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

[BassNBrew]

But if I forgo Gonzo, I get Horn and Driver/Muhammad/etc. and still get a TE who can at worst produce within 5 PPG of Gonzo.

Horn FBG projections: 194(ADP 7th) Lelie FBG projections: 142

Difference 3.25 PPG

Gonzo FBG projections: 156

(ADP 7th) McMichael FBG projections: 100

Difference 3.5 PPG

That is assuming that:1. Those projections will be exactly correct (they won't)

2. You will have the ability to get both of those players at your draft position in each of those rounds (most likely you won't)

Your examples of FBG projections (which I don't use) and ADPs (which are generalities at best) mean nothing, and I say that in the nicest way possible. They are guidelines, and you relying on them as fact to build the best team is a mistake.

But good luck in the upcoming season.

This argument will never be resolved due to one important fact. QB1/WR1/TE1 have ZERO upside. If you draft them, you're basically getting a constant. Your constant can't compete with the value of my super duper sleeper that's going to finish in the top 5. The only reason RB's escape this fate is due to scarcity.

 

[CalBear]

You are taking projections as gospel. This is a mistake. You need to draft as many good players as possible that get you to a certain PPG level as a group of starters throughout the year. Who you thought was your RB1 may be your RB2 or RB3 at the end of the year. Maybe your RB2 will miss 4 games to a minor injury so your RB3 will play 1/3 of the season as a starter.

There are so many contingencies out there that you need to look at the players that you draft as a group of interchangable parts that will give you production on some level depending on the week or matchup.

Pigeon-holing players as WR2 does not accomplish this.

I agree with your premise, but not with your conclusions. I am absolutely not taking Gonzo's projections as gospel, and certainly not Wayne's or Lelie's. But the important thing about Gonzo is that there is a lot of data about his productivity, and comparitively little about Wayne's or Lelie's. If you take Wayne in the third round and he puts up 2003 numbers (838 yards, 7 TDs), it will hurt a lot more than taking Gonzo in the third round if he puts up 2002 numbers (773 yards, 7 TDs). Taking Gonzo is reducing your risk, not increasing it. Look at the WRs available in round 7:

Mason

Deion Branch

Buress

Lelie

Round 8:

Stokely

Lee Evans

Rod Smith

Round 9:

Santana Moss

Houshmanzadeh

Keenan McCardell

Kennison

Mike Williams ®

Those are serious players. Five of them have top-10 performances to their credit; all except Lelie, Evans, and Williams have top-20 performances to their credit, and most expect good performances out of those. The idea that you can't find good value here is simply wrong.

Perhaps you could outline the scenario where choosing Gonzo over Reggie Wayne destroys your season, assuming Gonzo produces as the #1 or #2 TE.

 

[CalBear]

But if I forgo Gonzo, I get Horn and Driver/Muhammad/etc. and still get a TE who can at worst produce within 5 PPG of Gonzo.

You say that like it's a small number. 5ppg is enormous. In 2004, 5ppg is larger than the difference between McNabb and Brady/Brees. Larger than the difference between Rudi Johnson and Thomas Jones. Larger than the difference between Javon Walker and Keyshawn Johnson.I'll take the 5ppg, thanks.

 

[bagger.]

That league would have taken less time then what you've spent in this thread.

 

[bagger.]

But if I forgo Gonzo, I get Horn and Driver/Muhammad/etc. and still get a TE who can at worst produce within 5 PPG of Gonzo.

You say that like it's a small number. 5ppg is enormous. In 2004, 5ppg is larger than the difference between McNabb and Brady/Brees. Larger than the difference between Rudi Johnson and Thomas Jones. Larger than the difference between Javon Walker and Keyshawn Johnson.I'll take the 5ppg, thanks.

I never said it wasn't enormous. I said I could make that up and more by not selecting a TE in the 3rd round.Again, your error is only looking at the ramifications of VBD between two people and not conducting a draft based on drafting the best team who will give you the highest PPG production on a weekly basis.

 

[bagger.]

You are taking projections as gospel.  This is a mistake.  You need to draft as many good players as possible that get you to a certain PPG level as a group of starters throughout the year.  Who you thought was your RB1 may be your RB2 or RB3 at the end of the year.  Maybe your RB2 will miss 4 games to a minor injury so your RB3 will play 1/3 of the season as a starter.

There are so many contingencies out there that you need to look at the players that you draft as a group of interchangable parts that will give you production on some level depending on the week or matchup.

Pigeon-holing players as WR2 does not accomplish this.

I agree with your premise, but not with your conclusions. I am absolutely not taking Gonzo's projections as gospel, and certainly not Wayne's or Lelie's. But the important thing about Gonzo is that there is a lot of data about his productivity, and comparitively little about Wayne's or Lelie's. If you take Wayne in the third round and he puts up 2003 numbers (838 yards, 7 TDs), it will hurt a lot more than taking Gonzo in the third round if he puts up 2002 numbers (773 yards, 7 TDs). Taking Gonzo is reducing your risk, not increasing it. Look at the WRs available in round 7:

Mason

Deion Branch

Buress

Lelie

Round 8:

Stokely

Lee Evans

Rod Smith

Round 9:

Santana Moss

Houshmanzadeh

Keenan McCardell

Kennison

Mike Williams ®

Those are serious players. Five of them have top-10 performances to their credit; all except Lelie, Evans, and Williams have top-20 performances to their credit, and most expect good performances out of those. The idea that you can't find good value here is simply wrong.

Perhaps you could outline the scenario where choosing Gonzo over Reggie Wayne destroys your season, assuming Gonzo produces as the #1 or #2 TE.

I agree with you re: Gonzo reducing your risk from a historical perspective, but the price at the third round is too high with the alternatives you have later on in the draft.If those alternatives were not there, I would be in the camp of drafting Gonzo in the 3rd.

I never said you could not find good value in the 7th. I am sure the opportunity is there for you to do so. I think you are putting much more pressure on yourself to have a much more perfect draft by drafting Gonzo so high. The only way the "Gonzo gambit" works is by finding value late.

If you are 100% sure you can do that, go right ahead. I have never said that drafting Gonzo will ruin your season, but rather the reasoning of a pure VBD is faulty for drafting him there.

By drafting Gonzo that early, there is no room for error and you do limit your depth at other positions by doing so. If the player you pick that has value according to projections gives you that value then great.

But there are some in this thread that are taking projections as fact...not all of those projections will perform to the level you want them to.

In essence do you want to take 3 RBs and 3 WRs in the first 6 rounds or 2RBs, 3 WRs (or vice versa) and 1 TE in the first 6 rounds. You are limiting the amount of top RBs or WRs on your roster making it more imperative that your projections be exactly right along with Gonzo producing at the #1 TE level.

Not taking Gonzo gives you more leeway, both in terms of drafting better RBs/WRs or possibly even QBs earlier on and tandeming a TE combo, either one of which has the potential for top 5 status.

This is from a person who has historically taken a TE high in drafts.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I will say I agree with Bagger that taking a TE in the 3rd round puts a lot of pressure on Gonzo himself and the rest of your draft. Somewhere between 6-10 you're going to have to pull off a gem of a pick. Someone in your league is going to do it, so it could be you.I only recommend taking Gonzo/Gates in the late 3rd round if it's 2 points per reception. With that, I'll gamble and try and get that gem I talked about up above. Otherwise I'll pass on the TE in the 3rd.

 

[CalBear]

[

By drafting Gonzo that early, there is no room for error and you do limit your depth at other positions by doing so. If the player you pick that has value according to projections gives you that value then great.

Not taking Gonzo gives you more leeway, both in terms of drafting better RBs/WRs or possibly even QBs earlier on and tandeming a TE combo, either one of which has the potential for top 5 status.

I disagree that passing on Gonzo gives you more leeway, and I don't think you've provided any evidence that it does (though you keep asserting it). Knowing that you have a 50-90 point advantage on everyone else in the league provides you more leeway than having a decent but not spectacular WR1.Here are two realistic drafts from the #8 slot:

With Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Gonzo

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver

7.08: Ashley Lelie

8.05: TJ Duckett

Without Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Reggie Wayne

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver/Lee Suggs

7.08: Dallas Clark

8.05: TJ Duckett/Rod Smith

Team #1 is not pressured during the draft; the presence of Gonzo means that none of the other positions have to produce as much, and yet, the starting lineup at other positions winds up being only marginally weaker if at all (more or less, you lose Wayne and get Driver).

I think the team with Gonzo looks stronger on paper, and is more likely to succeed in a real season.

 

[BassNBrew]

[

By drafting Gonzo that early, there is no room for error and you do limit your depth at other positions by doing so.  If the player you pick that has value according to projections gives you that value then great.

Not taking Gonzo gives you more leeway, both in terms of drafting better RBs/WRs or possibly even QBs earlier on and tandeming a TE combo, either one of which has the potential for top 5 status.

I disagree that passing on Gonzo gives you more leeway, and I don't think you've provided any evidence that it does (though you keep asserting it). Knowing that you have a 50-90 point advantage on everyone else in the league provides you more leeway than having a decent but not spectacular WR1.Here are two realistic drafts from the #8 slot:

With Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Gonzo

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver

7.08: Ashley Lelie

8.05: TJ Duckett

Without Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Reggie Wayne

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver/Lee Suggs

7.08: Dallas Clark

8.05: TJ Duckett/Rod Smith

Team #1 is not pressured during the draft; the presence of Gonzo means that none of the other positions have to produce as much, and yet, the starting lineup at other positions winds up being only marginally weaker if at all (more or less, you lose Wayne and get Driver).

I think the team with Gonzo looks stronger on paper, and is more likely to succeed in a real season.

Drafting Wayne before S. Smith will put pressure on anyone to dig out of a hole.

 

[CalBear]

Drafting Wayne before S. Smith will put pressure on anyone to dig out of a hole.

Let's try not to get into player assessment here; that could go on forever. Maybe S.Smith's ADP sneaks up into the end of the third round and R.Wayne drops to the mid-fourth as the season approaches, but that's not really relevant to the point. The point is, it is entirely possible to put together a strong starting lineup at QB, WR, and RB, even if you take Gonzo in the third round. Even if you didn't go RB-RB to start, RBs available in the fourth include Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, JJ Arrington, Fred Taylor, and Warrick Dunn; in the fifth you can get Michael Bennett, Deshaun Foster, and Duce Staley. So there is still plenty of RB talent, more than enough to make up for not choosing Chris Brown in the third. I've already addressed the WR issue.I am still waiting to see this hypothetical draft where taking Gonzo in the third causes problems for the drafter; problems which are likely to cost 5 fantasy points per game.

 

[Gordon Keith]

Drafting Wayne before S. Smith will put pressure on anyone to dig out of a hole.

Let's try not to get into player assessment here; that could go on forever. Maybe S.Smith's ADP sneaks up into the end of the third round and R.Wayne drops to the mid-fourth as the season approaches, but that's not really relevant to the point. The point is, it is entirely possible to put together a strong starting lineup at QB, WR, and RB, even if you take Gonzo in the third round. Even if you didn't go RB-RB to start, RBs available in the fourth include Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, JJ Arrington, Fred Taylor, and Warrick Dunn; in the fifth you can get Michael Bennett, Deshaun Foster, and Duce Staley. So there is still plenty of RB talent, more than enough to make up for not choosing Chris Brown in the third. I've already addressed the WR issue.I am still waiting to see this hypothetical draft where taking Gonzo in the third causes problems for the drafter; problems which are likely to cost 5 fantasy points per game.

I'm inclined to agree with Cal. Although there are some very valid points on both sides, it seems that the reality of either style of drafting is you have to draft "solid" enough to hit on "some" players. I may not have near as much experience as some or most here but I know I have had some drafts that I thought I just NAILED...only to barely make the playoffs and get bounced early. I have never really went TE early because of some of the very same arguments made here....but this time...I might try it.

 

[Turbo Punch]

I don't think I've seen this point covered in this thread. Another reason that Gozalez in the 3rd makes sense and gets you the stronger overall team is that I typically only draft 1 TE. I simply don't want to waste a roster spot on a backup TE that I can get off the waiver wire. Since I only have 1 TE I only have 1 chance to make a good pick at that position, and no one is a better TE pick than Gonzalez.In a start 2 - 3 WR league or a 2WR with a flex I will draft at least 5 - 6 WRs and therefore increase my chance of finding that sleeper WR that outperforms his draft position - like Kenison and Muhammad last year.Last year a lot of drafters got great value by drafting Gates & Witten late in their drafts but that is not going to happen again this year. Simply put, getting value out of a late round TE is more difficult than a late round WR and by the simple fact that a person will draft more late round WRs than TEs you increase the probability of your overall team scoring.

 

[BassNBrew]

Drafting Wayne before S. Smith will put pressure on anyone to dig out of a hole.

Let's try not to get into player assessment here; that could go on forever. Maybe S.Smith's ADP sneaks up into the end of the third round and R.Wayne drops to the mid-fourth as the season approaches, but that's not really relevant to the point. The point is, it is entirely possible to put together a strong starting lineup at QB, WR, and RB, even if you take Gonzo in the third round. Even if you didn't go RB-RB to start, RBs available in the fourth include Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, JJ Arrington, Fred Taylor, and Warrick Dunn; in the fifth you can get Michael Bennett, Deshaun Foster, and Duce Staley. So there is still plenty of RB talent, more than enough to make up for not choosing Chris Brown in the third. I've already addressed the WR issue.I am still waiting to see this hypothetical draft where taking Gonzo in the third causes problems for the drafter; problems which are likely to cost 5 fantasy points per game.

I think my point has been made. Gonzo in the 3rd isn't a problem when you see other 3rd round talent dropping to the 4th round. I don't need to take a WR1 in round 3 when they'll be there in round 4 or 5. Player assessment isn't really mudding the waters as the entire anti-Gonzo contingent is arguing they'll get a quality TE in rd 7-8 like it's a given. If you had Heap of Shockey last year, you were digging out of a hole greater than 5 ppg.

 

[stevec]

I've been following this because I only seem to play in TE- required leagues, and I tried the sleeper TE route last year, and I'm heaving leaning towrds Gonzo if he's there late 3rd for me. In my main redraft league (12 Team TE required):2003 - Gonzo #1 60 pts over #2 Heap and 105 pts over avg starter (6&7 tied)2004 - Gonzo #1 16 pts over #2 Gates and 111 pts over avg starter (6&7 tied)Last year if you got Gates you were okay, otherwise not so good. Gonzo was 67 points ahead of #3 Witten.I think that if I can get Gonzo I need to take him - unless there's another Gates this year, and I nail that pick, I'm 4-6 or more points in the hole a week.

 

[bagger.]

Drafting Wayne before S. Smith will put pressure on anyone to dig out of a hole.

Let's try not to get into player assessment here; that could go on forever. Maybe S.Smith's ADP sneaks up into the end of the third round and R.Wayne drops to the mid-fourth as the season approaches, but that's not really relevant to the point. The point is, it is entirely possible to put together a strong starting lineup at QB, WR, and RB, even if you take Gonzo in the third round. Even if you didn't go RB-RB to start, RBs available in the fourth include Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, JJ Arrington, Fred Taylor, and Warrick Dunn; in the fifth you can get Michael Bennett, Deshaun Foster, and Duce Staley. So there is still plenty of RB talent, more than enough to make up for not choosing Chris Brown in the third. I've already addressed the WR issue.I am still waiting to see this hypothetical draft where taking Gonzo in the third causes problems for the drafter; problems which are likely to cost 5 fantasy points per game.

I'll get right on creating an entire 12 team hypothetical draft illustrating my point with sensitivities of various draft strategies of multiple drafters.

Like I said before, I am not here to change how you draft. Just refuting the "fact" that if you somehow get Gonzalez in the 3rd round you have magically just won your league via the dominant VBD he displays over other players using projections that I don't think are that good.

 

[CalBear]

Like I said before, I am not here to change how you draft. Just refuting the "fact" that if you somehow get Gonzalez in the 3rd round you have magically just won your league via the dominant VBD he displays over other players using projections that I don't think are that good.

No one is saying you'll win your league just by taking Gonzo in the third. I am saying that your team's expected production if you take Gonzo in the third is higher than if you take Andre Johnson or Reggie Wayne. You've shown nothing to disprove that.What do you think would be a reasonable projection for Gonzo? Given that his 6-year average is 986 yards and 8.3 TDs. (3-year: 982 yards, 8 TDs. 1-year, 1258 yards, 7 TDs).

 

[Mungo Burrows]

[

By drafting Gonzo that early, there is no room for error and you do limit your depth at other positions by doing so. If the player you pick that has value according to projections gives you that value then great.

Not taking Gonzo gives you more leeway, both in terms of drafting better RBs/WRs or possibly even QBs earlier on and tandeming a TE combo, either one of which has the potential for top 5 status.

I disagree that passing on Gonzo gives you more leeway, and I don't think you've provided any evidence that it does (though you keep asserting it). Knowing that you have a 50-90 point advantage on everyone else in the league provides you more leeway than having a decent but not spectacular WR1.Here are two realistic drafts from the #8 slot:

With Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Gonzo

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver

7.08: Ashley Lelie

8.05: TJ Duckett

Without Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Reggie Wayne

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver/Lee Suggs

7.08: Dallas Clark

8.05: TJ Duckett/Rod Smith

Team #1 is not pressured during the draft; the presence of Gonzo means that none of the other positions have to produce as much, and yet, the starting lineup at other positions winds up being only marginally weaker if at all (more or less, you lose Wayne and get Driver).

I think the team with Gonzo looks stronger on paper, and is more likely to succeed in a real season.

To me, this sample draft highlights the risk of taking Gonzo in the 3rd and the cumulative value you lose in those intervening rounds. A lot of it goes back to what Yudkin was saying: I would not feel good about my draft with TJ Duckett as my #3 rb. By taking Gonzo, you have pushed back your WR1 a round. You get your QB in the same spot because that's where the end of the value tier is, You then scramble to get a WR2, pushing your RB3 farther back. Personally I'm not sure I like Lee Suggs as my #3 either, but that's probably a matter of projections and strategy. I think the most telling fact is that that you list OPTIONS at some of those picks when you don't draft Gonzo, but if you draft him, you are more likely locked into a certain strategy because you are scrambling to fill other positions that have been pushed back a round or two by selelcting the early TE. By not taking Gonzo, you really have an option of taking an RB3 in round 4 when some pretty decent upside guys are still available. If you took gonzo in the 3rd and RB3 in the 4th, you wouldn't get your WR1 until round 6 - a significant risk unless you have a reasonable expectation that your leaguemates to let value slip though.

 

[CalBear]

To me, this sample draft highlights the risk of taking Gonzo in the 3rd and the cumulative value you lose in those intervening rounds. A lot of it goes back to what Yudkin was saying: I would not feel good about my draft with TJ Duckett as my #3 rb. By taking Gonzo, you have pushed back your WR1 a round. You get your QB in the same spot because that's where the end of the value tier is, You then scramble to get a WR2, pushing your RB3 farther back. Personally I'm not sure I like Lee Suggs as my #3 either, but that's probably a matter of projections and strategy. I think the most telling fact is that that you list OPTIONS at some of those picks when you don't draft Gonzo, but if you draft him, you are more likely locked into a certain strategy because you are scrambling to fill other positions that have been pushed back a round or two by selelcting the early TE. By not taking Gonzo, you really have an option of taking an RB3 in round 4 when some pretty decent upside guys are still available. If you took gonzo in the 3rd and RB3 in the 4th, you wouldn't get your WR1 until round 6 - a significant risk unless you have a reasonable expectation that your leaguemates to let value slip though.

I wouldn't feel great about having TJ Duckett as my #3 RB, either, but I am pretty sure it wouldn't cost me 50 to 90 points over the course of the season. I don't view Driver as a "scramble" at WR2; Driver could easily put up WR1 numbers. If you don't like him as much, you could take Suggs at that point and a WR like Santana Moss later.There is no doubt that your draft will be different if you take Gonzo in the third. But I think the problem people are having is that they edit the TE position out of their perceptions when valuing a team. A team with somewhat weaker starting WRs and backup RBs may look weaker if you discount TE production, but with Gonzo, you can't do that. The difference between the two teams is that the Gonzo team has Driver at WR instead of Wayne, and TJ Duckett at RB3 instead of Lee Suggs, and the non-Gonzo team has Dallas Clark.

Will Wayne and Suggs score 50 points more, in your starting lineup, than Driver and Duckett? It seems quite unlikely.

 

[David Yudkin]

IMO, there are two issues here that are being melded into one.The first one is "contingency planning" on when to take a RB3 and who it might be. The second is more a value approach to drafting.Unfortunately, we do not have the foresight to know what will happen by the end of the season, who will stay healthy, and who will bomb or be productive.As I mentioned earlier, the RB3 issue is really driven by position scarcity--there are not enough RB to go around. Later in the draft, there will still be viable fantasy starters at all other positions. There are a ton of QB, WR, and TE that you COULD play and draft later on that will not kill your team.IF (and this is a big IF), you are in a position in the third round to get a full time RB starter in a situation to put up RB2 numbers (or even RB1 numbers), that player should merit consideration in my book. To be clear, that means a bonafide player that comes from a run-centric team that has shown to have good results. So no, Kevan Barlow is not an option here.As I see it, that will leave the following for options in the 3rd:McNabbMaybe CJ or HoltMaybe 1 or 2 RB actually WORTH draftingGonzo and GatesIf you want to save your RBs for a rainy day, you go RB. if you want to draft for value, you pick whichever other guy you think will have the most value. If you have Johnson at 250 fantasy points this year, he might be the pick. If you have McNabb repeating last year's performance and playing in more games, then he could be the one. If you see a RB that somehow no one else grabbed and you get warm and fuzzy over, he could be the right pick for your strategy.As long as you walk away with ONE of those options in the third, you should be ok, but reaching for players or taking guys on the wrong side of the scoring tiers will hurt you more than which position you decide to go with.

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

12 teamer.

I take Gonzo, any time after 3.6...Gates only after 4.6 (won't happen). If I'm drafting in the first six slots, this conversation is moot.

So, if I am drafting after 3.6, that all but locks up RB/RB, for me...then Gonzo, if available in the 3rd. And probably WR/RB/WR.

If it ain't Gonzo in the latter half of the 3rd, I'll be more than happy with E. Johnson, Jeb Putzier, or Jermaine Wiggins late.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

IMO, there are two issues here that are being melded into one.

The first one is "contingency planning" on when to take a RB3 and who it might be. The second is more a value approach to drafting.

Actually I think a third issue is at work here, which is the presumed reliability (i.e., relatively low risk) of Tony Gonzalez. Probably no person with a "value" rating so high is considered to be more of a lock to live up to that value than him. I think most people in here are much more confident that Gonzo will be 50 points better than the #6 tight end than they think Javon Walker, etc. will be 50 points better than WR25-30. I think this perceived low risk is factoring into the discussion as well.

 

[Cool in the pocket]

Here is an actual Antsports draft that I am currently in. I drew the 9th spot out of 10 with HP scoring and a Starting lineup of 1 QB 2 RB 2 WR 1 TE 1 PK 1 DT.

I don't pretend to be a great drafter and surely made mistakes plus I am not sure about the quality of the other drafters, but there aren't many picks that look to be ridiculous. I can guarantee that almost everyone would have done something different, but my question is given how this draft is shaking out, would the team I currently drafted be hopeless because I took Tony G in the 3rd? Were there any other choices besides Tony G in the 3rd?

1.01 Tomlinson, LaDainian RB

1.02 Alexander, Shaun RB

1.03 Holmes, Priest RB

1.04 Manning, Peyton QB

1.05 McGahee, Willis RB

1.06 James, Edgerrin RB

1.07 Lewis, Jamal RB

1.08 Jones, Julius RB

1.09 McAllister, Deuce RB

1.10 Jones, Kevin RB

2.01 Culpepper, Daunte QB

2.02 Moss, Randy WR

2.03 Davis, Domanick RB

2.04 Johnson, Rudi RB

2.05 Portis, Clinton RB

2.06 McNabb, Donovan QB

2.07 Dillon, Corey RB

2.08 Green, Ahman RB

2.09 Westbrook, Brian RB

2.10 Owens, Terrell WR

3.01 Harrison, Marvin WR

3.02 Barber, Tiki RB

3.03 Martin, Curtis RB

3.04 Bell, Tatum RB

3.05 Holt, Torry WR

3.06 Johnson, Chad WR

3.07 Jordan, LaMont RB

3.08 Walker, Javon WR

3.09 Gonzalez, Tony STL

3.10 Jackson, Steven RB

4.01 Gates, Antonio TE

4.02 Wayne, Reggie WR

4.03 Horn, Joe WR

4.04 Johnson, Andre WR

4.05 Brown, Chris RB

4.06 Burleson, Nate WR

4.07 Jackson, Darrell WR

4.08 Ward, Hines WR

4.09 Brown, Ronnie RB

4.10 Williams, Carnell RB

5.01 Green, Trent QB

5.02 Smith, Steve WR

5.03 Clayton, Michael WR

5.04 Williams, Roy WR

5.05 Bennett, Michael RB

5.06 Vick, Michael QB

5.07 Porter, Jerry WR

5.08 Arrington, J.J. RB

5.09 Staley, Duce RB

5.10 Benson, Cedric RB

6.01 Boldin, Anquan WR

6.02 Dunn, Warrick RB

6.03 Witten, Jason TE

6.04 Fitzgerald, Larry WR

6.05 Bennett, Drew WR

6.06 Foster, DeShaun RB

6.07 Suggs, Lee RB

6.08 Bulger, Marc QB

6.09 Coles, Laveranues WR

6.10 Heap, Todd TE

7.01 Ravens, Baltimore DT

7.02 Crumpler, Alge TE

7.03 Johnson, Larry RB

7.04 Bruce, Isaac WR

7.05 Hasselbeck, Matt QB

7.06 Shockey, Jeremy TE

7.07 Patriots, New England DT

7.08 Favre, Brett QB

7.09 Collins, Kerry QB

7.10 Driver, Donald WR

8.01 Faulk, Marshall RB

8.02 Brooks, Aaron QB

8.03 Henry, Travis RB

8.04 Brady, Tom QB

8.05 Smith, Jimmy WR

8.06 Stokley, Brandon WR

8.07 Taylor, Fred RB

8.08 Palmer, Carson QB

8.09 Chambers, Chris WR

8.10 Mason, Derrick WR

9.01 Barlow, Kevan RB

9.02 Plummer, Jake QB

9.03 Droughns, Reuben RB

9.04 McMichael, Randy TE

9.05 Evans, Lee WR

9.06 Muhammad, Muhsin WR

9.07 Clark, Dallas TE

9.08 Lelie, Ashley WR

9.09 Bettis, Jerome RB

9.10 Bills, Buffalo DT

10.01 Delhomme, Jake QB

10.02 Smith, Rod WR

10.03 Duckett, T.J. RB

10.04 McCardell, Keenan WR

 

[stevec]

Actually I think a third issue is at work here, which is the presumed reliability (i.e., relatively low risk) of Tony Gonzalez. Probably no person with a "value" rating so high is considered to be more of a lock to live up to that value than him. I think most people in here are much more confident that Gonzo will be 50 points better than the #6 tight end than they think Javon Walker, etc. will be 50 points better than WR25-30. I think this perceived low risk is factoring into the discussion as well.

I definitely agree that Gonzo is one of the least risky bets in a TE-required league, and that many see it the same way.Who else is considered as safe a play at their position to be 4 or so pts per game better than average starter?Manning - yupCulpepper - maybe even without MossHolt/Moss/Owens/Harrsion over all WR slots likely, over WR 1 improbableTomlinson - over both RB slots-yup, over RB1, prolly as he's done it 2 yrs running but no other RB has except...Holmes - has done it ppg while healthySo the list of guys who can give you a big edge in PPG over half the league or more as starters that you will be confident that they will perform that well is quite short.

 

[-OZ-]

Actually I think a third issue is at work here, which is the presumed reliability (i.e., relatively low risk) of Tony Gonzalez. Probably no person with a "value" rating so high is considered to be more of a lock to live up to that value than him.  I think most people in here are much more confident that Gonzo will be 50 points better than the #6 tight end than they think Javon Walker, etc. will be 50 points better than WR25-30.  I think this perceived low risk is factoring into the discussion as well.

I definitely agree that Gonzo is one of the least risky bets in a TE-required league, and that many see it the same way.Who else is considered as safe a play at their position to be 4 or so pts per game better than average starter?

Manning - yup

Culpepper - maybe even without Moss

Holt/Moss/Owens/Harrsion over all WR slots likely, over WR 1 improbable

Tomlinson - over both RB slots-yup, over RB1, prolly as he's done it 2 yrs running but no other RB has except...

Holmes - has done it ppg while healthy

So the list of guys who can give you a big edge in PPG over half the league or more as starters that you will be confident that they will perform that well is quite short.

Every one of those players mentioned will be gone before Gonzo. If you start out with LT, Moss and Gonzo, while you'll need a couple sleeper RBs to perform, your top 3 will perform, setting you ahead of most other teams who are basically hoping for the best.

 

[Keith R]

I think that there are too many quality TEs around to spend a 3rd round pick on one. It is not like after Gates, there is nobody. Crumpler, Heap, Witten, Shockey, etc. Now if this was the 4th round and you already had RB/RB/QB or RB/RB/WR, I think it would definitely be worth it. Perhaps unlikely but not impossible for Gonzo or Gates to be there.

 

[Snotbubbles]

There are more quality starting QBs and WRs than TEs.

 

[-OZ-]

I think that there are too many quality TEs around to spend a 3rd round pick on one. It is not like after Gates, there is nobody. Crumpler, Heap, Witten, Shockey, etc.

Now if this was the 4th round and you already had RB/RB/QB or RB/RB/WR, I think it would definitely be worth it. Perhaps unlikely but not impossible for Gonzo or Gates to be there.

In a 12 teamer, yes they could be. FWIW, I took Gonzo in the 2nd recently. Now, this is a 20 team league, and it was the 39th pick, so in 12 teamers, that's the 4.03. I wonder what people would say about that pick.

 

[bagger.]

Here is an actual Antsports draft that I am currently in. I drew the 9th spot out of 10 with HP scoring and a Starting lineup of 1 QB 2 RB 2 WR 1 TE 1 PK 1 DT.

I don't pretend to be a great drafter and surely made mistakes plus I am not sure about the quality of the other drafters, but there aren't many picks that look to be ridiculous. I can guarantee that almost everyone would have done something different, but my question is given how this draft is shaking out, would the team I currently drafted be hopeless because I took Tony G in the 3rd? Were there any other choices besides Tony G in the 3rd?

Your receiving corps is extremely weak and you have a bunch of RBs who wll split time via RBBC and will not produce solid PPG #s for you.I'm not saying it is hopeless, but that Wayne has to produce equal to what he did last year (not sold on that) and even Moss (who I have as the #1 WR) is unknown coming into Oakland.

You wasted more picks trying to make up for your RB deficiency that you could have filled with WRs, especially if you are in a start 3 format.

I really like the back to back QB in the 7th and 8th, however, and that is something I will likely do if given the chance this year.

 

[bagger.]

There are more quality starting QBs and WRs than TEs.

This statement is pretty much useless without a discussion of when you can draft those positions.I agree with the QB aspect of your statement as top 10 QBs routinely are available in the 8th round. WRs...not so much. I looked into this this past offseason and you want 3 WRs in the top 30 or so to get you to a consistently winning team.

You can get a top 5 TE after you fulfill both of these needs.

 

[CalBear]

There are more quality starting QBs and WRs than TEs.

This statement is pretty much useless without a discussion of when you can draft those positions.I agree with the QB aspect of your statement as top 10 QBs routinely are available in the 8th round. WRs...not so much. I looked into this this past offseason and you want 3 WRs in the top 30 or so to get you to a consistently winning team.

You can get a top 5 TE after you fulfill both of these needs.

You know, it's really hard to argue with assertions. If you have research to show, please provide it. Plenty of people have provided research and numbers which show that teams with Gonzo score more points, more reliably.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Your receiving corps is extremely weak and you have a bunch of RBs who wll split time via RBBC and will not produce solid PPG #s for you.I'm not saying it is hopeless, but that Wayne has to produce equal to what he did last year (not sold on that) and even Moss (who I have as the #1 WR) is unknown coming into Oakland.

It's probably useless to continue the TE discussion with you when you say that a guys WR corps is EXTREMELY weak in a start 2 WR, 1 TE when the guy has Randy Moss, Reggie Wayne and Tony Gonzalez. Then another factor you have to consider is in rd 3 the available QB is probably McNabb. He falls under the same questions as Wayne...he has to produce to at least equal what he did last year (not sold on that). He threw for 3800+ yds and 31 TDs in essentially 14 games. Previous to last season his average was 3025 yards and 20 TDs. I would be just as equally worried about McNabb regressing to his norm.The RBs available then Stephen Jackson, Chris Brown, and the rookies. These are some of the biggest question marks. But they too have to perform, or you wasted your 3d pick. Chris Brown has yet to play 12 games. Stephen Jackson is in a RBBC with Faulk, and he couldn't stay healthy in part-time duty last year. The biggest question marks are the rookies, you just don't know what they will give you. Where that guy was drafting the only consistent production he could rely on was Gonzo.

 

[ko-jack]

I will say I agree with Bagger that taking a TE in the  3rd round puts a lot of pressure on Gonzo himself and the rest of your draft. Somewhere between 6-10 you're going to have to pull off a gem of a pick.  Someone in your league is going to do it, so it could be you.

I only recommend taking Gonzo/Gates in the late 3rd round if it's 2 points per reception. With that, I'll gamble and try and get that gem I talked about up above. Otherwise I'll pass on the TE in the 3rd.

2 pts per reception? using the FBGs vbd app, if its 2 pts per catch for all players, gonzo is the 16th best value, 2pts just for tes, he is the 4th best value

the 16th/4th best value in the late 3rd rd? thats your recommendation? do you recommend manning 10th overall in leagues that award 50 points per pass td?

 

[ko-jack]

Here is an actual Antsports draft that I am currently in. I drew the 9th spot out of 10 with HP scoring and a Starting lineup of 1 QB 2 RB 2 WR 1 TE 1 PK 1 DT.

I don't pretend to be a great drafter and surely made mistakes plus I am not sure about the quality of the other drafters, but there aren't many picks that look to be ridiculous. I can guarantee that almost everyone would have done something different, but my question is given how this draft is shaking out, would the team I currently drafted be hopeless because I took Tony G in the 3rd? Were there any other choices besides Tony G in the 3rd?

i would be very happy with that draft. good options at qb, an anchor at rb1, 1 studwr, 1 very good wr, a great value at te, and options at the #2 rb.

 

[Cool in the pocket]

Your receiving corps is extremely weak and you have a bunch of RBs who wll split time via RBBC and will not produce solid PPG #s for you.

I'm not saying it is hopeless, but that Wayne has to produce equal to what he did last year (not sold on that) and even Moss (who I have as the #1 WR) is unknown coming into Oakland.

It's probably useless to continue the TE discussion with you when you say that a guys WR corps is EXTREMELY weak in a start 2 WR, 1 TE when the guy has Randy Moss, Reggie Wayne and Tony Gonzalez. Then another factor you have to consider is in rd 3 the available QB is probably McNabb. He falls under the same questions as Wayne...he has to produce to at least equal what he did last year (not sold on that). He threw for 3800+ yds and 31 TDs in essentially 14 games. Previous to last season his average was 3025 yards and 20 TDs. I would be just as equally worried about McNabb regressing to his norm.

The RBs available then Stephen Jackson, Chris Brown, and the rookies. These are some of the biggest question marks. But they too have to perform, or you wasted your 3d pick. Chris Brown has yet to play 12 games. Stephen Jackson is in a RBBC with Faulk, and he couldn't stay healthy in part-time duty last year. The biggest question marks are the rookies, you just don't know what they will give you.

Where that guy was drafting the only consistent production he could rely on was Gonzo.

Try not to think about the actual players I could have chosen because everyone will differ there, but at the 3.9 spot, who was the best choice available? IMHO, this draft will not be unlike those who draw 8/9/10 slot will be facing in the third. Yudkin says you need to come out of the 3rd round with McNabb/CJ/Holt... and I agree with him. Had CJ been there, I would have taken him.With a start 3 WR, I would agree that my WR corp would be weak, but with a start 2, I can't agree that Wayne and Moss would be a weak WR tandem plus having arguably the best TE.

 

[Cool in the pocket]

IMHO, Gonzo is the only real justifiable pick here, everyone else has questions and the value just isn't there. Consensus seems to be that WR depth is strong this year, so it is a mistake reaching for anyone out side of CJ, Moss, TO and MH up till the 3rd round. In fact, I would suggest that I reached for Wayne at 4.02, but there wasn't any RB's available that were worth that slot IMHO. I believe this is a decision that many in the last couple of slots will face this year unless someone slips in the draft.

 

[Native]

[

By drafting Gonzo that early, there is no room for error and you do limit your depth at other positions by doing so.  If the player you pick that has value according to projections gives you that value then great.

Not taking Gonzo gives you more leeway, both in terms of drafting better RBs/WRs or possibly even QBs earlier on and tandeming a TE combo, either one of which has the potential for top 5 status.

I disagree that passing on Gonzo gives you more leeway, and I don't think you've provided any evidence that it does (though you keep asserting it). Knowing that you have a 50-90 point advantage on everyone else in the league provides you more leeway than having a decent but not spectacular WR1.Here are two realistic drafts from the #8 slot:

With Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Gonzo

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver

7.08: Ashley Lelie

8.05: TJ Duckett

Without Gonzo:

1.08: D.Davis

2.05: R.Johnson

3.08: Reggie Wayne

4.05: Steve Smith

5.08: Marc Bulger

6.05: Donald Driver/Lee Suggs

7.08: Dallas Clark

8.05: TJ Duckett/Rod Smith

Team #1 is not pressured during the draft; the presence of Gonzo means that none of the other positions have to produce as much, and yet, the starting lineup at other positions winds up being only marginally weaker if at all (more or less, you lose Wayne and get Driver).

I think the team with Gonzo looks stronger on paper, and is more likely to succeed in a real season.

To me, this sample draft highlights the risk of taking Gonzo in the 3rd and the cumulative value you lose in those intervening rounds. A lot of it goes back to what Yudkin was saying: I would not feel good about my draft with TJ Duckett as my #3 rb. By taking Gonzo, you have pushed back your WR1 a round. You get your QB in the same spot because that's where the end of the value tier is, You then scramble to get a WR2, pushing your RB3 farther back. Personally I'm not sure I like Lee Suggs as my #3 either, but that's probably a matter of projections and strategy. I think the most telling fact is that that you list OPTIONS at some of those picks when you don't draft Gonzo, but if you draft him, you are more likely locked into a certain strategy because you are scrambling to fill other positions that have been pushed back a round or two by selelcting the early TE. By not taking Gonzo, you really have an option of taking an RB3 in round 4 when some pretty decent upside guys are still available. If you took gonzo in the 3rd and RB3 in the 4th, you wouldn't get your WR1 until round 6 - a significant risk unless you have a reasonable expectation that your leaguemates to let value slip though.

This is an excellent point, and something worth considering when your team is on the clock. Still, to counter your argument, the question now becomes: what are your feelings about the players you suddenly need to "reach for" in later rounds to justify the early round TE selecion? If you go RB/WR in the first two rounds, and select Gonzo in the third, you will need to choose from a group of second-tier RB's in the 4th (Brown, Caddy, Benson, Arrington, Dunn, Taylor, Staley etc). Do you think any of these guys are undervalued and can perform like a solid #2 RB? If yes, then the decision to draft a TE in the third becomes a no-brainer - since you can outscore your opponents at TE while still finding comparable performance at RB later in the draft. However, if youre not sold on the second tier RB's, then taking a TE early is much more risky. The same thing holds true with WR's.

Ultimately, the question of "TE early" should come down to your perceived depth at other th other "non-drafted" positions in a given year. If you think the talent level in the mid-rounds at a given poisition is high, then taking Gonzo early is a great move.

Personally, I think this year there is TREMENDOUS depth at RB, especially with the rookie RB's, making a play for an early-round TE much more plausible.

 

[David Yudkin]

Personally, I think this year there is TREMENDOUS depth at RB, especially with the rookie RB's, making a play for an early-round TE much more plausible.

This line of thinking, IMO, is something that many people like to utilize but do not fully understand the complications in making such an argument.There is a finite amount of offense to be had in any given NFL season. For the most part, yardage and scoring totals do night rise and fall that dramatically from year to year.Last year, as an example, everyone has been describing offense as a whole as "way up" with the so-called "rules enforcement."Here's the impact on the league numbers from 2003 to 2004 . . .2003318.3 total yards per game per team20.3 ppg per team2004327.2 total yards per game per team21.5 ppg per teamSo this offensive explosion amounted to an increase of just 9 yards and 1.2 points scored per game per team.So what am I trying to say? EVERY year looks loaded at RB, but usually there will be players that don't stack up production wise. For argument's sake, let's say there really ARE 25 top RB this year that all put up bonafide, legit numbers.What that tells me is that PASSING numbers would have to be down to make up for the infusion in rushing totals. This actually happend in 2002, where there were many more high scoring RBs than usual. If you look at WR scoring though, there were few stud WR.So if there ARE a ton of good RBs, that dilutes the RB pool value wise, which would play into the argument to take Gonzalez early. (RB scoring up = TE scoring down = more value for Tony G.).The converse is also true--if passing numbers are up (circa 2004), then rushing totals would be reduced (which is what happened last year).So you really need to come to your own conclusions as to if the league as a whole will be doing more running or passing. IMO, I suspect we see passing numbers dip some this year and rushing totals climb some, as they usually tend to revert back more than expand outward from year to year.

 

[CalBear]

On the RB side, the question is whether Chris Brown (the only RB being taken in the last half of the third round) is worth significantly more than RBs available in the fourth round, like Ronnie Brown, JJ Arrington, Carnell Williams, Cedric Benson, Fred Taylor. I don't see it; he might be big, but he has a lot of questions around him from an injury perspective. I'd be just as comfortable with any of the rookies except Ronnie Brown, and Chris Brown's injury risk isn't any lower than Fred Taylor's.

 

[David Yudkin]

On the RB side, the question is whether Chris Brown (the only RB being taken in the last half of the third round) is worth significantly more than RBs available in the fourth round, like Ronnie Brown, JJ Arrington, Carnell Williams, Cedric Benson, Fred Taylor. I don't see it; he might be big, but he has a lot of questions around him from an injury perspective. I'd be just as comfortable with any of the rookies except Ronnie Brown, and Chris Brown's injury risk isn't any lower than Fred Taylor's.

My question is for those with EARLY third round picks . . . RBs aside, is it worth taking Gonzalez over a Holt/Johnson/Harrison/McNabb from a value perspective? I have seen a couple of those WR fall into the third round, as Moss/Owens/Walker have gone before them.

 

[bagger.]

Your receiving corps is extremely weak and you have a bunch of RBs who wll split time via RBBC and will not produce solid PPG #s for you.

I'm not saying it is hopeless, but that Wayne has to produce equal to what he did last year (not sold on that) and even Moss (who I have as the #1 WR) is unknown coming into Oakland.

It's probably useless to continue the TE discussion with you when you say that a guys WR corps is EXTREMELY weak in a start 2 WR, 1 TE when the guy has Randy Moss, Reggie Wayne and Tony Gonzalez. Then another factor you have to consider is in rd 3 the available QB is probably McNabb. He falls under the same questions as Wayne...he has to produce to at least equal what he did last year (not sold on that). He threw for 3800+ yds and 31 TDs in essentially 14 games. Previous to last season his average was 3025 yards and 20 TDs. I would be just as equally worried about McNabb regressing to his norm.

The RBs available then Stephen Jackson, Chris Brown, and the rookies. These are some of the biggest question marks. But they too have to perform, or you wasted your 3d pick. Chris Brown has yet to play 12 games. Stephen Jackson is in a RBBC with Faulk, and he couldn't stay healthy in part-time duty last year. The biggest question marks are the rookies, you just don't know what they will give you.

Where that guy was drafting the only consistent production he could rely on was Gonzo.

I agree it is useless to continue a discussion when you don't understand that he only has two WRs through the first 9 rounds. That means that one of his every week starters will be drafted in the 10th round or later, will have to start two WRs drafted in the 10th round or later on two other occasions for bye week fill ins, and God forbid if Moss and/or Wayne don't produce then your entire WR corps is a dud week in and week out.Like I said before, his draft through drafting a TE that early has forced him to press at the RB position in multiple rounds and caused him to drop drafting an everyday starter at WR until at least the 10th round. That erodes more than 5 PPG right there.

There are bigger concepts at work here than VBD.

And while you may think the only options available here are rookie RBs (a notion I find laughable as all the rookie RBs except for Arrington, who can be had in the late 4th, are extremely overrated) there are a lot of other options.

I have no desire to change the way you think or draft. However, I am here to give another side to drafting that encompasses a bigger picture than an individualistic approach to drafting.

It is because that I have drafted Gonzo in the 3rd round in prior years that I have come to realize the fundamental flaws with this strategy. You can either choose to learn from someone with experience, or keep your head in the sand and continue to draft off some static value baseline that does not take into consideration your starting team PPG.

 

[CalBear]

I have no desire to change the way you think or draft. However, I am here to give another side to drafting that encompasses a bigger picture than an individualistic approach to drafting.

It is because that I have drafted Gonzo in the 3rd round in prior years that I have come to realize the fundamental flaws with this strategy. You can either choose to learn from someone with experience, or keep your head in the sand and continue to draft off some static value baseline that does not take into consideration your starting team PPG.

Well, O Experienced And Masterly One, why don't you tell us something about what happened when you drafted Gonzo in the third, to help enlighten we plebes? You haven't done anything to give another side; you've just asserted that all the people who've provided real-world scenarios are wrong.

 

[Snotbubbles]

So this offensive explosion amounted to an increase of just 9 yards and 1.2 points scored per game per team.

9 yds X 32 teams X 16 games = 4608 more yards1.2 pts X 32 teams X 16 games = 614 more pointsIs that all the increase was?

I agree it is useless to continue a discussion when you don't understand that he only has two WRs through the first 9 rounds. That means that one of his every week starters will be drafted in the 10th round or later, will have to start two WRs drafted in the 10th round or later on two other occasions for bye week fill ins, and God forbid if Moss and/or Wayne don't produce then your entire WR corps is a dud week in and week out.

This particular draft he went Kerry Collins/Aaron Brooks back to back. He passed up on likes of Donald Driver, Jimmy Smith, Derrick Mason, Chris Chamber. Why? Who knows, that was the drafter preference. The point being, there is enough talent at WR even in round 7 and 8 should you chose to wait. Whether you select those players is your preference. Looking at the draft I would have probably went WR in round 7 because the button guy already had Culpepper. I'd feel pretty confident that the QB I had ranked the highest would be there when I picked again. In fact by the time that person had taken Collins 8 teams already had QBs so it probably would have made more sense to wait until the 8th to take his QB1 then in the 10th go QB2 which appears to be Jake Delhomme. But like I said, it wasn't this drafters preference. It had nothing to do with lack of available talent at any position in the 7th or 8th.

 

[bagger.]

So this offensive explosion amounted to an increase of just 9 yards and 1.2 points scored per game per team.

9 yds X 32 teams X 16 games = 4608 more yards1.2 pts X 32 teams X 16 games = 614 more points

Is that all the increase was?

I agree it is useless to continue a discussion when you don't understand that he only has two WRs through the first 9 rounds. That means that one of his every week starters will be drafted in the 10th round or later, will have to start two WRs drafted in the 10th round or later on two other occasions for bye week fill ins, and God forbid if Moss and/or Wayne don't produce then your entire WR corps is a dud week in and week out.

This particular draft he went Kerry Collins/Aaron Brooks back to back. He passed up on likes of Donald Driver, Jimmy Smith, Derrick Mason, Chris Chamber. Why? Who knows, that was the drafter preference. The point being, there is enough talent at WR even in round 7 and 8 should you chose to wait. Whether you select those players is your preference. Looking at the draft I would have probably went WR in round 7 because the button guy already had Culpepper. I'd feel pretty confident that the QB I had ranked the highest would be there when I picked again. In fact by the time that person had taken Collins 8 teams already had QBs so it probably would have made more sense to wait until the 8th to take his QB1 then in the 10th go QB2 which appears to be Jake Delhomme. But like I said, it wasn't this drafters preference. It had nothing to do with lack of available talent at any position in the 7th or 8th.

If you don't go back to back QB there (something I like) your depth at QB is severely limited. He now has 2 QBs that will give him consistent point production week in and week out throughout the season, and has hedged the risk of one of them getting hurt.I agree that your alternative scenario was a viable option, and I understand that there are solid WRs in the 7th and 8th rounds. I just think that drafting a TE early forces your hand to get one of those, something that is not always a guarantee.

 

[David Yudkin]

9 yds X 32 teams X 16 games = 4608 more yards1.2 pts X 32 teams X 16 games = 614 more pointsIs that all the increase was?

My math must have been wrong or what I posted was incorrect.. Yardage was up 2% and scoring 6%.The actual yardage difference was 2,836 yards (up 88 yards per team on the season). Essentially allocating almost all of that yardage by expanding the RB depth pool leaves almost nothing for all other positions.If we said that there would be 25 rushers with 1,000+ yards, that would far exceed the total yardage variation from year to year.For example, in looking at the Player Spotlights and projection threads, many people have 15 or so RBs going over 1,300 rushing yards. Last year there were 8. Some people have close to 25 RB with over 1,000 yards rushing this year. Last year there were 18. When you add up all that additional projected yardage, it is nearly impossible for that to happen--the cumulative league rushing total would be way out of whack compared to other seasons.Total scoring was up 395 points (or 12 points per team over the course of the season). I can't tell you how many RB are getting projected to have 10 TD this year--almost every starting RB seems to get that in their projections. Even the guys in the RB20s are getting pegged for 10+ TD. Last year there were 12 with that many.All I'm saying is that the volume of production that people suggest will happen will never happen, as there will not be 25 guys with 1,300 rushing yards and 10 TD.

 

[suspected]

Good luck getting a top WR or QB in the 3rd in a 12 team redraft start 2 WR, 1 TE required, 1QB, no flex leaque. Look at recent antsports ADPs. Moss, TO, Harrison, Holt and Johnson are all gone by the end of the second. McNabb is going 3.2. Let's assume you went RB/RB in the first 2 rounds. Who are you going to take at 3.03 and later in the third? Certainly not a QB. I think all the WRs are a reach at this point. Once you get beyond the top WRs the next tier is quite unpredictable IMO. Perhaps others feel differently and would select a WR. Just remember history has shown there is a good chance you'll be disappointed. Last year 7 of the top 14 WRs were drafted in round 8 or later. Last year the only receivers drafted in the first 4 rounds that actually finished in the top 14 were Moss, TO, Holt, Johnson, and Harrison. Doing this same analysis for previous years (compare preseason ADP to actual EOY rankings) I've found predicting WR performance after the studs have been drafted has been very difficult for most drafters. There have been quite a few third round WR underachievers. Now look at Gonzalez and compare his variance (risk) to your alternatives. You're getting outstanding performance at low risk. Yes you have to be somewhat "lucky" when selecting your WRs later, but history has shown once the WR studs are gone, you're going to need luck anyway when drafting WR. Give me Gonzo and I'll take my chances at WR later rather than reaching in the 3rd. Look at ADP and see what the alternatives will be for the rest of your team in rounds 4 and later. I'd rather take Gonzo and the consequences of filling the rest of my team a round later.Note: Perhaps I might consider drafting a 3rd RB in round 3, but at this point it would not make sense to go WR or QB. Last month's antsports ADP:1. LaDainian Tomlinson 2. Shaun Alexander 3. Priest Holmes 4. Edgerrin James 5. Peyton Manning 6. Willis McGahee 7. Deuce McAllister 8. Clinton Portis 9. Randy Moss 10. Domanick Davis 11. Corey Dillon 12. Jamal Lewis 13. Ahman Green 14. Kevin Jones 15. Terrell Owens 16. Tiki Barber 17. Julius Jones 18. Daunte Culpepper 19. Rudi Johnson 20. Marvin Harrison 21. Steven Jackson 22. Torry Holt 23. Chad Johnson 24. Curtis Martin 25. Brian Westbrook 26. Donovan McNabb 27. LaMont Jordan 28. Tatum Bell 29. Javon Walker 30. Andre Johnson 31. Joe Horn 32. Antonio Gates 33. Tony Gonzalez 34. Ronnie Brown 35. Chris Brown 36. Reggie Wayne 37. Hines Ward 38. Fred Taylor 39. Cedric Benson 40. Darrell Jackson 41. Steve Smith 42. Carnell Williams 43. Nate Burleson 44. Roy Williams 45. Michael Vick 46. J.J. Arrington 47. Michael Clayton 48. DeShaun Foster 49. Warrick Dunn 50. Duce Staley 51. Jerry Porter 52. Drew Bennett 53. Marc Bulger 54. Trent Green 55. Michael Bennett 56. Jason Witten 57. Laveranues Coles 58. Alge Crumpler 59. Todd Heap 60. Matt Hasselbeck

 

[Snotbubbles]

This is all I'm saying.Gonzo's scored 168 fantasy points would have finished the 2004 season as the #11 WR. He only scored 17 total points less than Chad Johnson.Jason Witten scored 134 fantasy points and would have finished as the #27 WR.Randy McMichael scored 100 fantasy points and would have finished as the #41 WR.WR rankings 2004:17 Mason,Derrick (6.12)18 Kennison,Eddie (9.11)21 Smith,Jimmy (6.03)23 Lelie,Ashley (7.09)24 Evans,Lee (8.02)25 Chambers,Chris (7.01)All of these guys are bargains compared to Witten (ADP: 5.10) or McMichael (ADP: 7.11).

 

[bagger.]

I have no desire to change the way you think or draft.  However, I am here to give another side to drafting that encompasses a bigger picture than an individualistic approach to drafting.

It is because that I have drafted Gonzo in the 3rd round in prior years that I have come to realize the fundamental flaws with this strategy.  You can either choose to learn from someone with experience, or keep your head in the sand and continue to draft off some static value baseline that does not take into consideration your starting team PPG.

Well, O Experienced And Masterly One, why don't you tell us something about what happened when you drafted Gonzo in the third, to help enlighten we plebes? You haven't done anything to give another side; you've just asserted that all the people who've provided real-world scenarios are wrong.

Stating projections as facts is not a real world scenario. And picking and choosing what players might work with taking Gonzo in the 3rd is not indicative of who may be available for you in your draft at that given spot.The only real world scenario I have seen in this thread was the above poster's Antsports draft where he did not even have a 3rd starting TE by the 9th round and handcuffed players like Duce and Bettis who you never know who to start as one might go off one week, and the other the next.

 

[bagger.]

All I'm saying is that the volume of production that people suggest will happen will never happen, as there will not be 25 guys with 1,300 rushing yards and 10 TD.

This is what a fundamental flaw in projecting stats without having them close to historical averages.

However, what is really the takeaway to all of this is that by using projections that do this to base your argument on, these projections will give you a false sense of hope that there will more depth later in the draft than what will happen. And if you base your VBD calcs on this inflated depth, you are obviously going to come away with the conclusion that Gonzo is the only possible choice.

The fact of the matter is that depth will not be there. Injuries will happen even if the FBG projections don't account for them.

 

[CalBear]

On the RB side, the question is whether Chris Brown (the only RB being taken in the last half of the third round) is worth significantly more than RBs available in the fourth round, like Ronnie Brown, JJ Arrington, Carnell Williams, Cedric Benson, Fred Taylor. I don't see it; he might be big, but he has a lot of questions around him from an injury perspective. I'd be just as comfortable with any of the rookies except Ronnie Brown, and Chris Brown's injury risk isn't any lower than Fred Taylor's.

My question is for those with EARLY third round picks . . . RBs aside, is it worth taking Gonzalez over a Holt/Johnson/Harrison/McNabb from a value perspective? I have seen a couple of those WR fall into the third round, as Moss/Owens/Walker have gone before them.

I think Harrison is one of the few players in the league who had shown as much reliability as Gonzo, so I'd definitely take him ahead of Tony. Holt, Johnson, and McNabb are top-tier players, but with lower reliability; I think that comes down to personal style. (I'd probably take Johnson, but not Holt or McNabb).I think the interesting question is running backs like Lamont Jordan or Tatum Bell, who both could be boom-or-bust.

 

[CalBear]

Stating projections as facts is not a real world scenario. And picking and choosing what players might work with taking Gonzo in the 3rd is not indicative of who may be available for you in your draft at that given spot.

Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you've got nothing new to say.