Pros and Cons of stud TE in the 3rd (1 Viewer)

[Gordon Keith]

I have an early pick and plan RB-RB or RB-WR in the 1st 2 rounds depending on who's there in the 2nd. Every year the stud TE's go in the 3rd round somewhere. Is this a boon or bust stragedy or actually a play it safe pick for TE mandatory PPR leagues. I'm thinking if Hines Ward were still there, it would behoove me to take him. It seems almost every year the team with a top producing TE is always competing for the title in my league so I may just take a shot at one this year. Has there ever been a study on this point?

 

[NYG Endzone]

According to Dodds' perfect draft in the FBG Mag, if Gates or Tony is available in the 4th (no sooner) take either and run.

 

[David Yudkin]

For starters, I think that TE scoring will decline from last year. I also think that Gates will not score as often, so that might limit his value right there.I envision that the impact of the "rules enforcement" will be lessened, meaning that TE numbers might be slightly elevated compared to recent years but not as high as last year. IMO, the first TE should be Gonzalez. I think that teams got caught off guard by Gates some last year and will make a more concerted effort to neutralize him. Also, I believe the Chargers schedule might be a lot more difficult, which probably hurts Gates as well.As far as TE production and value goes, I think the bandwidth will be closer so the value of the top guys will be high but perhaps not astronomical. Based on that, the value of the player you pass over in Round 3 might not make taking a TE that early the best option.I personally wouldn't take Gates in the third (not so sure about Gonzalez), but I suppose I would consider it if it looked like my team was shaping up that I could take a TE and not sacrifice too much elsewhere. Depending upon your draft slot, taking a TE in the 3rd might not even be a viable option . . .

 

[Bloom]

biggest Pro is that you are only one of two teams with a threat go off for a 15+ game at TE every single week.biggest Con is that you will probably be hurting at WR1 or RB2. if you plan on taking gonzo or gates, i would definitely pass on any of the top 3 QBs and take your starter from that large 2nd tier in the 5th or later. i would go RB/WR or RB/RB - if you take a QB in the first 2 rounds AND a TE in the 3rd, you are probably gonna be not just hurt, but crippled at RB2 or WR1, unless you pick the breakout WR of the year, or are lucky enough to have someone like dunn or staley fall to you in the 5th.

 

[ko-jack]

the pro is that if the TE pans out , whoo hoo, the con is if the te doesnt pan out

 

[LHUCKS]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition. If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

 

[lebowski]

I have an early pick and plan RB-RB or RB-WR in the 1st 2 rounds depending on who's there in the 2nd. Every year the stud TE's go in the 3rd round somewhere. Is this a boon or bust stragedy or actually a play it safe pick for TE mandatory PPR leagues. I'm thinking if Hines Ward were still there, it would behoove me to take him. It seems almost every year the team with a top producing TE is always competing for the title in my league so I may just take a shot at one this year. Has there ever been a study on this point?

I am in the same sitiuation in a 12 team redraft... I pick 3 and I am considering Gonzo in the 3rd round after going RB/RB. I won multiple games last year because Gonzo was a stud! (Alexander also helped). I think a TE that score almost as good as many recievers is a HUGE advantage. (Note: I may not actually do this but I am trying it in some mocks to see how my team pans out). Plus.. I HATE having a TE that scores 2pts every week.

 

[Giantseasonticketholder]

I will not, repeat, will not take a TE until the 6th round...a round earlier than my QB

 

[-OZ-]

I was never a fan of taking a TE early until recently. Somehow, this coincides with winning in better leagues for me. It all depends on the scoring and format. In some leagues, even a stud TE doesn't score more than the #20 WR, in others, Gonzo/Gates were top 10 players last year. Plus, can you start 2 TEs, or only 1? Makes a difference IMO.In a dynasty, I prefer both Gates and Gonzo over most RBs or WRs you'll get in the 3rd.In a redraft, I'll probably hold off until the 4th for either.

biggest Con is that you will probably be hurting at WR1 or RB2. if you plan on taking gonzo or gates, i would definitely pass on any of the top 3 QBs and take your starter from that large 2nd tier in the 5th or later. i would go RB/WR or RB/RB - if you take a QB in the first 2 rounds AND a TE in the 3rd, you are probably gonna be not just hurt, but crippled at RB2 or WR1, unless you pick the breakout WR of the year, or are lucky enough to have someone like dunn or staley fall to you in the 5th.

I agree with Bloom here, choose either a stud QB or stud TE, you really can't afford both in redrafts. Dynasty, well, it depends on your philosophy.

 

[ko-jack]

if its a 10 team league that starts 2 wrs, you can go rb-rb-te all day and still have good options at wr

 

[LHUCKS]

if its a 10 team league that starts 2 wrs, you can go rb-rb-te all day and still have good options at wr

That's why I stated earlier that it depends on the league format and level of competition.This conversation is useless until you have all of the details.

 

[paul0]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

 

[Bri]

I like Moss in 1st then Tony G in the 3rd. I wasn't as happy with my teams in mocks when I went RB RB Tony G. 3rd round is too valuable a pick for me to take Antonio Gates. One year he was great but is he that much better than Heap(if healthy), Shockey, and Witten whom I can have 2-3-4 rounds later? Tony G's been great for years now, I'm comfy with him. Gates worries me a bit.

 

[David Yudkin]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

. . . at the cost of lower production some place else.If you take a TE in the 3rd, you will 99% of the time be looking at lower WR production, lower RB production, or lower QB production.

As others have already mentioned, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you go RB/RB/TE, you are behind the ball at WR and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/WR/TE, you will be behind at RB2 and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/QB/TE, you are behind at RB2 AND WR . . .

If you go QB/WR/TE, you have little left at RB to pick from . . .

I'm not saying taking a TE in the 3rd = certain fantasy death, but you really have to make some shrewd decisions further down the line or you could be teetering on the edge . . .

 

[Gordon Keith]

if its a 10 team league that starts 2 wrs, you can go rb-rb-te all day and still have good options at wr

That's why I stated earlier that it depends on the league format and level of competition.This conversation is useless until you have all of the details.

I'm sorry for not clarifying,but for the sake of this thread it would be for a 12 team one TE mandatory PPR league. I think David makes some great ponts....looks like there are differing opinions on what a team must have to make it to the top. You definately have to get a little "lucky" in rounds 4-5 to make up other areas.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

. . . at the cost of lower production some place else.If you take a TE in the 3rd, you will 99% of the time be looking at lower WR production, lower RB production, or lower QB production.

As others have already mentioned, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you go RB/RB/TE, you are behind the ball at WR and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/WR/TE, you will be behind at RB2 and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/QB/TE, you are behind at RB2 AND WR . . .

If you go QB/WR/TE, you have little left at RB to pick from . . .

I'm not saying taking a TE in the 3rd = certain fantasy death, but you really have to make some shrewd decisions further down the line or you could be teetering on the edge . . .

The difference of course is that by the time you get down to 3rd round RB's, you're looking at around the #20 RB overall, and they're down that far for a reason.My point being that the chances of having a 3rd round RB bust are pretty high anyway. Two years ago I took William Green in the 3rd round in my most competetive league, so I was essentially getting no production out of my 3rd rounder at all, and still made it to the championship game of the league. My point here simply that you can still keep up without that 3rd round RB or WR, and when the smoke clears the guy that took one of those risky 3rd round RB's that didn't pan out is going to be in a much worse situation than you are, since you got a stud TE out of the deal and they got nada.

Were I certain that that 3rd round RB was going to play up to the levels I thought he would, I'd take the RB no question. But the reason that RB is that low (around #20 at his position) is usually that there's a pretty good chance they won't produce up to those levels, whereas the TE at the top 2 in his position is up there because he's much less likely to fall flat on his face.. People become way too certain in the offseason that they're going to pick the "right guy" that's going to actually live up to his value.

 

[wannabee]

I hear you Bagel, but would taking Cjohnson, Horn, or Walker in the 3rd and Witten in the 4th not make you better than taking 3rd round TE (gonzo) and 4th round WR (tke your pick of Burleson or Roy Williams)? I guess the the 3rd round WR is safer and more of a sure thing, unlike the 3rd round RB.

 

[David Yudkin]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

. . . at the cost of lower production some place else.If you take a TE in the 3rd, you will 99% of the time be looking at lower WR production, lower RB production, or lower QB production.

As others have already mentioned, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you go RB/RB/TE, you are behind the ball at WR and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/WR/TE, you will be behind at RB2 and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/QB/TE, you are behind at RB2 AND WR . . .

If you go QB/WR/TE, you have little left at RB to pick from . . .

I'm not saying taking a TE in the 3rd = certain fantasy death, but you really have to make some shrewd decisions further down the line or you could be teetering on the edge . . .

The difference of course is that by the time you get down to 3rd round RB's, you're looking at around the #20 RB overall, and they're down that far for a reason.My point being that the chances of having a 3rd round RB bust are pretty high anyway. Two years ago I took William Green in the 3rd round in my most competetive league, so I was essentially getting no production out of my 3rd rounder at all, and still made it to the championship game of the league. My point here simply that you can still keep up without that 3rd round RB or WR, and when the smoke clears the guy that took one of those risky 3rd round RB's that didn't pan out is going to be in a much worse situation than you are, since you got a stud TE out of the deal and they got nada.

Were I certain that that 3rd round RB was going to play up to the levels I thought he would, I'd take the RB no question. But the reason that RB is that low (around #20 at his position) is usually that there's a pretty good chance they won't produce up to those levels, whereas the TE at the top 2 in his position is up there because he's much less likely to fall flat on his face.. People become way too certain in the offseason that they're going to pick the "right guy" that's going to actually live up to his value.

I'm not saying that there are any sure things or right or wrong calls here.However, other than Gonzalez, who else has been "goof proof" at TE as a cinch Top 3 TE? Sharpe was the other option, but he's retired. Heap, Shockey, Gates, and Witten have all had one or two good seasons, but are they "can't miss?" Heap ranked highly but was not exceedingly valuable.

As for taking a third round RB, IMO, it depends who it is. You mentioned Green. He was in an environment that has rarely produced big RB numbers. If it was Curtis Martin or Tiki Barber who have been productive already (both were available in the third in some drafts last year), then you hit a home run.

After doing this for years, I think you CAN take a TE in the 3rd and do well, but I would sell the WR and QB positions short but not RB (the good ones go too fast).

So I would think that RB/RB/TE would be the least impactful of the options. However, a lot depends on your draft slot. I have the #2 pick in an upcoming draft--meaning I would have to burn my 3.02 on a tight end (which makes no sense to me at this point).

 

[dougthonus]

First, I'd like to say the primary way to success in fantasy football is to grab successful players. I know it sounds stupid, but a lot of time people get too caught up in the order of positions they draft and don't think enough about what the odds of are for success of the guy they take.Second, the scoring system and starting lineup requirements are key to making the decision. Points per reception greatly enhance the value of TEs, becuase it creates a larger seperation between the stud TE and the second tier TE. This is also true at WR, but you're already past the stud tier of WRs, so the drop off between WR available in round 3 vs WR available in round 4 probably is not so big.In leagues where you only start 2 WRs and 2 RBs, a stud TE in the 3rd makes a lot of sense if you have to take one that early to get them. The league isn't deep enough that you'll struggle to find starters. If you start 3 WRs or 2 and a flex it's a much tougher choice, but it still may pan out. This is where it's important to realize that you need to pick a good player. If you gamble with a stud TE in the 3rd your odds of picking a stud are higher than if you take a WR or RB, so I think it becomes a conservative move in some respects even though people think of it as a radical one. I think the most radical part about taking a round 3 TE is that the odds are so high that you could wait until round 4 and still grab one in the leagues I play anyway.Also, do you put Gates below Gonzo? If so, how far below? I'd be much more content with Gates in the 4th than Gonzo in the 3rd if that's what it came down to. In fact, I might just take Gates before Gonzo anyway, or at least I think it's close enough that I wouldn't pay an extra round earlier to go for one over the other.

 

[LHUCKS]

if its a 10 team league that starts 2 wrs, you can go rb-rb-te all day and still have good options at wr

That's why I stated earlier that it depends on the league format and level of competition.This conversation is useless until you have all of the details.

I'm sorry for not clarifying,but for the sake of this thread it would be for a 12 team one TE mandatory PPR league. I think David makes some great ponts....looks like there are differing opinions on what a team must have to make it to the top. You definately have to get a little "lucky" in rounds 4-5 to make up other areas.

That leaves three basic scenarios...Expert League - I would draft Gonzo in the late 3rd. That is, if I though I could get quality still at my #2 RB or #1WR on the comeback.

Semi-Shark League(half experts) - I would draft Gonzo in middle 3rd, expecting value to slide a bit at the other positions.

Guppy League - Late 2nd, Early 3rd. Value will slide to me at other key positions throughout the draft...might as well take the best TE in the game.

Of course, all of this is based on my projection that has Gonzo by far and away in his own tier.

Gates is another story. I have him ranked #2, but believe that he's currently overvalued ADP-wise. I expect his numbers to dip which will put him closer to the tier 2 TEs, thus making him less valuable. In a shark League I probably wont draft him until the 6th. In a guppy league no earlier than the late 4th.

 

[Gordon Keith]

if its a 10 team league that starts 2 wrs, you can go rb-rb-te all day and still have good options at wr

That's why I stated earlier that it depends on the league format and level of competition.

This conversation is useless until you have all of the details.

I'm sorry for not clarifying,but for the sake of this thread it would be for a 12 team one TE mandatory PPR league. I think David makes some great ponts....looks like there are differing opinions on what a team must have to make it to the top. You definately have to get a little "lucky" in rounds 4-5 to make up other areas.

That leaves three basic scenarios...

Expert League - I would draft Gonzo in late 3rd...if I though I could get quality still at my #2 RB or #1WR on the comeback.

Semi-Shark League(half experts) - I would draft Gonzo in middle 3rd, expecting value to slide a bit at the other positions.

Guppy League - Late 2nd, Early 3rd. Value will slide to me at other key positions throughout the draft...might as well take the best TE in the game.

Of course, all of this is based on my projection that has Gonzo by far and away in his own tier.

Gates is another story. I have him ranked #2, but believe that he's currently overvalued ADP-wise. I expect his numbers to dip which will put him closer to the tier 2 TEs, thus making him less valuable. In a shark League I probably wont draft him until the 6th. In a guppy league no earlier than the late 4th.

[/quote

Great stuff LHUCKS....

I am going to be very tempted at 3.2 assuming he's still there. While there are no real "experts " in my league, it is very competetive ever year. There are just a few bargains here and there and I will be hoping to get Gonzo and maybe some serviceable Wrs in rounds 4-5.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

However, other than Gonzalez, who else has been "goof proof" at TE as a cinch Top 3 TE? Sharpe was the other option, but he's retired. Heap, Shockey, Gates, and Witten have all had one or two good seasons, but are they "can't miss?" Heap ranked highly but was not exceedingly valuable.

Isn't that kind of what we're talking about here? Your choice of a top TE, and really, we're talking about Gonzo/Gates. If you're not high on Gates, then by all means just consider Gonzo, it was my impression that we were deciding whether or not the top TE was worth it at that spot.

After doing this for years, I think you CAN take a TE in the 3rd and do well, but I would sell the WR and QB positions short but not RB (the good ones go too fast).So I would think that RB/RB/TE would be the least impactful of the options. However, a lot depends on your draft slot.

I'll certainly agree with you here, I will never come out of the first three rounds without two RB's, so I would only consider taking a 3rd round TE if I already had a pair of RB's to work with, the guys left at RB in the 4th round are just much too unstable to rely on as a #2.

 

[bueno]

I guess I can say this now that both are gone in Great White. I would have traded up to get Gonzalez, but Gates is ranked TE#6 for me. I just don't see the TD production from him that we saw last year. The strategy for drafting TE early is to have some sleepers in your pocket for WR1 and/or QB1. Sometimes you can pull that off, even in a Shark League.Now having said that, I don't see a tight cluster of TE talent. I have eight TEs in my first seven buckets and no more than two in any one bucket. So the strategy if you don't get Gonzo or Gates (if yo believe in him) is to think of these top seven TEs as your WR#2 and your WR#3 as your TE#1, if that makes any sense.

 

[ko-jack]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

. . . at the cost of lower production some place else.If you take a TE in the 3rd, you will 99% of the time be looking at lower WR production, lower RB production, or lower QB production.

As others have already mentioned, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you go RB/RB/TE, you are behind the ball at WR and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/WR/TE, you will be behind at RB2 and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/QB/TE, you are behind at RB2 AND WR . . .

If you go QB/WR/TE, you have little left at RB to pick from . . .

I'm not saying taking a TE in the 3rd = certain fantasy death, but you really have to make some shrewd decisions further down the line or you could be teetering on the edge . . .

i understand your points, but#1-there is no perfect team after a draft. your team will have needs.

#2-if you are short at rb2, is it really saying much? how much difference is there between rb12 and rb18-20. also, dont forget, rbs2 have baggage, thats why they arent rb1s. lots of rb2s bust, ie, henry,faulk,barlow,taylor. why not take a for sure commidity that is also a great value? there will be options for rb2slater in the draft. like last years backs that slid, q.griffin,martin,t.jones,c.brown,barber,dunn,westbrook, etc. and then there is l.johnson's, j.jones, mcghee's of the world

you can have 4 options to plug 1 hole with. if you hit the right back, look out

ditto for the elite qb.

 

[lebowski]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition. If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Agreed, my league only starts 2 WR...that makes a difference for WR depth later on. I have no doubt I would be hurting my #1 WR or QB but to have a TE that good it may be worth it. My guess is that the to p 3 QB's and top 4 WR's will be gone. So the question is do I go with a "iffy" #5 wideout or go with Gonzo. I don't know yet, but it is an option worth considering.

 

[suspected]

In a 12 team redraft start 2,2,1,1,1 it is perfectly reasonable to select Gonzo in the middle of the third. If you're planning for your draft and picking in the middle of the third, lets assume 3.6 (or 30 overall), you have to make the following assumptions based on antsports ADP:1) Moss, TO, Harrison, Holt, CJ, and Walker will all be gone2) Manning, C-Pep, Mcnabb will be gone3) 20 RBs will be goneLet's say you went RB/RB in rounds 1 and 2. Your choices are WR(Horn, AJ, Wayne, Ward, D-Jax), TE (Gonzo), RB21, or QB4. If you go Gonzo in round 3 your choices in round 4 for WR are Burleson, S. Smith, Clayton, Bennett. Not that much of a dropoff IMO, considering you are getting a proven stud in Gonzo.For kicks lets look at last years top 14 WR and what round they were selected:1) Muhammed - 92) TO - 23) Harrison - 24) Horn - 55) Walker - 56) Bennett - 157) Holt - 28) Wayne - 89) Moss - 110) Johnson - 211)Stokely - FA12) Driver - 1113) Burleson - 1414) Kennison - 10Do this same analysis for previous years and you'll find these results are not unusual.A couple of point:1) The only top 14 WRs selected in the first 4 rounds were TO, Harrison, Holt, Moss, and CJ.2) 7 of the top 14 WRs were selected in rounds 8 or later. You need luck in this game as well as skill. If you cant get a true stud QB or WR in the third (they are IMO: TO, Moss, Harrison, Holt, CJ), and the top 20 RBs are already gone, why not wait on WR and get a true stud TE like Gonzo in the third?

 

[BassNBrew]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition. If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

 

[LHUCKS]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Too much risk at RB for my blood...that was the bullet you took for drafting Gonzo.

 

[-OZ-]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition. If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

If the league is 2 point per reception and it's mid 3rd or later I'd pull the trigger, meaning if I'm drafting say at the 1, 2 or 3 spot, I really have no chance (from my perspective) of getting either one of them because if I go RB, then very late 2nd, I'm not taking a TE in that spot in the 3rd, there are too many good wide receivers on the board still.However, if you're drafting later in the draft order, like 10, 11, or 12.........you almost have to plan for it. For example, go RB, RB with the possibility of Gates or Gonzalez being there at the end of round 3 then take one of them. If he's not, no big deal and you go WR and RB with a solid start in the first 4 rounds.I've found that once one of them go, it's like a trigger that you're allowed to take a TE now so the other will go within the next 2 or 3 picks thinking they just got value because they drafted that player a few picks behind the other one.If you don't get one of them, I suggest waiting till round 6 or 7. You will still get a mid tier TE such as McMichael.Again, if it's not 2 points per reception, I'd pass all together on the TE in the 3rd.

 

[-OZ-]

If the league is 2 point per reception and it's mid 3rd or later I'd pull the trigger, meaning if I'm drafting say at the 1, 2 or 3 spot, I really have no chance (from my perspective) of getting either one of them because if I go RB, then very late 2nd, I'm not taking a TE in that spot in the 3rd, there are too many good wide receivers on the board still.

However, if you're drafting later in the draft order, like 10, 11, or 12.........you almost have to plan for it. For example, go RB, RB with the possibility of Gates or Gonzalez being there at the end of round 3 then take one of them. If he's not, no big deal and you go WR and RB with a solid start in the first 4 rounds.

I've found that once one of them go, it's like a trigger that you're allowed to take a TE now so the other will go within the next 2 or 3 picks thinking they just got value because they drafted that player a few picks behind the other one.

If you don't get one of them, I suggest waiting till round 6 or 7. You will still get a mid tier TE such as McMichael.

Again, if it's not 2 points per reception, I'd pass all together on the TE in the 3rd.

I don't know if you meant to do it, but IMO you just made a strong case for getting a late slot. You'll walk away with 2 solid-good RBs in the 1st and 2nd, then Gonzo/Gates and a 2nd tier WR at 3/4. A lineup of Portis/Jamal/Gonzo/Ward or something similar is a great start IMO.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

If the league is 2 point per reception and it's mid 3rd or later I'd pull the trigger, meaning if I'm drafting say at the 1, 2 or 3 spot, I really have no chance (from my perspective) of getting either one of them because if I go RB, then very late 2nd, I'm not taking a TE in that spot in the 3rd, there are too many good wide receivers on the board still.

However, if you're drafting later in the draft order, like 10, 11, or 12.........you almost have to plan for it.  For example, go RB, RB with the possibility of Gates or Gonzalez being there at the end of round 3 then take one of them.  If he's not, no big deal and you go WR and RB with a solid start in the first 4 rounds.

I've found that once one of them go, it's like a trigger that you're allowed to take a TE now so the other will go within the next 2 or 3 picks thinking they just got value because they drafted that player a few picks behind the other one.

If you don't get one of them, I suggest waiting till round 6 or 7.  You will still get a mid tier TE such as McMichael.

Again, if it's not 2 points per reception, I'd pass all together on the TE in the 3rd.

I don't know if you meant to do it, but IMO you just made a strong case for getting a late slot. You'll walk away with 2 solid-good RBs in the 1st and 2nd, then Gonzo/Gates and a 2nd tier WR at 3/4. A lineup of Portis/Jamal/Gonzo/Ward or something similar is a great start IMO.

Well, there's a thread in here recently about what are the best draft positions this year, and in it I posted that I think 1 and 2 are the best........then 11 and 12. I like 11 and 12 for the reasons I mentioned above.......you have lots of options there in the first 4 rounds of a 12 team draft.I like 1 and 2 just like everyone else because on paper I think the top 2 Rb's are in a fantasy class by themselves then a signficant dropoff. For example, you can have 4 people draft in the 3 spot and all 4 could make a different pick.

 

[Rovers]

For most formats, taking a TE early was once a solid strategy, but not anymore IMHO. That was when Gonzo and Heap were the only producers. There are many more TE's that put up some numbers now. The big drop off doesn't exist anymore. There simply are more TE's now that score. When a guy like Witten can be had in the fifth, is Gonzo worth a third? I just don't see it.

 

[-OZ-]

For most formats, taking a TE early was once a solid strategy, but not anymore IMHO. That was when Gonzo and Heap were the only producers. There are many more TE's that put up some numbers now. The big drop off doesn't exist anymore. There simply are more TE's now that score. When a guy like Witten can be had in the fifth, is Gonzo worth a third? I just don't see it.

The same can be said for most positions, except maybe RB - if you want to go RB/RB/RB, so be it.Holt vs. Boldin

Vick (wide spread with him, but I've seen him go in the 3rd) vs. Brooks

Gonzo vs. Witten

You decide.

 

[BassNBrew]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]David Givens (9.11) [7]Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

Question marks (WRs) in a 16 team league??? A sure top ten and 3 top 36's!!!

 

[BassNBrew]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Too much risk at RB for my blood...that was the bullet you took for drafting Gonzo.

Well considering Gonzo was a top 5 scorer in this league last year, I can afford the hit. Surely you have to admit that since I went QB, TE, WR to start the draft that I have a decent RB core with some potential starters and definte contributors. I Smith hits like I expect, it's a battle for second!

 

[Family Matters]

Great thread with some very good ideas. I was thinking back 2 years ago and before and realized why I was willing to take Gonzo in the 3rd. He was by far the best there was. The drop off of sure fire players was significant.Today, Gonzo is still the man when it comes to TE's. What has changed is that the bottom group of TE's has moved closer to Gonzo. Last year it took Gonzo's career best to hold off Gates for the #1 TE ranking. But there were still several good TE's below Gonzo/Gates that can be had much later. Guys like Witten, Crumpler and Shockey and Heap will go later but will give you some very good weeks. They may not beat out Gonzo but what you can draft in the 3rd & 4th rounds can provide your team with some excellent starting WR's and QB's or depth at RB.I expect Gonzo will be gone in the 3rd in 10/12 team leagues and possibly in the 2nd in larger leagues. Gates may go in the same round as Gonzo. I also expect some great value after round 5. See the article "Value Plays" http://www.footballguys.com/05valueintro.htm for some ideas.So I feel you can go either way on this. My decision will come down to who I think I can get later at TE by waiting and who I can get in his place to determine which provides my tean the best chance of overall success.BTW-I've won championships both ways.Edit: Speaking of sleeper TE's, I just read this and thought it's an example of finding some value later in the draft.

Broncos | Tight Ends to go Downfield More Often?Sun, 19 Jun 2005 18:32:45 -0700Patrick Saunders, writing for the Sporting News, reports the Denver Broncos are expected to use TEs Jeb Putzier, Stephen Alexander and Nate Jackson as downfield targets more often this year, rather than as dump-off targets or safety valves. All three can beat linebackers in coverage. Putzier, in particular, is ready to become the kind of downfield threat TE Shannon Sharpe used to be.

 

[CalBear]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

. . . at the cost of lower production some place else.If you take a TE in the 3rd, you will 99% of the time be looking at lower WR production, lower RB production, or lower QB production.

As others have already mentioned, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you go RB/RB/TE, you are behind the ball at WR and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/WR/TE, you will be behind at RB2 and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/QB/TE, you are behind at RB2 AND WR . . .

If you go QB/WR/TE, you have little left at RB to pick from . . .

I'm not saying taking a TE in the 3rd = certain fantasy death, but you really have to make some shrewd decisions further down the line or you could be teetering on the edge . . .

Obviously, no matter what position you take in the third round will impact your production at all other positions. This is exactly what VBD is useful for. Why VBD fans are willing to use it when it tells them to hold off on non-RBs, but unwilling to use it when it tells them to take a TE, continues to mystify me. By VBD, Gonzo should be taken in the second round. Yes, that means you'll get less production at RB or WR, but again, by VBD you will more than make up that gap with increased TE production.

 

[DarkManX]

I rarely take a TE before the 5th, I mean I let everyone reach for them while I build depth taking a solid RB3 and fillin out my WR core. Mind you I rarely take a QB before thr 6th either, depending on the draft though. Sure I could take Gates or Gonzo in the 3rd but with my depth and taking a TE at #7 I got enough trade bait to even have enough strength to trade for Gates/Gonzo.

 

[radballs.]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Bass,Weren't you the one busting on Ruds for taking Manning so early. Granted, second or third overall is different from 13th but I thought you made a lot of arguments about how you wouldn't touch him until the mid to late second at the earliest. Or, maybe I'm just drunk and I'm not recalling that correctly.

 

[Rovers]

To me, drafting Gonzo/Gates is just like drafting an extra, starting every week, WR.

. . . at the cost of lower production some place else.If you take a TE in the 3rd, you will 99% of the time be looking at lower WR production, lower RB production, or lower QB production.

As others have already mentioned, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

If you go RB/RB/TE, you are behind the ball at WR and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/WR/TE, you will be behind at RB2 and won't have an elite QB . . .

If you go RB/QB/TE, you are behind at RB2 AND WR . . .

If you go QB/WR/TE, you have little left at RB to pick from . . .

I'm not saying taking a TE in the 3rd = certain fantasy death, but you really have to make some shrewd decisions further down the line or you could be teetering on the edge . . .

Obviously, no matter what position you take in the third round will impact your production at all other positions. This is exactly what VBD is useful for. Why VBD fans are willing to use it when it tells them to hold off on non-RBs, but unwilling to use it when it tells them to take a TE, continues to mystify me. By VBD, Gonzo should be taken in the second round. Yes, that means you'll get less production at RB or WR, but again, by VBD you will more than make up that gap with increased TE production.

The thing with VBD, is was, and always will be, is what one's projections are. Will Gonzo and Gates light it up the way they did last year? If your projections say they will, then it's a solid VBD choice. Gonzo put up a career year last year. If one thinks he can duplicate that, it makes sense. I am in one league that gives TE's double yardage points over recievers. (Last year, they even got 2 points per reception, which was ridiculous, and changed to 1 PPR for this year) Gonzo went in the first round, and was a solid pick there. So, VBD is also very scoring system dependent, as it affects, in some cases, projections very dramatically.

In my more conventional scoring leagues, I don't see the VBD for a TE in the second round this year, expecting both Gonzo and Gates to fall off some, while looking for some other TE's to close the gap. Depending on league size, I usually expect my third RB to start in at least 5 games due to bye and injuries. That is a minimum. Case in point, I had Brown and DD last year as my #2 and 3 RB's in one league. Between them, they split starts. I got by fine with Crumpler in the sixth. VBD is a great tool, but it has to be wieghed in any given league to be useful.

 

[-OZ-]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition. If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]David Givens (9.11) [7]Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]Question marks (WRs) in a 16 team league??? A sure top ten and 3 top 36's!!!

Gee, I didn't mean to insult, this team is the best I've ever seen! For a 16 teamer, as I said before, the team overall is fairly strong. I've seen, and have better in a league of the same size, but this thread really isn't about comparing our teams.

If you don't see any questions with a guy coming off a leg injury, a guy changing from McNair / Volek to Boller, or Lelie, ok.

BTW, who's your "sure top ten"?

Smith is ranked #17, Mason #26 and Lelie #27 in FBG's own rankings.

 

[Rovers]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]David Givens (9.11) [7]Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]Question marks (WRs) in a 16 team league??? A sure top ten and 3 top 36's!!!

Gee, I didn't mean to insult, this team is the best I've ever seen! For a 16 teamer, as I said before, the team overall is fairly strong. I've seen, and have better in a league of the same size, but this thread really isn't about comparing our teams.

If you don't see any questions with a guy coming off a leg injury, a guy changing from McNair / Volek to Boller, or Lelie, ok.

BTW, who's your "sure top ten"?

Smith is ranked #17, Mason #26 and Lelie #27 in FBG's own rankings.

Um.... I really don't want BnB to get PO'd, but I see this as a fairly weak team. None of the RB's here are garranteed to be starters. If they start, they could potentially lose those spots. Moore and Fason behind Bennett and Droughns and Green behind Suggs. Last year, both of those RB's screwed thier owners, big time. After Smith and Lelie, the WR corp is highly suspect. what will Mason do this year? Manning and Gonzo are the best at thier positions, but Gonzo is no longer alone at the top, he has some competition. I am in a 16 team dynasty IDP league. My offense is:

Green and Rothlisberger

Portis, Lewis and trash (C Taylor, Crockett, Cloud)

Coles, Evans, Clayton (MIA), and Housh.

Heap, Cooley

Keading and Hansen

BnB's TE pick really screwed him at RB, IMHO. Unless Manning does a repeat, I think this roster is in trouble. He will need a VBD of 100 for the Gonzo pick to work, at least. He left a ton of points on the board with that RB corp. BnB, sorry, it's not personal, just my opinion, and I've been wrong before, that's for derned sure! Now, I'm sure I'll take some hits on MY roster! LOL.

 

[BassNBrew]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]David Givens (9.11) [7]Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]Question marks (WRs) in a 16 team league??? A sure top ten and 3 top 36's!!!

Gee, I didn't mean to insult, this team is the best I've ever seen! For a 16 teamer, as I said before, the team overall is fairly strong. I've seen, and have better in a league of the same size, but this thread really isn't about comparing our teams.

If you don't see any questions with a guy coming off a leg injury, a guy changing from McNair / Volek to Boller, or Lelie, ok.

BTW, who's your "sure top ten"?

Smith is ranked #17, Mason #26 and Lelie #27 in FBG's own rankings.

Smith is grossly undervalued by FBGs. You can read my comments here.

 

[BassNBrew]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]David Givens (9.11) [7]Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]Question marks (WRs) in a 16 team league??? A sure top ten and 3 top 36's!!!

Gee, I didn't mean to insult, this team is the best I've ever seen! For a 16 teamer, as I said before, the team overall is fairly strong. I've seen, and have better in a league of the same size, but this thread really isn't about comparing our teams.

If you don't see any questions with a guy coming off a leg injury, a guy changing from McNair / Volek to Boller, or Lelie, ok.

BTW, who's your "sure top ten"?

Smith is ranked #17, Mason #26 and Lelie #27 in FBG's own rankings.

Um.... I really don't want BnB to get PO'd, but I see this as a fairly weak team. None of the RB's here are garranteed to be starters. If they start, they could potentially lose those spots. Moore and Fason behind Bennett and Droughns and Green behind Suggs. Last year, both of those RB's screwed thier owners, big time. After Smith and Lelie, the WR corp is highly suspect. what will Mason do this year? Manning and Gonzo are the best at thier positions, but Gonzo is no longer alone at the top, he has some competition. I am in a 16 team dynasty IDP league. My offense is:

Green and Rothlisberger

Portis, Lewis and trash (C Taylor, Crockett, Cloud)

Coles, Evans, Clayton (MIA), and Housh.

Heap, Cooley

Keading and Hansen

BnB's TE pick really screwed him at RB, IMHO. Unless Manning does a repeat, I think this roster is in trouble. He will need a VBD of 100 for the Gonzo pick to work, at least. He left a ton of points on the board with that RB corp. BnB, sorry, it's not personal, just my opinion, and I've been wrong before, that's for derned sure! Now, I'm sure I'll take some hits on MY roster! LOL.

Critical analysis will never get me PO'd. Working from memory, Manning and Gonzo (2 pt/recpt) were #1 and #3 in that scoring system last year. Even at a 20% production reduction, I think they finish in the top ten. VBD was screaming to pick those guys. Personally I see Bennett and Suggs as starters. Even if they are not, the entire crew of Bennett/Suggs/Shipp/Fisher/Goings will get enough touches and receptions that their points plus Manning and Gonzo will out pace the alternative which would be something like Martin/Benson/Brady/Johnson.My overall premise is that I'm not afraid to step up and grab that stud TE. I saw a lot of league champions last year with Gonzo on their roster, including the winner of the EBF Invitational.

 

[Callas Disregard]

I hear you Bagel, but would taking Cjohnson, Horn, or Walker in the 3rd and Witten in the 4th not make you better than taking 3rd round TE (gonzo) and 4th round WR (tke your pick of Burleson or Roy Williams)? I guess the the 3rd round WR is safer and more of a sure thing, unlike the 3rd round RB.

I'd much rather take Gonzo in the 3rd and Driver in the 6th than Walker in the 3rd and Crumpler in the 6th.

 

[CalBear]

The thing with VBD, is was, and always will be, is what one's projections are. Will Gonzo and Gates light it up the way they did last year? If your projections say they will, then it's a solid VBD choice. Gonzo put up a career year last year. If one thinks he can duplicate that, it makes sense.

I am in one league that gives TE's double yardage points over recievers. (Last year, they even got 2 points per reception, which was ridiculous, and changed to 1 PPR for this year) Gonzo went in the first round, and was a solid pick there. So, VBD is also very scoring system dependent, as it affects, in some cases, projections very dramatically.

In my more conventional scoring leagues, I don't see the VBD for a TE in the second round this year, expecting both Gonzo and Gates to fall off some, while looking for some other TE's to close the gap. Depending on league size, I usually expect my third RB to start in at least 5 games due to bye and injuries. That is a minimum. Case in point, I had Brown and DD last year as my #2 and 3 RB's in one league. Between them, they split starts. I got by fine with Crumpler in the sixth. VBD is a great tool, but it has to be wieghed in any given league to be useful.

Here is Gonzo's VBD value by year:
Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------1999 91 2 112000 114 1 82001 55 1 232002 56 2 272003 87 1 132004 99 2 11--------------------------------------------------For the past 6 years in a row, he has been #1 or #2 at his position. The worst he's done in overall ranking is #27. I don't have a quick way to calculate rankings by VBD, but it seems obvious looking at the above numbers that, on average, he has been in the top 10 by VBD, and even in his worst season he was in the top 20. He's the surest bet in fantasy football.So if the question is, should Gonzo be taken before pick #36, the answer is, why is he going that low?

 

[David Yudkin]

The thing with VBD, is was, and always will be, is what one's projections are. Will Gonzo and Gates light it up the way they did last year? If your projections say they will, then it's a solid VBD choice. Gonzo put up a career year last year. If one thinks he can duplicate that, it makes sense.

I am in one league that gives TE's double yardage points over recievers. (Last year, they even got 2 points per reception, which was ridiculous, and changed to 1 PPR for this year) Gonzo went in the first round, and was a solid pick there. So, VBD is also very scoring system dependent, as it affects, in some cases, projections very dramatically.

In my more conventional  scoring leagues, I don't see the VBD for a TE in the second round this year, expecting both Gonzo and Gates to fall off some, while looking for some other TE's to close the gap. Depending on league size, I usually expect my third RB to start in at least 5 games due to bye and injuries.  That is a minimum. Case in point, I had Brown and DD last year as my #2 and 3 RB's in one league. Between them, they split starts. I got by fine with Crumpler in the sixth. VBD is a great tool, but it has to be wieghed in any given league to be useful.

Here is Gonzo's VBD value by year:
Year        Value        Pos. Rank    Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------1999          91             2             112000         114             1              82001          55             1             232002          56             2             272003          87             1             132004          99             2             11--------------------------------------------------For the past 6 years in a row, he has been #1 or #2 at his position. The worst he's done in overall ranking is #27. I don't have a quick way to calculate rankings by VBD, but it seems obvious looking at the above numbers that, on average, he has been in the top 10 by VBD, and even in his worst season he was in the top 20. He's the surest bet in fantasy football.So if the question is, should Gonzo be taken before pick #36, the answer is, why is he going that low?

I started a great thread last year on who should be drafted first, Culpepper or Gonzalez. Part of the issue with determining "value" at TE is that there could be a corps of solid TE but one rotten apple that ranks as the TE 12 that messes up everything. So yes, Gonzalez could have a huge advantage over the #12 TE but maybe not so much over others.As I mentioned earlier, I think a lot depends how "valuable" Gonzalez is based on how your team looks before you take him.

For example, if you went QB/WR and then took Gonzalez, I think you will be hard pressed to come up with 2 RB that will be NFL starters. So IMO, you are almost forced to have at least one viable RB by the time you look at Gonzalez--and if that RB gets hurt, depth could be an issue.

If you did have at least one RB, it could be possible to feed off of RBBC guys later on (taking say Dunn/Duckett or Suggs/Droughns) and maybe taking a couple backups that could get more work (Gore, Moore, Shelton, Buckhalter, etc.).

As you suggest, a case could be made for Gonzalez in the second (I've made that argument before as well) and depending on the scoing system he might be worth it in the first (say in leagues that double TE points).

Gates scares me way more than Gonzo, as how likely is it that Gates sets another TE scoring record this year?

 

[-OZ-]

To me it depends on the league format and level of competition.  If you take Gonzo in a shark league you're going to suffer at RB or WR...at least you should.

Not if you have acumen. BassNBrew 16 team league

QB

Peyton Manning (1.13) [8]

J.P. Losman (7.12) [9]

RB

Michael Bennett (4.4) [5]

Lee Suggs (5.13) [4]

Marcel Shipp (10.4) [6]

Tony Fisher (15.13) [6]

Nick Goings (17.12) [7]

WR

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]

Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]

Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]

David Givens (9.11) [7]

Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]

Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]

TE

Tony Gonzalez (2.4) [5]

Freddie Jones (11.11) [7]

PK

Nate Kaeding (13.13) [10]

Todd Peterson (16.4) [8]

Def

Buffalo Bills (12.4) [9]

Lol, the team overall is fairly strong because of Manning and Gonzo, but you're proving his point. Suggs / Bennet as the 1-2 is weak and your WRs have question marks as well. They might all pan out, but I doubt it.

Steve Smith (3.13) [7]Ashley Lelie (6.4) [9]Derrick Mason (8.4) [3]David Givens (9.11) [7]Rod Gardner (14.4) [3]Kelley Washington (18.3) [10]Question marks (WRs) in a 16 team league??? A sure top ten and 3 top 36's!!!

Gee, I didn't mean to insult, this team is the best I've ever seen! For a 16 teamer, as I said before, the team overall is fairly strong. I've seen, and have better in a league of the same size, but this thread really isn't about comparing our teams.

If you don't see any questions with a guy coming off a leg injury, a guy changing from McNair / Volek to Boller, or Lelie, ok.

BTW, who's your "sure top ten"?

Smith is ranked #17, Mason #26 and Lelie #27 in FBG's own rankings.

Smith is grossly undervalued by FBGs. You can read my comments here.

At the risk of continuing down this road tangent...Smith probably is undervalued, but you're overvaluing him if you call him a "LOCK" as a top 10. Possible, sure, maybe even probable if all goes as planned, but defintely not a lock.

Anyway, we do agree that you can get a stud TE and do well, I just don't think this is the perfect illustration.

 

[CalBear]

I started a great thread last year on who should be drafted first, Culpepper or Gonzalez. Part of the issue with determining "value" at TE is that there could be a corps of solid TE but one rotten apple that ranks as the TE 12 that messes up everything. So yes, Gonzalez could have a huge advantage over the #12 TE but maybe not so much over others.

I don't think this is the case. In recent years, the difference between the #6 and #12 TE has been minimal.2004: 33 points

2003: 8 points

2002: 21 points

2001: 11 points

2000: 27 points

1999: 16 points

Average: 19 points (1.2 per game)

The difference between Gonzo and the #6 TE is larger than the difference between the #6 and #12 TE, every year over the past six. In four of the last 6 years, Gonzo has scored more than 66 points more than the #6 TE.

So no, there is not one weak performer artificially raising the TE VBD. The curve for TEs drops significantly in the first few positions, and then starts to plateau around TE#4-TE#7 (varies depending on the year). Then you get a whole bunch of guys who put up very little in terms of fantasy production.