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!
I almost went with Ball too, but after thinking about it, and the hype of the Manning Offense that will be deafening all off-season, I don't see how Ball will be a real "value" .
Based on Ball's current ADP, I don't think the hype has set in, yet. But, like you, I do expect it to.
Yes, Ball is a very right now kind of opportunity. When people realize Moreno is gone his value will skyrocket.
If you stick your head in the sand and ignore all of the risk. I still rank him as the #2 TE because nobody else can score like him besides Graham. The difference is that I've significantly downgraded him based on his inability to stay on the field. I don't think he's unlucky. I think he's brittle with a playing style and build that expose him to a heightened risk of injury. It will take a couple years of clean health before I'd be comfortable assuming that I could count on him. Right now I see him as a luxury player. When he's in the lineup, you can expect good performance. However, you can't assume that he's going to be in the lineup.
We started a staff dynasty league last offseason that had super-premium TE scoring. I drew the #9 overall pick, and immediately had offers out to everyone with a top 4 pick trying to move up and ensure that I landed Gronk. #1 and #2 balked, but I wound up moving up to #3 overall to grab him. And I've never regretted it. Well, I've regretted that I didn't draft Graham and then immediately flip him for Gronk and a little extra, but other than that, no regrets.
Sounds good, but Jimmy Graham actually doesn't score like Gronk at all. Since 2011 when they both exploded on the scene, Gronk has provided an 8.387 PPG advantage over baseline, while Graham has been at 6.955 (using standard PPR here) -- 17% more actual value for Gronk. That's a full tier difference between the two guys on the field -- and Gronk is 2 1/2 years younger also, which should count for a ton in your world.
Excluding their rookie seasons when they were both still developing, their per-game production is:
Again, all of this is well and good, but if you're saying you wouldn't take him in the first 2 rounds, that must mean you have 24 names who you feel are less of a risk. I'd be curious to see that list. Does it include Josh Gordon? Keenan Allen? Adrian Peterson? All of these guys have risks, too- different risks, but risks nonetheless. The list of guys without risks is basically a half-dozen names long. Again, I'd be curious to see your list of 24 guys who are more likely to be starting for your fantasy team 3-5 years from now than Rob Gronkowski.
It also depends on what you think the chances are that New Orleans franchises Jimmy Graham and he wins his grievance. If that happens, I think it's likely that league management software will transition him to WR in their databases, which kills all of that value he gets from his positional advantage.
You're down playing the differences in production too much, IMO. 5 yards and .17 TDs / week is absolutely significant over the course of a full season, much less the 5+ seasons we're looking at for these players.
No, because if there's just one guy with a similar ADP who I like more than Gronk then that's who I'm going to take. DLF's February ADP has Gronk with an ADP ~24th overall. They have Aaron Rodgers ~28th overall. Putting format considerations aside, I view Rodgers as a genuinely elite player who doesn't have as many question marks. So even though he doesn't have the same difference-maker potential of Gronk, if I were forced to make a pick somewhere around 20-25, he would be a stronger candidate based on the combination of all the variables (proven production, reliability, longevity potential).
That difference isn't guaranteed to hold in the long run. We're talking about 2-3 seasons of work. A small enough sample size that minor differences aren't necessarily going to be predictive for 8-10 year careers. Graham outscored Gronk in ppg this past season. Who's to say that won't happen again next year? I'm not on board with the idea that a healthy Gronk has a higher ppg expectation than a healthy Graham.
First off, my love of Harvin and Gronk has nothing to do with how many points per game they've scored, and everything to do with the fact that I simply don't think any defense in the league is capable of stopping them. The points are a byproduct of the ability, and it's the ability that I value them for.
Also, quick aside, but those guys don't give the same edge over the field as Rob Gronkowski.
I don't use VBD, but in my leagues that require 3-4 WRs every week, the ppg difference between a top WR and the bottom range of what other teams will be starting is the same as the ppg difference between a top TE like Graham/Gronk and the bottom range of what other teams will be starting. The scarcity argument loses some steam when you consider that there might only be 12-14 starters at TE and 36-48+ starters at WR. When you compare guys like Dez and Demaryius to the really weak WR3 types, they give you a massive edge.
If an elite, generational RB like Adrian Peterson tore his ACL and MCL late in the season he would not be a 1st round pick in startups based on risk. I know this because Adrian Peterson was not a 1st round pick in startups after he tore his ACL and MCL late in the season. He was taken in the late 2nd or early 3rd. If the risk was overblown on Peterson it doesn't necessarily mean it is overblown on Gronkowski given the comments on Peterson's healing ability and relatively clean (pro) health history. While injured players are almost universally good value plays they don't always reach their pre-injury value or production. The margin on Gronkowski is pretty thin right now, even at a late 2nd valuation.
But you have to start Dez or Thomas in your WR3 spot to have that advantage. Dez was #7 in PPG this season - a (slightly below) baseline WR1. At the WR1 spot, he provided no advantage to your team. At the WR2 spot, he offered a 3PPG advantage, or 48VBD. At the WR3 spot, he provided 5.5 PPG, or 88 VBD.
What is the margin measuring? Looking at the guys going in that range--I don't see Gronk as risky.
Purely as a FF asset, Peterson hadn't been in Gronk's class to that point in his career, though. Except for 2012, Peterson has never been a lap the field RB1. TD after the first knee injury is a more valid comparison from a FF standpoint -- I wasn't in multiple dynasty leagues yet at that point, so I have no real idea on his startup value, but he was definitely a high 1st round redraft pick that year. I held him in a keep one league without even seriously considering anyone else.
Alright, we'll come at this from a different angle.
If Peterson had torn his ACL and MCL that late in the season at age 24, he probably still would have been a first round pick in startups. It's extremely impressive that he managed to tear his ACL and MCL that late in the season at age 26 and still go in the 2nd round of startups.
From a market value standpoint he was a much superior asset to Gronk from day 1 until the day he got hurt. From a VBD standpoint you're overstating it, as well. AP averaged 110 VBD per year his first four years, and Gronk's high water mark is 140.
I've already covered why VBD isn't the best measure of value at TE, and value over average is a better way to go. This is less of a problem when comparing to RBs than to WRs, because the dropoff is steeper at RB. Still not as steep as at TE, but steeper than WR.
I agree, to an extent. Yeah, there's a lot of guys in round 3 I wouldn't take over him, and at least a couple I would.
Obviously the maximum profit is high. I was focusing on expected profit.
I guess I can buy that, but then it raises the real issue that I have with Gronk: He's not scoring any points when he's on the sidelines for you.
