What's new
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!

Latimer vs Moncrief (Dynasty) (1 Viewer)

Raiderfan32904

Footballguy
Latimer and Moncrief were neck and neck in rookie dynasty drafts. Very difficult to separate. It seems as if Latimer is gaining a lot of post rookie draft hype and is separating. I am interested in discussing these two rookies who are coming into the league pairing up with elite QB's.

 
I prefer latimer mainly because he seems to be more consistent with his hands... DHB was a physical freak but inconsistent hands has pretty much ended his career. I worry that Moncrief won't be able to consistently make plays in traffic in tight windows but I don't worry abt that as much with latimer. Also while both of them have elite QBs only one of them has an offense that we know will consistently throw the ball all over the yd and I like latimers immediate 1-2 yr window a little more than moncriefs window

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I had them both very tight when I did my rookie draft. Ended up taking Moncrief. I may end having buyers remorse, but what I read about them I had a very difficult time separating them. I won't attempt to BS anyone that I've watched a lot of tape. But I have read up on a number of scouting reports to get the pros and cons.

Moncrief has the physical size and athleticism that could be special, but the knock on him is his hands. And like you said about DHB, you can't teach hands. Latimer has some speed, but not the physical attributes to reach Moncrief's ceiling. But the fantasy experts are really hyping him and Bloom loves him.

Situation is close for both of them. I'd prefer the WR that is potentially going to be the next Reggie Wayne than the next Manny Sanders, so in that oversimplified case, I'd take Moncrief. That and Manning's window is closing. It's ultimately why I chose Moncrief, but I admit I could be 100 percent wrong.

 
I'm big on Latimer.

I think he's going to be a big time player in a few years. Moncrief is nice too, but I don't see anything exceptional with him, just a lot of very good.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
WRs are just complete crap shoots. I'm not sure there is a reliable way to determine whether their skills will translate to the NFL. NFL CBs, even mediocre ones, are just so much better than the overwhelming majority of college CBs, the offenses are so much more complex in most cases, the physicality is at such a higher level.

Throw out the top 2 guys in this draft - and I have serious questions about one of them - and you get a lot of guys who have some good strengths but also some very real flaws.

Remember 2008? All 2nd rounders listed:

2.02 Donnie Avery

2.03 Devin Thomas

2.05 Jordy Nelson

2.10 James Hardy

2.11 Eddie Royal

2.15 Jerome Simpson

2.18 DeSean Jackson

2.20 Malcolm Kelly

2.22 Limas Sweed

2.27 Dexter Jackson

Who would have guessed at the time that there would be so many misses? And some of these guys had very similar games to this current rookie group beyond the top 2.

It's just so difficult to credibly predict before we see them in training camp and preseason.

 
Excellent point, Bronco Billy. We were sold that this draft class was a particularly deep one, capable of matching or exeeding the 2009 draft class. I think the optimism of the second round WR's in this class is on par with typical first round WR classes.

 
Floor favors Latimer, ceiling favors Moncrief. Latimer has sort of a Marvin Jones trajectory IMO. He should be a solid NFL WR, but I don't see him being great unless more things break his way. You see Miles Austin a lot, and Miles Austin in Dallas after Dez is drafted isn't a bad comparable either. Moncrief could be Pierre Garcon but is more likely to be Jerome Simpson. He has the physical profile to be dominant, but given he wasn't consistent in college, it's hard to see him becoming really great.

 
T.Y. Hilton doesn't have the greatest hands. I don't know where he ranked last year, but as a rookie, he was tied with Donnie Avery for the worst drop rate in the league.

There is a difference between not having great hands and having absolutely horrible hands. DHB has absolutely horrible hands. Not mediocre, not bad, HORRIBLE.

If Moncrief has even average hands, I think he will be fine. I personally have him penciled-in as the #4 WR on the depth chart behind Wayne, Hilton, and Nicks. Based on Nicks injury history, I think there's a decent chance he gets a fair amount of playing time this year and may be the WR2 there next season.

I'm a little 'meh' on Latimer. Perhaps it's because of all the other IU WR busts. He's got skills, but I could see him getting lost in the shuffle in Denver.

 
Never thought it was close, Latimer. He is closer to the Matthews/Adams/Robinson group than Moncrief/Bryant. More consistent play maker.

 
It is close, but I'd prefer Latimer. Just think he is closer to being a complete WR, and has just as easy a path to massive targets.

I think they will both be the #2 WR on their teams by 2015.

 
I had them both very tight when I did my rookie draft. Ended up taking Moncrief. I may end having buyers remorse, but what I read about them I had a very difficult time separating them. I won't attempt to BS anyone that I've watched a lot of tape. But I have read up on a number of scouting reports to get the pros and cons.

Moncrief has the physical size and athleticism that could be special, but the knock on him is his hands. And like you said about DHB, you can't teach hands. Latimer has some speed, but not the physical attributes to reach Moncrief's ceiling. But the fantasy experts are really hyping him and Bloom loves him.

Situation is close for both of them. I'd prefer the WR that is potentially going to be the next Reggie Wayne than the next Manny Sanders, so in that oversimplified case, I'd take Moncrief. That and Manning's window is closing. It's ultimately why I chose Moncrief, but I admit I could be 100 percent wrong.
How could Moncrief "be special" and not Latimer? Especially when Latimer played "bigger" on tape than Moncrief. Latimer ran a 4.40 and vertical jumped 39". Moncrief had the same 40 and a 39.5" vertical.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top