worth.
I rip the intelligence of the SP because NOTHING has been added to the discussion on the Tamme side of the debate other than his half year of chemistry. And I've said before, I'm not drafting either one of them, so I don't really care if people agree with me or not. It is just disheartening that this is as good as the SP gets.'The Jerk said:
Again, there has been zero meaningful content added to the Tamme argument. My meaningful content has been quickly dismissed because it can't hold a candle to the Manning-Tamme chemistry.'The Jerk said:
'The Jerk said:
For both of these quotes (the second being cut and pasted from the top of your post) I will honestly tell you I don't care about the reputation of my silly fake name on this board, nor do I care if people think "FF ninja" is smart. Lots of these people do care and I find it rather sad and pitiful. The only reputation I'd like is that people will know they need to bring stats and analysis rather than eyeball tests and gut feelings into player discussions or I will absolutely call them out. Luckily, there are people like you who will stick up and fight for them. Let the stupid points continue to rule the SP! All hail group think!Fun facts from the earlier TE thread:'The Jerk said:
Again, I've never said you should target either one of these guys. I just think Tamme has been getting way overdrafted (TE10) on nothing more than the notion that his chemistry with Manning is going to win him the job. Granted, I've had the advantage of being in Houston so I was forced to pay closer attention to Dreessen and hear about him on the local radio but it is frustrating to feel like you are casting pearls before swine. I've got nothing to gain here. Just trying to do my part in the SP. In this case share that Tamme has some serious competition and isn't worth drafting when Olsen and Daniels are still on the board, only to have my case for Dreessen immediately thrown out because obviously Tamme and his 9.0 ypr is the clear #1 on the Broncos because he's got chemistry.
moleculo
Footballguy
you want some stats:
Dreessen has been in the league for 6 years. over that time, he has never had more than 40 receptions, and more than 30 just once. In his best year, he averaged 3.2 receptions per start which pro-rates to 53 in a 16 game season. Owen Daniels, on the other hand, is the same age and played in the exact same situation, being teammates w/ Dreessen for the last 5 years. over that span (2007-2011), Daniels worst season he averaged 3.6 rec/start, which pro-rates to 57 receptions in a 16 game season.
Therefore, we can conclude that by looking at past history, Dreessen's team has not looked to him to be the "move" TE.
Tamme, on the other hand, averaged 8.4 rec/start the last time he played on a team that wasn't completely inept...coincidentally, with the same QB he has in Denver. 8.4 receptions/start pro-rates to 134 per season. If we wanted to include last season, Tamme averaged 3.8 receptions per start, which pro-rates to 61 over a 16 game season... still better than Dreessen's best year.
looking at the past data, it's tough to justify Dreessen > Tamme.
Of course, that's strictly looking backwards and things are completely different now...both players are on a new team, so all stats have little value. Nothing else really can be brought to the table besides eyebell tests and gut feel.
Dreessen has been in the league for 6 years. over that time, he has never had more than 40 receptions, and more than 30 just once. In his best year, he averaged 3.2 receptions per start which pro-rates to 53 in a 16 game season. Owen Daniels, on the other hand, is the same age and played in the exact same situation, being teammates w/ Dreessen for the last 5 years. over that span (2007-2011), Daniels worst season he averaged 3.6 rec/start, which pro-rates to 57 receptions in a 16 game season.
Therefore, we can conclude that by looking at past history, Dreessen's team has not looked to him to be the "move" TE.
Tamme, on the other hand, averaged 8.4 rec/start the last time he played on a team that wasn't completely inept...coincidentally, with the same QB he has in Denver. 8.4 receptions/start pro-rates to 134 per season. If we wanted to include last season, Tamme averaged 3.8 receptions per start, which pro-rates to 61 over a 16 game season... still better than Dreessen's best year.
looking at the past data, it's tough to justify Dreessen > Tamme.
Of course, that's strictly looking backwards and things are completely different now...both players are on a new team, so all stats have little value. Nothing else really can be brought to the table besides eyebell tests and gut feel.
I'm not being a "tool". To me, the shark pool is full of tools. People who don't know what they're talking about, speaking authoritatively in the hopes of convincing the totally uninformed masses into agreeing with them and making them feel good. Or the guys who jump into a discussion just to say that they picked the guy up in a draft or that they just traded for the player and then adding NOTHING. Or people talking about watching every snap in college and promising he's going to be a stud. Me? I'm being elitist. Do your homework or don't post. If you post crap, I'm calling it out - nicely at first. I'm not looking to get into a flame contest with anyone. I just want to clear out the BS in here. I'm actually a pretty busy guy and I'm tired of sorting through utter crapola. I don't like to be the bad guy. But someone's got to say something from time to time. Worthless info runs rampant here. If more people discouraged it, this place would turn into a good information/analysis haven instead of a place full of braggarts and blowhards.
Shutout
Footballguy
I find it telling that most of the people in these forums that have a tendency to criticize people for not presenting a certian thing are the people that are most likely to do that very thing. You come on here and say multiple times how you will respond to people who don't offer actual analysis and reason, yet your only input is a series of one-liner sarcastic remarks and smiley faces with the eyes rolling.Your information was there for you to consider: you just failed to comprehend it. Others have offered lots of info also, but, just to use my own post as example, I gave you an entire paragraph of reasons. You just missed it. Granted, a lot of my responses in these forums are more intangible, team philosophical, and planning instead of a number I googled out of a box score. But if you want a number, how about you, yourself, bringing something to the table to analyze that can contradict the FACT that Tamme and Manning have been very productive together and try to take into account that the fact that they have been on the same team together and worked together accounts for something. Just because you don't get fantasy points for something doesn't mean it doesn't impact the end-result. There are a good number of posters in the forums right now, unfortunately, that are similar to you. They are people that want to make the news instead of report it. You want the chaos and the drama of a cat fight instead of the "boring" real information. You have the desire to speak and be noticed instead of being willing to read and listen and learn. You want everything in a nice little boxscore where you can point to a number instead of actually taking the time to THINK and analyze (the very thing you criticize). But what you don't understand is the boxscore is only the fantasy aspect of it. And its simply a history record. That's not how things pan out in the future. If they were, there would be no point in playing this game because we would already know the results, if we didn't have to think about how changes affect the future.I've watched both these TE's and their teams for a lot of years now and I've watched what the Broncos are doing. I don't get caught up in pre-season because I understand that what they are doing in pre-season isn't centered around making your fantasy team happy. Maroney looked good in a pre-season once, ya know? If Dreesen and Tamme both stay healthy and Dreesen is the guy, then by all means, please come back and bump this post and claim your gift card for your 15 minutes. But if he doesn't, please come back and re-read what some people have been trying to point out to you and take that 15 minutes to learn something.
Shutout
Footballguy
Its real nice that you wondered into town here sheriff and volunteered to clean up the joint but there is a real danger in attention-seeking individuals that wonder into places trying to make the forums what they want it to be instead of just coming in and being a part of what it is. If you want to make a change, do it constructively; if you have something to offer, people will eventually see it and respond to it. And if you like what the forums are or becomes, then stay. And if you don't like it, then leave. Unless you have another agenda, why WOULD a person join something that they basically use every post they post to state all its faults.
That type of behavior doesn't work in most relationships, real or virtual and I don't think it will work well here because I doubt most of us here are girls with daddy issues seeking an abusive relationship of some guy with a superiority complex.
I've never claimed Dreessen was better than Daniels. If you want to look at it from that angle, how did Tamme do while Dallas Clark was healthy in 2010? Oh, that's right. He didn't get a single target. In 2009, he saw 10 targets while playing in 16 games - the 4th most for a TE on the team despite #2 and #3 only playing 3 and 13 games. In 2011, he warranted 31 targets (Dallas Clark missed 5 games). In the last 3 years, the Texans have passed the ball an average of 544 times. The Colts an average of 604 times.
Dreessen averages 12.4 ypr while Tamme dwindles at 9.0 ypr. I don't know Tamme's drop numbers, but Dreessen's 3% is very solid. Dreessen was only asked to block on 30% of Houston passing plays, so he clearly wasn't a one trick pony. And seriously, I'm not trying to make a case for Dreessen >> Tamme, just that Tamme isn't worth a TE10 pick. This discussion originated in a TE value play thread I started. I was saying Tamme is a pretty clear pass at TE10 while guys like Daniels and Olsen have much lower ADPs, but other people chimed in saying Tamme was a great pick if you miss out on the early TEs and the only reason why? You guessed it, chemistry. And now that Dreessen has been named the starter people are still on the Tamme bandwagon, still beating the chemistry drum. I'll get called out if I question the SP, but this just doesn't seem shark-like.
I think you mean "wander".The value in the SP is in finding contrarian opinions. I prefer the spotlights. They are usually the most information dense threads. I like to read other people's takes on players as well as post mine - both to share my analysis and conclusions and to hear people possibly take another side and show me an angle I had not yet considered.
I think Reggie Wayne and Torrey Smith are two guys I wouldn't have drafted if not for reading some SP discussion on. We've all got guys in our blind spots and I use the SP as my parabolic mirror to see those blind spots. Unfortunately, the mirror is clouded with lots and lots of dust.
The Jerk
Footballguy
You did a top-notch job of cutting and pasting my quotes, but on the comprehension side, not so much. There is a fairly sizable difference between being a poster that will "stick up and fight for them" as you claim, and pointing out that some of your comments -- in my opinion, to be clear -- are unnecessarily offensive and belittling, while simultaneously being no more effective for the effort.Once more, let me state that I am on your side on this issue, both in the specific (Dreessen/Tamme) and the general, concerning analysis. Assuming someone's post history is still available to be searched (I haven't done that in a long time), you can find countless statistical analyses of mine that emphasize numbers as a large part of FF preparation. More in the deeper past, as I've had less time the past few years. Yet even today, I was analyzing Malcom Floyd's numbers on a per game basis elsewhere in the Shark Pool. I may not be as rigid as you when it comes to looking at only numbers, but suffice it to say we have a lot in common.Where we apparently differ most significantly is in how we value discourse and etiquette in the Shark Pool. I've had my moments, to be sure, but I can see from others posts that I'm not the only one who finds your consistent level of anger and condescension to be unhelpful to your cause. And really, it's our cause, as we all have a stake in the Shark Pool.Feel free to have the last word, as I'm sure you'll be unable to contain yourself. I hoped I was wrong, but apparently I learned all I need to know about your attitude when you stated
Apparently, you genuinely cannot understand why some people think differently from you, that they may be able to contextualize differently from you (i.e., that smaller leagues can present a different, but possibly equal and sometimes even superior challenge, depending on your experience), and that they may come to conclusions in a different way than you. Have you considered that numbers cannot explain everything in fantasy football? Can you at least acknowledge that chemistry can be a factor, even if only a minor one? Finally, have you noticed that while a lot of us cannot agree on the value of Tamme vs. the value of Dreessen (considering their relative ADP), one thing we are in easy agreement on is that we dislike the arrogant tone of your posts?I'm guessing that you don't like to be faced with people who think differently from you. Where you seem threatened or at least annoyed by people who think differently from you, I am fascinated by them and wonder what I can learn from them. I'm going to guess that most of these Shark Pool sheep as you call them are pretty successful at FF. Some of them, dare I say it, may even be better than you. Even if they're not, what makes FF interesting is that we all don't think the same way. If we all thought the same way, then there would be no variety at all. Every league and draft would become the same boring exercise. The fact that there is variety in FF is one of its best qualities. While you may disagree, I think the same can be said for the Shark Pool.
Last edited by a moderator:
MAC_32
Footballguy
Dreesen didn't block as much last year because both Owen and Andre missed games. He wasn't retained in large part because the Texans wanted to expand the role of James Casey and they acquired several WR's so they wouldn't have to go so TE-heavy in case Andre misses games again.I think the fundamental difference I think you're missing in Tamme vs. Olsen vs. Daniels vs. other lower end TE's is upside. Tamme has it, the others don't. Best case scenario for an Olsen or Owen is top 7, 8-ish finish imho. We have a good idea of what to expect out of them and what we can find on waivers in standard leagues in a pinch in-season isn't much lower. Roll the dice on a guy like Tamme that has the ability and situation to be top 5 at a backup price and if he doesn't pan out dive in the well and dig up an inuninteresting vet is a formidable strategy. In deeper leagues Tamme drafters should have backed up their risky pick, I did with Rudolph (and Moeaki in another very deep league) - guys that I think have similar physical and opportunity upside.
My philosophy on team building doesn't seem to be the same as many, but I've had success throwing a bunch of darts at upside guys once getting out of the top 60-70 and working the trade and waiver wire over the first few weeks. Usually have a complete team by the time I get out of the bye weeks, just a matter of staying above .500 in the process.
I find it telling that most of the people in these forums that have a tendency to criticize people for not presenting a certian thing are the people that are most likely to do that very thing.
You come on here and say multiple times how you will respond to people who don't offer actual analysis and reason, yet your only input is a series of one-liner sarcastic remarks and smiley faces with the eyes rolling.
False. That was certainly not my only input. I posted a link prior to that which was to my previous thread about TEs in which I had already lined out why Tamme's chemistry was being way overvalued and Dreessen was being overlooked. Plus, I was one of those "few people" you were replying to who don't value Tamme's half season of chemistry.
Your information was there for you to consider: you just failed to comprehend it. Others have offered lots of info also, but, just to use my own post as example, I gave you an entire paragraph of reasons. You just missed it. Granted, a lot of my responses in these forums are more intangible, team philosophical, and planning instead of a number I googled out of a box score. But if you want a number, how about you, yourself, bringing something to the table to analyze that can contradict the FACT that Tamme and Manning have been very productive together and try to take into account that the fact that they have been on the same team together and worked together accounts for something. Just because you don't get fantasy points for something doesn't mean it doesn't impact the end-result.
Haha, no you didn't. Go back and read it. Nothing of value in there.
There are a good number of posters in the forums right now, unfortunately, that are similar to you. They are people that want to make the news instead of report it. You want the chaos and the drama of a cat fight instead of the "boring" real information. You have the desire to speak and be noticed instead of being willing to read and listen and learn. You want everything in a nice little boxscore where you can point to a number instead of actually taking the time to THINK and analyze (the very thing you criticize). But what you don't understand is the boxscore is only the fantasy aspect of it. And its simply a history record. That's not how things pan out in the future. If they were, there would be no point in playing this game because we would already know the results, if we didn't have to think about how changes affect the future.
I've watched both these TE's and their teams for a lot of years now and I've watched what the Broncos are doing. I don't get caught up in pre-season because I understand that what they are doing in pre-season isn't centered around making your fantasy team happy. Maroney looked good in a pre-season once, ya know?
I 100% agree that one shouldn't look into the preseason too much, but Dreessen had never played with Manning before. The fact that he's earned the job for week 1 just might indicate that he's proved his worth or maybe even developed some chemistry with his QB - just like everyone is supposed to do in the offseason/preseason.
If Dreesen and Tamme both stay healthy and Dreesen is the guy, then by all means, please come back and bump this post and claim your gift card for your 15 minutes. But if he doesn't, please come back and re-read what some people have been trying to point out to you and take that 15 minutes to learn something.
One last time, I'm just saying Tamme and his chemistry will be a bust at TE10 for reasons already stated. I'm not recommending either TE, although with Dreessen being named the starter he does become a sleeper in large roster leagues.
moleculo
Footballguy
Today is 9/5/2012. The regular season starts tonight. I'd wager 95% of all drafts are complete. ADP is now irrelevant. Who cares where so and so was drafted? What's important right now is this: is Tamme a good play? Is Dreessen a good play? That's where the focus should be. If Dreessen > Tamme and you drafted Tamme as TE9, cut him and get Dreessen ASAP.RE: Owen Daniels - the point I was trying to make is that Dreessen has made a career out of being a blocking TE, as opposed to a consistent down-field threat (The fact that he stays in to block 30% of the time (your data) is a little high, don't you think? I wonder how that compares to say, Vernon Davis0. Tamme, on the other hand, seemed to always be a 2nd string "move" TE, behind Clark. Yes, Tamme never got stats while Clark was healthy...he was the back-up. Dreessen did get stats when Daniels was healthy because they had different roles on that offense.
These are two guys who, despite playing the same position, have had different roles in the offense, and it's my contention that they will have different roles in this Bronco offense. Both roles are important to real football, but one role is much more important in terms of FF stats.
I didn't include the whole quote bc there's not much to say about the other part. I will say I'm not as rigid about numbers as you may think. I do like to use them as a starting point, though. And you did not need to re-state it. I read you the first time you said you agreed on this TE debate and the logic/numbers approach.And I think I put it in another post, but I actually come here for analysis and differing opinions. I try to come into every offseason with a clean slate on every player but I still typically have a few favorites. I haven't been talked out of a player that I liked yet (only really loved Mathews, Lynch, Lloyd, Hillis coming into this season) but I've definitely been talked into a few that I had neutral or undecided opinions on.So I don't feel the least bit threatened by differing opinions and takes on situations. They are 90% of the reason I come here (10% for news/articles). I just get sick of seeing people who think they are clever refute a side of a debate with a one line quip (he's a quitter, he's a plodder). I'd like to see well thought out responses on both sides. In this thread it wasn't quite that exaggerated, but shutout definitely dropped a pretty worthless point like it was some sort of iron clad argument combined with a paragraph of nothing and then revealed that he really believes there were some gems in there afterwards.And yes, I'll absolutely agree that chemistry is a factor. If Tamme = Dreessen in all areas then yes, chemistry would be the deciding factor.I also seriously doubt these sheep are all that successful (did I really use the word sheep before?). The "I drafted with guppies and look how awesome my team is LOL" threads show you the result of these arrogant uninformed posters' research on these boards. Not so good.We can talk about small leagues, short rosters, 2WR/2RB lineups, roster restrictions, etc. on PM if you want. They are definitely harder to win because they eliminate a large advantage well prepared drafters typically have. I guess I may have been a bit strong on that one. I should have said, if you hate doing offseason/preseason research and just want to set lineups and play the waiver wire like crazy then small leagues/short rosters are great.
Run It Up
Footballguy
Agreed completely, the bigger the roster, the bigger the edge.18-20 man rosters forever imo.
Shutout
Footballguy
Like I said, flag this thread and sit back and watch and then you WILL have something you could have learned from "the likes of me". I very rarely argue for or against "boxscores" and stats. I think all things have a value but my point is there ARE other factors to consider and just because you choose to ignore them doesn't make them any less important.I find it telling that most of the people in these forums that have a tendency to criticize people for not presenting a certian thing are the people that are most likely to do that very thing.
You come on here and say multiple times how you will respond to people who don't offer actual analysis and reason, yet your only input is a series of one-liner sarcastic remarks and smiley faces with the eyes rolling.
False. That was certainly not my only input. I posted a link prior to that which was to my previous thread about TEs in which I had already lined out why Tamme's chemistry was being way overvalued and Dreessen was being overlooked. Plus, I was one of those "few people" you were replying to who don't value Tamme's half season of chemistry.
Your information was there for you to consider: you just failed to comprehend it. Others have offered lots of info also, but, just to use my own post as example, I gave you an entire paragraph of reasons. You just missed it. Granted, a lot of my responses in these forums are more intangible, team philosophical, and planning instead of a number I googled out of a box score. But if you want a number, how about you, yourself, bringing something to the table to analyze that can contradict the FACT that Tamme and Manning have been very productive together and try to take into account that the fact that they have been on the same team together and worked together accounts for something. Just because you don't get fantasy points for something doesn't mean it doesn't impact the end-result.
Haha, no you didn't. Go back and read it. Nothing of value in there.
There are a good number of posters in the forums right now, unfortunately, that are similar to you. They are people that want to make the news instead of report it. You want the chaos and the drama of a cat fight instead of the "boring" real information. You have the desire to speak and be noticed instead of being willing to read and listen and learn. You want everything in a nice little boxscore where you can point to a number instead of actually taking the time to THINK and analyze (the very thing you criticize). But what you don't understand is the boxscore is only the fantasy aspect of it. And its simply a history record. That's not how things pan out in the future. If they were, there would be no point in playing this game because we would already know the results, if we didn't have to think about how changes affect the future.
I've watched both these TE's and their teams for a lot of years now and I've watched what the Broncos are doing. I don't get caught up in pre-season because I understand that what they are doing in pre-season isn't centered around making your fantasy team happy. Maroney looked good in a pre-season once, ya know?
I 100% agree that one shouldn't look into the preseason too much, but Dreessen had never played with Manning before. The fact that he's earned the job for week 1 just might indicate that he's proved his worth or maybe even developed some chemistry with his QB - just like everyone is supposed to do in the offseason/preseason.
If Dreesen and Tamme both stay healthy and Dreesen is the guy, then by all means, please come back and bump this post and claim your gift card for your 15 minutes. But if he doesn't, please come back and re-read what some people have been trying to point out to you and take that 15 minutes to learn something.
One last time, I'm just saying Tamme and his chemistry will be a bust at TE10 for reasons already stated. I'm not recommending either TE, although with Dreessen being named the starter he does become a sleeper in large roster leagues.
Again, i'm still waiting for your actual "input" and "analysis". You keep advocating well thought-out conversations but all I'm seeing from you is a bunch of "HAHA...nuh-uh, I'm right and you're wrong" one-liners. I can get that from the pre-schoolers.
Shutout
Footballguy
Nope..meant it exactly as written. Wonder-as a verb: Desire or be curious to know something. Thought it was fitting in this instance.
Click on the link to the original discussion in my first post of this thread. There is a nice article I pasted in there which details Dreessen's ability in pass blocking (7th best TE in the NFL), run blocking (3rd best TE in the NFL), and pass catching (<3% drops, 12.4 ypr). Despite the stats, the author thought at the time that Tamme would still be the primary TE. But the point I got out of the article was that Dreessen was a superior talent to Tamme in every phase of the game, so I'm not the least bit surprised Dreessen is listed as the week 1 starter. Articles are a good source of information, but independent thinking is always a good idea.
Hahahahaha! This is perfect. Everything makes so much sense now. If you are too stubborn to admit you screwed up when the error is obvious and impossible to deny, then OF COURSE no one can have a reasonable debate with you.Btw, you do you realize you used "wonder" instead of "wander" twice in that paragraph, right? It is an easily forgivable error, but stubbornly sticking to it and trying to pretend like you meant to do it... not making yourself look any smarter. You strike me as a fellow who really cares what people think about you on message boards so you might want to handle that differently in the future.
Next time you wonder about a player and wander onto one piece of information, please remember there might be some other information that might swing your opinion if you are willing to be open minded. That information might even come from a rude, elitist fantasy football ninja, but it's still good info.
Mr. Soup Nazi
Footballguy
And I would be wrong.Seeing Tamme lined up in the slot a ton and getting lots of looks, plus a TD today.
Similar threads
