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!
Fair point. In the PPR rankings he was not listed at WR 14 but WR 19. Since seven of the 11 current choices are WR, it means that WR26 will go right around pick 5.3
That exact thought has crossed my mind as well. But that's really the only reason to even bother with him in non-PPR. In the hopes that he's the next Antonio Brown.
I don't think you have to necessarily be directly addressing someone to disagree with them. If someone is saying he probably won't pull in any 1st round pick and someone else is saying he'd probably pull in 1.07 at the latest and maybe better than that, then that is a disagreement.
Ok... i get where you are coming from, but I guess I was not very clear in my comments.
Those 11 choices are arbitrarily defined though and there's a lot of bias in how they are structured with the sequencing and population selection. They don't account for rookies yet because you only have one on there so to posit that 7 of 11 will be WR is a significant assumption. WR14 went at 3.2 in that poll, so the drop to 5.3, even if accurate, is already over 2 rounds. And you could easily start seeing QB's and TE's start peeling off as the difference makers at other positions start to go. 14 of the first 26 picks were WR and only 5 of the subsequent 15, so it's trending away from run-of-the-mill WR's.
Totally agree... mine was merely a hypothesis that could easily be wrong.
I don't like that it's framed this way. Williams is an arbitrary comp--that I'm sure we all agree has plenty of upside. That shouldn't have to be a knock on Diggs.
Where are Dodds' rankings (for some reason I can't find them)?
The comparison isn't a knock on either of them. I think it's reasonable to take diggs ahead of Williams. I think it's reasonable to take Williams ahead of diggs. But diggs just went in the top 40 in the community rankings and Williams isn't even a poll choice yet. How do you explain that the bigger faster quicker guy who put up wr1 numbers with a better quarterback is going rounds later than the slower smaller guy who almost put up wr2 numbers with a worse qb who can never stay healthy? It's group think.
Yes I already addressed that in the post that you quoted, yet you parsed that out. I have been playing fantasy football since the 1980s and have played in many different formats.
My post was for context only. Obviously he would need to sustain a similar level of performance over 16 games to reach those numbers. He has only played in 13 his first two seasons.
Maybe but if 10 people play non-PPR and view it the same I'd value that over the opinions of 50 that don't play that format.
1. Tyrell's QB situation is highly likely to degrade soon. Diggs' probably isn't getting worse.
what?!?! First of all, are we saying Rivers = Bradford?? C'mon. Second, I guess we're going to ignore the fact that Diggs was injured last year? Third, Tyrell had the benefit of Keenan AND Benjamin being injured last year while he was fully healthy. Even with the nagging injuries, Diggs' 13 games extrapolate to a 16 game total of 103/1111/4. So if you play PPR, that's a pretty big boost. If you don't, the volume should give you hope that his year 3 YPR more closely resembles his year 1. And those 2016 numbers were with a healthy Thielen and Treadwell. If Treadwell's role grows, I'm thinking he'll take over SOME of the targets vacated by Charles Johnson and Patterson (107 targets). Tyrell on the other hand will only see players returning to take targets.
Of course nor. But Bradford is the qb there for the immediate future and had a healthy season, so that's irrelevant.
Sorry, buddy. I didn't mean to put you in a position to defend yourself. Which was naïve of me--of course it was going to come off that way. As FBG pointed out, I think most people can grasp the general value adjustment, but it can be different in practice. I often comment on trades in formats I don't play (IDP) under the impression that I grasp enough to have a reasonable opinion. I was just responding to a few folks in a row positing a valuation that was surprising to me. We're likely beating a dead horse now. Moving on.
Well, you said "both had nearly identical situations to break out last year" and a WR's situation is largely based on QB quality. So if you're admitting Bradford isn't even close to as good as Rivers then you're admitting that statement was ridiculous. So I'm glad we cleared that up. I totally agree that Bradford is the QB there for 2017 so we need to take that into consideration for projecting 2017 but that's not at all what you said. Not cool to move the goal posts.
Thielen didn't out produce Diggs; he simply played more games. Of course, availability is a valid knock on Diggs, but Stefon Diggs wasn't out produced by Adam Thielen.
Zealots scoring
I have a tough time remembering players like Hill that were consistent fantasy starters. If I own HIll, I am putting him out there in a big public way, now before the actual NFL draft, and people start falling in love with situations.
I agree but I'm wondering how much more I should be thinking I need to offer, if any, to get Hopkins.
I said nearly ideal, not nearly identical. I can see why you would argue with identical. Before you say Bradford isn't ideal, in the context of diggs career, a fully healthy season of Bradford putting up his career best season is as good as it gets. Also Peterson wasn't dominating the offense, and his only competition was a good tight end and an unheard of receiver, while the guy who was drafted to be their number one didn't play. That's as good as you could hope for if you're diggs, and he put up... ok numbers.
There are on my a handful of productive receivers who get good return numbers, too. It's usually one or the other. I'd actually keep hill in that format, because for Hopkins to be worth more he has to produce at his 2015 levels, but hill can coast to Hopkins 2016 numbers.
Ah, sure, enough I did read that wrong. I should've copied and pasted my quote, but I'm lazy and typing is faster. So I agree, from a competition standpoint they both had pretty good situations, but put them on each other's teams and I think 16 games of Diggs with Rivers and no good + healthy players would be awesome, whereas Tyrell was merely decent. Tyrell with Bradford, Thielen, and Rudolph... well, he'd probably be about as much of a household name as he was 12 months ago today.
We're probably a long way from where we started by now, but this discussion about Diggs was (or at least began) specifically about non-PPR.
Right, i think a lot of receivers would be better if they had better quarterbacks. Terrell Owens would be in the hall of fame already if he hadn't shared the same observation.
Seems to vary pretty wildly. Assuming no return yards most trades in the dynasty trade thread seem to be late 1st. Though his value seems to be trending up as there have been one or two recently that were more like a mid 1st I think.
I'd guess the general consensus is something like "Tyreek and 1.05 for Hopkins". I love me some Tyreek in return yard leagues though and is probably very much a flavor pick. I'd snap up an offer even close to that and gun to my head I'd take Hill straight up in that format. The floor that the return yards brings is massive - 2.5 PPG for Hill in that format.
Hill 12.2 PPG in 2016. Hopkins 2015 wasn't nearly so beastly in non-PPR (he had 111 that year, nearly 7 points per game!) at 13.6 PPG and was a huge outlier as a result of his targets.
I don't think PPR is a huge impact for him, I think the return yards are the key. I'd say late 1st early 2nd is about right if there's no return yards. In theory they'll try to get him more touches and more short passes may be one way for that but I don't know if he'll get the receiving yards and TD's needed to move to solid WR2 status.Spike said:
6 points per punt or kickoff return TD; .05 points per punt return yard; .025 points per kickoff return yard
Well, that's why I'm saying quality of QB needs to be taken into consideration when looking backwards. Can't just compare Diggs' 13 game stats with Bradford vs. Tyrell's 16 game stats with Rivers and use that to draw a conclusion as to who should be valued higher going forward in dynasty. In just 1-2 years, their situations will likely have changed drastically so the context of their past 2 seasons is valuable.bostonfred said:
He finished WR9 in that format last year. There's some risk of repeatability, especially the rushing totals/efficiency, but I'll gamble an expanded workload can offset that. I'd happily give up 1.07 for him and possibly up to 1.05. Top 5 in that format would include McCaffrey for me so I think that's my cutoff. Cook, Mixon, Davis, McCaffrey, Fournette. Given Fournette's virtual certainty to go top 3 means I'm holding up to 1.05 but after that gimmie Tyreek.
If you are trying to sell, I don't think you are going to find too many buyers - I'd say his true value is probably a late second to mid third depending on the makeup of your team.
Well you can try and get him even cheaper. I do not think it would be insulting (although probably too light) to offer a couple of fourths. It would at least maybe get a conversation started - and if not I am not one to think you'd be missing out on all that much. Veteran WR3/4 types are a dime a dozen in dynasty.
If you don't have what he's worth just throw out any old offer. Maybe 8.10 upgraded to 8.05 will get you a counter.
