Positional Scarcity question (1 Viewer)

[Bayhawks]

So, I am in the midst of an on-going trade discussion.  I am going to avoid using player names so as to not stray into Assistant Coach jurisdiction, but it got me considering positional scarcity.

Top WRs score more points than top TEs (unless you had Gronk during one of his uber-stud years), but there are less viable options at TE.  Does that make having a top TE more important than a top WR?

Basically, if I trade away a top WR to get a top TE, I could replace more of that WR's points with bench players or WW adds.  If I trade away a top TE to get a top WR, I'd have a harder time replacing those TE points from my bench or WW.

This has led me to think that obtaining or keeping a top TE is more important than obtaining or keeping a top WR.

Thoughts/comments/opinions?

 

[Interseptopus]

Dynasty or redraft?

This matters because it is possible a WR would contribute for a longer period of time than a TE

However, in most cases I'd say yes, a top TE could be worth the same as a top WR. I don't think it's so black and white all the time though 

If I go down 10 fp/g at WR but up 5 fp/g at TE, then I'm losing the deal. Sure, it's easier to find wrs than TEs, especially this year where TE is scarce, but to me it's always what am I doing from a fp/g standpoint 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

So, I am in the midst of an on-going trade discussion.  I am going to avoid using player names so as to not stray into Assistant Coach jurisdiction, but it got me considering positional scarcity.

Top WRs score more points than top TEs (unless you had Gronk during one of his uber-stud years), but there are less viable options at TE.  Does that make having a top TE more important than a top WR?

Basically, if I trade away a top WR to get a top TE, I could replace more of that WR's points with bench players or WW adds.  If I trade away a top TE to get a top WR, I'd have a harder time replacing those TE points from my bench or WW.

This has led me to think that obtaining or keeping a top TE is more important than obtaining or keeping a top WR.

Thoughts/comments/opinions?

Yes that’s the entire theory behind VBD. 

 

[ratbast]

As with the points, it’s not 1-1 though. What’s on your wire? Do your league mates usually carry 2 TEs? I’ve churned through TEs this year. From Hooper to Dissly to Fells to Goedart to Henry etc. You can find a top 12 TE, can you find a Top 24 WR? 

 

[Bayhawks]

Yes that’s the entire theory behind VBD. 

I understand that, with regards to drafting.  I was referring more to in-season acquisition through trades. 

Even in drafts, VBD doesn't necessarily apply with regards to top WRs and top TEs.  In their best years, we might see Gronk, Graham, Kelce go in the 2nd round, but they aren't going before the top WRs.  They are picked when the elite RBs and elite WRs are gone, and its' either top-tier TE or second tier RB or WR.

In my particular trade discussions, I was presented with the opportunity to choose a WR who is widely seen as a top-3 WR going forward vs a TE who is seen as a top-3 TE going forward.  As I looked at the two situations, and what my roster might look like in either case, I realized that I'd probably be better off with the top TE vs the top WR.  If that's the entire theory behind VBD, why wasn't Kelce chosen before Hopkins, Julio, and Adams in drafts this pre-season?

 

[Deamon]

I understand that, with regards to drafting.  I was referring more to in-season acquisition through trades. 

Even in drafts, VBD doesn't necessarily apply with regards to top WRs and top TEs.  In their best years, we might see Gronk, Graham, Kelce go in the 2nd round, but they aren't going before the top WRs.  They are picked when the elite RBs and elite WRs are gone, and its' either top-tier TE or second tier RB or WR.

In my particular trade discussions, I was presented with the opportunity to choose a WR who is widely seen as a top-3 WR going forward vs a TE who is seen as a top-3 TE going forward.  As I looked at the two situations, and what my roster might look like in either case, I realized that I'd probably be better off with the top TE vs the top WR.  If that's the entire theory behind VBD, why wasn't Kelce chosen before Hopkins, Julio, and Adams in drafts this pre-season?

Tight Ends are a weird one.  Their value is low because their upside is often fairly capped.  Agree with a previous poster, you can find top 12 TE talent, but no chance you find top 12 wr talent on your wire.  Position scarcity is counterbalanced by the fact that you start 2-3 times as many WR as TE and are unlikely to flex a TE too.

I would choose a top 3 WR vs a top 3 TE any day in trade discussions.  

The big thing here is who your current TE is.  If you  have a TE who is even TE8-14, then trading away a top 3 WR to get a top 3 TE is even worse.  If your TE situation is dire (no one in the top 15), then you can likely find one of those TE8-12's either on the wire, or by trading away a less valuable asset.  Again not sure which side of this trade you're on, but if there's a top 3 WR on the table, make sure you keep him or go after him.

 

[Bayhawks]

Tight Ends are a weird one.  Their value is low because their upside is often fairly capped.  Agree with a previous poster, you can find top 12 TE talent, but no chance you find top 12 wr talent on your wire.  Position scarcity is counterbalanced by the fact that you start 2-3 times as many WR as TE and are unlikely to flex a TE too.

I would choose a top 3 WR vs a top 3 TE any day in trade discussions.  

The big thing here is who your current TE is.  If you  have a TE who is even TE8-14, then trading away a top 3 WR to get a top 3 TE is even worse.  If your TE situation is dire (no one in the top 15), then you can likely find one of those TE8-12's either on the wire, or by trading away a less valuable asset.  Again not sure which side of this trade you're on, but if there's a top 3 WR on the table, make sure you keep him or go after him.

This was my thought initially; however, I began to question that conclusion after doing some research. In this league, there are only 2 of the top 24 TEs on the WW: Ryan Griffin & Jordan Akins.  If/when Herndon comes back, Griffin will likely fall out of the top 24 at TE, & Akins position is based on his big week 3, and he has seemingly been passed on the depth chart by Fells.

There's not a single WR in the top 36 on my WW in that league, but I have several WRs on my bench to plug in if I were to lose the top-3 guy, and there are often weekly streamers that can more reliably put up numbers at WR than at TE.

When I looked at the trade from both ends (with the top TE vs the top WR), I felt like my team was a little better with the top TE. 

 

[fightingillini]

Tight Ends are a weird one.  Their value is low because their upside is often fairly capped.  Agree with a previous poster, you can find top 12 TE talent, but no chance you find top 12 wr talent on your wire.  Position scarcity is counterbalanced by the fact that you start 2-3 times as many WR as TE and are unlikely to flex a TE too.

I would choose a top 3 WR vs a top 3 TE any day in trade discussions.  

The big thing here is who your current TE is.  If you  have a TE who is even TE8-14, then trading away a top 3 WR to get a top 3 TE is even worse.  If your TE situation is dire (no one in the top 15), then you can likely find one of those TE8-12's either on the wire, or by trading away a less valuable asset.  Again not sure which side of this trade you're on, but if there's a top 3 WR on the table, make sure you keep him or go after him.

This is my thoughts as well.  A Julio or Thomas or Hopkins can explode for a 10/150/2 type game.  Even Kelce normally doesn't have that kind of upside.  So it's a top 3 WR easily over a top 3 TE.

Now if the league has a rule where TEs points are premium (say 1.5 PPR for TE vs 1 PPR for WRs), then the decision gets closer.

 

[Deamon]

This was my thought initially; however, I began to question that conclusion after doing some research. In this league, there are only 2 of the top 24 TEs on the WW: Ryan Griffin & Jordan Akins.  If/when Herndon comes back, Griffin will likely fall out of the top 24 at TE, & Akins position is based on his big week 3, and he has seemingly been passed on the depth chart by Fells.

There's not a single WR in the top 36 on my WW in that league, but I have several WRs on my bench to plug in if I were to lose the top-3 guy, and there are often weekly streamers that can more reliably put up numbers at WR than at TE.

When I looked at the trade from both ends (with the top TE vs the top WR), I felt like my team was a little better with the top TE. 

Who is your current starting TE though?  Appreciate this not being a 'do I make the trade' thread but its now time to tell us the names.  haha

 

[Bayhawks]

Who is your current starting TE though?  Appreciate this not being a 'do I make the trade' thread but its now time to tell us the names.  haha

Current starting TE is Everett, but that's not where the trade comes in.  I have the ability to get EITHER Waller or Michael Thomas.  Initial thought was Thomas, easy.  But when I looked at my potential lineups, the improvement I get from going from Everett to Waller is greater (IMO) than the improvement I'd get by replacing one of my starting WRs with Thomas.

 

[Deamon]

Current starting TE is Everett, but that's not where the trade comes in.  I have the ability to get EITHER Waller or Michael Thomas.  Initial thought was Thomas, easy.  But when I looked at my potential lineups, the improvement I get from going from Everett to Waller is greater (IMO) than the improvement I'd get by replacing one of my starting WRs with Thomas.

Really?  Interesting. You must have studs at wr. No flex spot?  I'd take Thomas over Waller all day almost regardless of who I have at other positions. 

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

Really?  Interesting. You must have studs at wr. No flex spot?  I'd take Thomas over Waller all day almost regardless of who I have at other positions. 

was writing this exactly. though i agree with the logic Bayhawks is using, that incremental change from Everett to Waller can't be nearly as much as the third receiver on your current starting roster (assuming start 3) to Michael Thomas. That also means whatever gain you would have over the competition at the positional level with Waller can't be that big of a number above Everett.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I understand that, with regards to drafting.  I was referring more to in-season acquisition through trades. 

It should still be applicable in assessing a trade. The concept is the concept.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

If that's the entire theory behind VBD, why wasn't Kelce chosen before Hopkins, Julio, and Adams in drafts this pre-season?

1. Because not everyone’s projections have Kelce being more valuable from a VBD perspective than Hopkins, Julio or Adams;

or

2. Not everyone follows VBD when drafting;

or

3. I’ve often heard (and I’m guilty of it myself) some say they just don’t like how their team “looks” after using a first or second round pick on a TE.

 

[barackdhouse]

Anecdotally, my best squads over the years have dominated at TE. Not all of them, but having an advantage at that spot can be huge.

In the example of Waller vs Thomas, it only adds points to your boxscore if the difference between

(Waller - Everett)

&

(Thomas - your 3rd WR) 

is to your advantage. Hard to forecast but on many of my teams I am strong at my 3rd WR and the difference with Waller might be greater. Everett has had some big weeks, though. I also pretty much only play TE premium. If you are strong at WR already I would certainly consider Waller. 

There may not be a WR 24 on the wire but there may be a few guys like Lazard or Pascal that can be streamed in a jam. 

Hard to pass on Thomas though. If you took him would you be benching a moderate stud WR to do it?

 

[barackdhouse]

And there are zero TE1s available on the wire anywhere in any of my leagues.

 

[Bayhawks]

1. Because not everyone’s projections have Kelce being more valuable from a VBD perspective than Hopkins, Julio or Adams;

or

2. Not everyone follows VBD when drafting;

or

3. I’ve often heard (and I’m guilty of it myself) some say they just don’t like how their team “looks” after using a first or second round pick on a TE.

3 definitely applies to me; maybe I haven’t looked at it thoroughly enough-but what I’ve looked at so far is making me question this. 

 

[Bayhawks]

was writing this exactly. though i agree with the logic Bayhawks is using, that incremental change from Everett to Waller can't be nearly as much as the third receiver on your current starting roster (assuming start 3) to Michael Thomas. That also means whatever gain you would have over the competition at the positional level with Waller can't be that big of a number above Everett.

We only start 2 WRs.  Can flex WR, but have Mack at flex.  Thomas would replace Diggs or Edelman in my lineup.  It’s about a 3.5-3.9 ppg difference at WR thus far, while the TE difference would be 4.5 ppg.  Again, these point differences are based on what they’ve done so far, versus what they will do moving forward.  I’m trying to look at ROS projections, but I can find more ranking rather than projections.

Theres also the fact that Waller’s bye is over, while Everett, Thomas, Diggs & Edelman still have their byes.  That’s not a main factor & doesn’t really have anything to do with the value of the two positions, however.

 

[Bayhawks]

Anecdotally, my best squads over the years have dominated at TE. Not all of them, but having an advantage at that spot can be huge.

In the example of Waller vs Thomas, it only adds points to your boxscore if the difference between

(Waller - Everett)

&

(Thomas - your 3rd WR) 

is to your advantage. Hard to forecast but on many of my teams I am strong at my 3rd WR and the difference with Waller might be greater. Everett has had some big weeks, though. I also pretty much only play TE premium. If you are strong at WR already I would certainly consider Waller. 

There may not be a WR 24 on the wire but there may be a few guys like Lazard or Pascal that can be streamed in a jam. 

Hard to pass on Thomas though. If you took him would you be benching a moderate stud WR to do it?

He’d replace Diggs or Edelman in my starting lineup.

Thats what prompted this thread.  Thomas is a STUD WR; in my non ppr league, he’s WR3 and my first reaction was “take Thomas.”  But the stats are suggesting otherwise.  I’m just trying to get other opinions, to see if the “stats are lying,” in this case.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

We only start 2 WRs.  Can flex WR, but have Mack at flex.  Thomas would replace Diggs or Edelman in my lineup.  It’s about a 3.5-3.9 ppg difference at WR thus far, while the TE difference would be 4.5 ppg.  Again, these point differences are based on what they’ve done so far, versus what they will do moving forward.  I’m trying to look at ROS projections, but I can find more ranking rather than projections.

Theres also the fact that Waller’s bye is over, while Everett, Thomas, Diggs & Edelman still have their byes.  That’s not a main factor & doesn’t really have anything to do with the value of the two positions, however.

scenario makes more sense with start 2, now I see the attraction to Waller here. strictly by the numbers anyway. this is a good question btw, was doing something similar at the QB level vs RB's with so many QB1's either regressing or injured this year. by the numbers, like Octopus said though, VBD definitely applies here as a concept and by that Waller is probably marginally better choice than Thomas. but with Thomas, hard to say go the other way. i didn't help at all here, i know. first world problem with no wrong answer imo.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

This is why my league eliminated the TE position a few years ago.  You can still have them, but they count the same as WRs.  Right now, there are 5 in the current list of top 32 in receiver points.

 

[barackdhouse]

He’d replace Diggs or Edelman in my starting lineup.

Thats what prompted this thread.  Thomas is a STUD WR; in my non ppr league, he’s WR3 and my first reaction was “take Thomas.”  But the stats are suggesting otherwise.  I’m just trying to get other opinions, to see if the “stats are lying,” in this case.

New Orleans probably has more scoring upside than Oakland, and I had originally targeted Saints players during draft season because I liked their fantasy playoff schedule (I'll have to look again). I like Thomas floor a lot better than Wallers but if you get a scrub game from Everett (likely), would it be offset by Thomas - Edelman/Diggs? I can't quite see stomaching either of those 2 on my bench while Everett doesn't do anything for you in your TE spot. Of course, he might do something though. He has before. And Waller may not continue his run if defenses key on him more. Whereas Thomas arrow is up. Maybe you could snag Thomas and move Edelman or Diggs? 

 

[Ilov80s]

So, I am in the midst of an on-going trade discussion.  I am going to avoid using player names so as to not stray into Assistant Coach jurisdiction, but it got me considering positional scarcity.

Top WRs score more points than top TEs (unless you had Gronk during one of his uber-stud years), but there are less viable options at TE.  Does that make having a top TE more important than a top WR?

Basically, if I trade away a top WR to get a top TE, I could replace more of that WR's points with bench players or WW adds.  If I trade away a top TE to get a top WR, I'd have a harder time replacing those TE points from my bench or WW.

This has led me to think that obtaining or keeping a top TE is more important than obtaining or keeping a top WR.

Thoughts/comments/opinions?

Depends what the WRs on your bench and WW look like. 

 

[Ilov80s]

If you are going from Mike Evans to Jamison Crowder, than I think you are better off sticking with the elite WR. If you will be going from Mike Evans to Mike Gallup, than I think you can make an argument that it makes sense. 

 

[wlwiles]

What are you trading away to get Thomas or Waller?  Any chance the answer is to throw in Diggs or Edelman and acquire both of them?

 

[Deamon]

 I’m trying to look at ROS projections, but I can find more ranking rather than projections.

FBG has full ROS projections.  

Waller 67
Everett 45
Upgrade of 22 points

Thomas 97
Diggs 69
Edelman 68
Upgrade of 28/29

Thomas again is the answer here.

 

[barackdhouse]

FBG has full ROS projections.  

Waller 67
Everett 45
Upgrade of 22 points

Thomas 97
Diggs 69
Edelman 68
Upgrade of 28/29

Thomas again is the answer here.

It should be

(Waller + Diggs + Edelman)

vs

(Everett + Diggs + Thomas)

which would be 204 vs 211 in favor of the Thomas side. Marginally. In TE premium maybe dead even. 

ETA byes not withstanding

 

[Deamon]

It should be

(Waller + Diggs + Edelman)

vs

(Everett + Diggs + Thomas)

which would be 204 vs 211 in favor of the Thomas side. Marginally. In TE premium maybe dead even. 

ETA byes not withstanding

I'm confused why you put Diggs in there if he is the common denominator here.  What he does is irrelevant if he's in both equations.

So it's Waller+Edelman (135) vs Everett vs Thomas (142).

So yes, better for the Thomas side.  Not sure why mentioning TE premium, the OP is in a standard scoring league.

 

[barackdhouse]

I'm confused why you put Diggs in there if he is the common denominator here.  What he does is irrelevant if he's in both equations.

So it's Waller+Edelman (135) vs Everett vs Thomas (142).

So yes, better for the Thomas side.  Not sure why mentioning TE premium, the OP is in a standard scoring league.

Yeah you're right no need to include Diggs but the main point is that the actual boxscore difference is marginal rather than significant. Based on those projections. But yes a slight bump to the Thomas side.

I mentioned TE premium because it had been brought up previously above.

 

[Ilov80s]

This is why my league eliminated the TE position a few years ago.  You can still have them, but they count the same as WRs.  Right now, there are 5 in the current list of top 32 in receiver points.

My league got rid of positions period. My team is rolling right now as I have Lamar, Dak, Tannehill and Gardner Minshew. I would cry if I had to start someone like Darren Waller or OBJ. 

 

[rockaction]

My league got rid of positions period. My team is rolling right now as I have Lamar, Dak, Tannehill and Gardner Minshew. I would cry if I had to start someone like Darren Waller or OBJ. 

How does that work, or are you being facetious? I can't really tell anymore. Cheeky. 

 

[Ilov80s]

How does that work, or are you being facetious? I can't really tell anymore. Cheeky. 

Just draft QBs for the first 5 or 6 rounds and hope the right starters get hurt or benched. Then fill out the back of your line-up with the target hog WRs and workhorse RBs in case your QBs don't work out. I was doing backflips when I got Tannehill in the early 4th. Someone actually took Deandre Hopkins ahead of him if you can believe that.

 

[rockaction]

Just draft QBs for the first 5 or 6 rounds and hope the right starters get hurt or benched. Then fill out the back of your line-up with the target hog WRs and workhorse RBs in case your QBs don't work out. I was doing backflips when I got Tannehill in the early 4th. Someone actually took Deandre Hopkins ahead of him if you can believe that.

Hmm...sounds like a dig at a certain type of league. 

Best to go with my league's old school 1 QB/2 WR/2RB/1TE/Flex/K/DST where running backs essentially make up the top twenty of the draft compared to about three receivers that go with them. And Mahomes.

Least RBs are wild cards, in the proverbial sense of the term. 

P.S. Love your interests. Huh. I'm right there with you. 

 

[Ilov80s]

Hmm...sounds like a dig at a certain type of league. 

Best to go with my league's old school 1 QB/2 WR/2RB/1TE/Flex/K/DST where running backs essentially make up the top twenty of the draft compared to about three receivers that go with them. And Mahomes.

Least RBs are wild cards, in the proverbial sense of the term. 

P.S. Love your interests. Huh. I'm right there with you. 

Right, just jabbing a bit at the idea of eliminating a position making the league better. If one is to eliminate TE, why stop there?  It's a bit left leaning for even me. Positional fluidity and fantasy football is still one area where we can enforce traditional norms. Also, this is what interests me about my interests.

 

[rockaction]

Right, just jabbing a bit at the idea of eliminating a position making the league better. If one is to eliminate TE, why stop there?  It's a bit left leaning for even me. Positional fluidity and fantasy football is still one area where we can enforce traditional norms. Also, this is what interests me about my interests.

I see what you did there. Touche. Natch. 

And I see what your link did. Who is that?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Right, just jabbing a bit at the idea of eliminating a position making the league better. If one is to eliminate TE, why stop there?  It's a bit left leaning for even me. Positional fluidity and fantasy football is still one area where we can enforce traditional norms. 

So you hate flexing, cool.

 

[Ilov80s]

So you hate flexing, cool.

When I was growing up a RB played in the RB slot and a WR went in the WR slot but you kids these days think you can just stick anything anywhere you want. 

 

[Ilov80s]

I see what you did there. Touche. Natch. 

And I see what your link did. Who is that?

Not sure if this name was sexy back then or if it was always frumpy sounding, but Myrna Loy was definitely never frumpy.  

 

[Bayhawks]

FBG has full ROS projections.  

Waller 67
Everett 45
Upgrade of 22 points

Thomas 97
Diggs 69
Edelman 68
Upgrade of 28/29

Thomas again is the answer here.

Thanks.  Sorry this shifted into a discussion about my team, though.

The larger point that I’m going to think about is should I change how I draft/value players (in auction leagues).  If the season continues, for these two particular players, how it’s gone thus far; in drafts next year, MT would be a 1st rounder & Waller would likely be a 4th/5th rounder.  Yet they’ll be fairly similar in value.  Is MT going to be over valued?  Is Waller going to be under valued?  And, how can we take advantage of that?  Is it as “simple” as changing the way we think?  As someone else posted, when I mock draft TEs early, I don’t like the way my team turns out.  Do I just need to change that thought process?

 

[rockaction]

Not sure if this name was sexy back then or if it was always frumpy sounding, but Myrna Loy was definitely never frumpy.  

All the boys and Myrna Loy/would tie a rope to a tree and not so coyly/go pendulum swinging just to see...

 

[Deamon]

Thanks.  Sorry this shifted into a discussion about my team, though.

The larger point that I’m going to think about is should I change how I draft/value players (in auction leagues).  If the season continues, for these two particular players, how it’s gone thus far; in drafts next year, MT would be a 1st rounder & Waller would likely be a 4th/5th rounder.  Yet they’ll be fairly similar in value.  Is MT going to be over valued?  Is Waller going to be under valued?  And, how can we take advantage of that?  Is it as “simple” as changing the way we think?  As someone else posted, when I mock draft TEs early, I don’t like the way my team turns out.  Do I just need to change that thought process?

Not really.  The fact that MT is projected 30 more than Waller in just half a season is very significant. 

I don't really get how using VBD will 'boost" tight ends... if anything it's the opposite.  If you look at VBD rankings, TE is quite far down in standard leagues.  The drop off to the next tier of TE is fairly marginal, and TE is also seemingly fairly hard to predict.  If there's anything I learned this year it's that I'm going to wait even longer for TE next year, try to draft a few late round guys with hype and hope a Waller/Hooper/Andrews type guy.  There's too many late round TE's that become top 10 players, and not near as many WRs.  

5 of the top 8 TE this year (Waller, Andrews, Fells, Hooper, Dissley) weren't even in the top 12 drafted TE.  It's an unpredictable position that you're often better off waiting for.

 

[Biabreakable]

We only start 2 WRs.  Can flex WR, but have Mack at flex.  Thomas would replace Diggs or Edelman in my lineup.  It’s about a 3.5-3.9 ppg difference at WR thus far, while the TE difference would be 4.5 ppg.  Again, these point differences are based on what they’ve done so far, versus what they will do moving forward.  I’m trying to look at ROS projections, but I can find more ranking rather than projections.

Theres also the fact that Waller’s bye is over, while Everett, Thomas, Diggs & Edelman still have their byes.  That’s not a main factor & doesn’t really have anything to do with the value of the two positions, however.

Thanks for the topic.

What you are describing is a great example of how a higher value player (Thomas) doesn't help the bottom line of your team as much as a lower value player (Waller) because of your specific team needs.

You should not have to pay as much for Waller as you would Thomas. Trading for Waller is a better move for your team.

As far as projections for the rest of the season goes, we are at the halfway point of the season. Those projections will be mostly based on the first 8 games of the season, except that there are only 5 weeks left before playoffs. So the 8 week sample actually has greater weight (8 weeks) than the 5 weeks remaining (before playoffs)

Waller has averaged 8.2 targets per game over the first 7 games this season. He has been catching 79% of his targets so far.6.6 receptions per game and .42 TD per game.

Thomas has averaged 11,1 targets per game catching 82% of those 9.1 receptions per game  and .5 TD per game.

I don't think there is any question which player is more valuable. That is Thomas.

Because of your current team needs and the lack of scarcity at the WR position (you only have to start two) I think Waller is more useful to your team. You should not have to pay the same price for Waller as you would for Thomas.

 

[rockaction]

Thanks for the topic.

Thanks for the take. Interesting. 

 

[Deamon]

As far as projections for the rest of the season goes, we are at the halfway point of the season. Those projections will be mostly based on the first 8 games of the season, except that there are only 5 weeks left before playoffs. So the 8 week sample actually has greater weight (8 weeks) than the 5 weeks remaining (before playoffs)

Wouldn't it be the opposite?  I put massive weight on weeks 14, 15, and 16.


EDT:   To add to that, you're looking at numbers that are MT with Teddy at QB and now he has Brees.  I agree with you that Waller could be the better trade target for him IF he's paying less, but if he's giving up the same amount for either player, there is absolutely NO WAY you should take Waller over MT.

 

[Catbird]

To me it's about the difference between what the guy scores and the alternatives available. If you are starting Hopkins(100) and Diggs(67) at WR and Everett(45) at TE, and if Thomas(97)  and Waller(67) are available adding Thomas replacing Diggs is worth 30 points to your lineup. Waller replacing Everett only increases your scoring by 22 points. If you are starting Hockenson (31) however, and face the same choice, Waller represents an point increase of 37 and so is much more valuable to your team than Thomas.   The problem is that lots of things mess up this easy calculation.

What really matters is what the guy you replace and the guy you pick do from here, which by injury or teammate injury or roster moves or whether one guy you pick just plays better or worse going forward ... many, many things - make using past performance extremely tenuous. This is true for the guy you pick up and for the guy you are replacing. That's why knowing the players and their situation can make a major difference in results. People who think its all luck miss this.

Another factor that is very difficult to quantify is who might be available tomorrow that isn't today. If you are using Hockenson and Waller is available today, but Everett will come available next week,  you are better to replace Digs with Thomas and then Hockenson with Everett. I don't means that you can predict this, but you can look at what level players are likely to become available. Usually, for example, far better WRs are developing and becoming available than TEs. What I try to do is look at relative rank of the player you are picking within that position and if they make a fairly similar difference in the points they will produce, I pick the guy who is closer to the top at his position - this because it is more likely, for example, that another player of Diggs caliber will come available among WRs than that another RB of Everett's caliber will come along among TEs.

You also have to take into account what the players cost you in terms of draft poition or waiver capital, can't know who else in your roster and lineup will get injured after you make your decision  (which hugely effects the 'wisdom' of the choice you make), nor can you know when the coaching will change to a new game plan. In short, and its one of the good things about fantasyball, is that there are way too many variables to ever make a concrete decision on roughly similar players. If anything were universally predictable,  those who figured out how to predict that would be invincible. 

 

[Biabreakable]

Wouldn't it be the opposite?  I put massive weight on weeks 14, 15, and 16.


EDT:   To add to that, you're looking at numbers that are MT with Teddy at QB and now he has Brees.  I agree with you that Waller could be the better trade target for him IF he's paying less, but if he's giving up the same amount for either player, there is absolutely NO WAY you should take Waller over MT.

You could and likely should be looking at playoff scenarios in these considerations.

I assume the numbers Bayhawks put forth showing a higher PPG for Waller than Thomas are correct for his league using a worst starter baseline of WR 24 and TE 12. I just ran the PPG.

I totally agree MT is more valuable if he is paying the same price for either. Just that Waller could give him a larger incremental advantage in terms of average points per game. Even though that margin may only be 1 point per game. 

 

[Deamon]

You could and likely should be looking at playoff scenarios in these considerations if its not fantasy.

I assume the numbers Bayhawks put forth showing a higher PPG for Waller than Thomas are correct for his league using a worst starter baseline of WR 24 and TE 12. I just ran the PPG.

I totally agree MT is more valuable if he is paying the same price for either. Just that Waller could give him a larger incremental advantage in terms of average points per game. Even though that margin may only be 1 point per game. 

Why wouldn't fantasy playoffs be important?  Weeks 14 15 16 are the most important weeks of the fantasy season. 

 

[Biabreakable]

Why wouldn't fantasy playoffs be important?  Weeks 14 15 16 are the most important weeks of the fantasy season. 

Sure as long as you are making the playoffs.

I had a run on sentance I never finished in my original response.

The projections would be essentially the same if you are basing them on the first 8 weeks of the NFL season and using points per game.

If you are using some form of adjustment to these projections based on SOS that would be something else.

For me the projection wouldn't be different for those specific weeks than it is for the other weeks.

 

[Deamon]

Sure as long as you are making the playoffs.

I had a run on sentance I never finished in my original response.

The projections would be essentially the same if you are basing them on the first 8 weeks of the NFL season and using points per game.

If you are using some form of adjustment to these projections based on SOS that would be something else.

For me the projection wouldn't be different for those specific weeks than it is for the other weeks.

I guess it does depend on his record.  But in the end, its those 3 weeks that determine your pay out. 

I also think MT will be improved even more-so from his first 8 weeks now that he has Brees back.  Where as not sure Waller will stay on the exact same pace as he has the first half.  Just think Everett+MT is a no brainer over Waller+Edelman in his starting line up.  The way he posed the question seemed to be that he would be giving up the same player in the deal.  Of course that would make all the difference, and I'd go for waller if the cost was way cheaper.

Either way, a top 5 TE is not worth what a top 3 WR is based on VBD, or pretty much any ranking imo.  Go for the stud wr.

 

[Biabreakable]

I guess it does depend on his record.  But in the end, its those 3 weeks that determine your pay out. 

I also think MT will be improved even more-so from his first 8 weeks now that he has Brees back.  Where as not sure Waller will stay on the exact same pace as he has the first half.  Just think Everett+MT is a no brainer over Waller+Edelman in his starting line up.  The way he posed the question seemed to be that he would be giving up the same player in the deal.  Of course that would make all the difference, and I'd go for waller if the cost was way cheaper.

Either way, a top 5 TE is not worth what a top 3 WR is based on VBD, or pretty much any ranking imo.  Go for the stud wr.

You make some good points about both specific players and what you expect to happen with them moving forward.

There are other ways to do projections here than the easiest one of just PPG. For MT for example we could use the last 3 seasons of his career for the sample. I don't think it changes much as far as the bottom line but the larger sample would likely be more accurate in predicting what MT will do moving forward in the 2019 season.

We can't really do that with Waller. So for the simplicity of comparison that Bayhawks did, the PPG makes sense.

Waller has been producing what he has in part perhaps because of WIlliams missing games. In his most recent game vs Houston he had 8 targets but only 2 receptions. Thats his worst game so far this season. We also have evidence of last season where Jared Cook led all Raiders in targets. He had 101 last season. Waller is on pace for 132 targets in his 7 game sample.

Brees is certainly an upgrade but MT did fine with Teddy as well. I think Brees helps guys like Ginn a bit more vs Teddy than it helps MT.