TE Mason Taylor, NYJ (2 Viewers)

[wgoldsph]

I think you're confusing "the TE had a solid season" with "the QB was good for his production." I'd argue given the lack of other receiving options in Chicago, that Fields probably held Kmet back.

I’d counter that by pointing out that a 23% target share is very solid for a TE on a team with DJM & Darnell Mooney, and that type of production is actually pretty excellent for a QB mostly known for his rushing ability.

It shows a concerted effort to get the ball to the Tight End, especially when talking about a QB who only threw 370x for 2562 yards.

That means Kmet’s production accounted for28% of Fields passing yardage & 37.5% of Fields TDs.

That, to me, is a much stronger data set than overall target share & clearly supports the contention that Fields is good for TE production.

You want to make a bet on it of some kind for this year? I'm happy to put his career against a single outlier season that I think still wasn't that good.

Not one retort to my data-driven commentary?

Challenging me to a bet over it officially ends my participation in what was a somewhat interesting discussion.

The fact is that I’ve already won the bet: Fields was, in fact, “good for TE production”. You acknowledged that yourself. He helped a TE to a 12th, then 7th finish at the position.

There it is. Fields has been good for TE production.

Again, I wish you a very good evening.

HSG I'm usually on your side for most things but I don't think a 7th and 12th overall season qualifies as "good for" the TE position. Quite frankly, most years there were 2-3 elite te and the field. I haven't checked, but I would put money on one of those two years a guy like Taysom Hill finished higher.

Also, can we really say anything outside the fact that for a few seasons Kmet was utilized more in the offense with that information? He's not an elite player, and it makes sense that the CHI has faded him from the gameplan. I can see the argument that Fields is a first read and run QB, and that means his first read will be something short to the TE in more plays than an average QB, which could explain the rise in targets from Kmet. Unfortunately, The fact is that the evidence says Fields overall career targets TE at league avg or lesser (instinctive's posts have the actual numbers) shows how he actually impacts the position. One highlight season seems to be the outlier.

So what exactly qualifies as him being good for a te? Two seasons of mid TE1 production? One of which is 12th overall, and you could probably do better streaming TE than riding with him every week. There's more evidence that the lack of a secondary target on the Jets boosts Taylor's overall targets.

I gave the % of Fields overall production.

Being “good” IMO is being a startable FF TE.

I didn’t say he was great. I didn’t say he made Kmet a star. I said there was evidence of Fields supporting a FF TE. Certainly more so than many other FF QBs.

If someone chooses to define “good for TE” as other than a top 12 starting option (which is my basic criteria here) then we have no common ground on which to have a discussion. I believe Fields will do enough to sustain their rookie TE as a FF starting option. I’m not saying he’ll be as good as McBride or Bowers or even LaPorta. But I said I think his startup ADP is fair, and base that on Fields’ history.

The definition of “good” is clearly the moving goal post and bad faith discussion. That bad faith was subsequently cemented by first challenging me to a bet, and then finally resorting to multiple personal attacks.

I’m out of this discussion. The user is now on ignore.

My own goalpost for "good for te" is a QB who has career numbers that favor TE production. I just see a guy who doesn't ignore the position and overall is a drag on the offense.

 

[Wigglytuff's Gruff]

All I wanted was a bit of Taylor hype.

 

[Houston turmOiler]

For redraft, it might be more important to simply look at how Fields targets RBs, which would be Hall, a solid pass-catcher at the position. Garrett Wilson will presumably be the focal point, but the #2 WR now is Josh Reynolds? Doesn't seem like the Jets WRs other than Wilson will command targets, but stranger things have happened I guess.

Which player is most likely to be second in targets? Reynolds, Taylor, or Hall? And will the passing volume of this offense be enough to make being second in targets viable for fantasy? You guys find and study data much more than I do, but I'd compare Fields' career TE and RB usage given their personnel.

 

[rockaction]

a lot of arguing about dynasty's top 3 TE in 26/27

I think clear definitions would help. I also think clarifying if you’re playing or talking about dynasty, redraft, or both would also help bridge the gap tremendously.

There’s a lot of miscommunication between decent people because we didn’t define terms to begin with and we’re getting a bit both loose with language and then too exacting about that casualness. It can be resolved unless both sides are dug in.

 

[greenmountaingoat]

a lot of arguing about dynasty's top 3 TE in 26/27

Straight into the veins.

 

[Instinctive]

a lot of arguing about dynasty's top 3 TE in 26/27

I think clear definitions would help. I also think clarifying if you’re playing or talking about dynasty, redraft, or both would also help bridge the gap tremendously.

There’s a lot of miscommunication between decent people because we didn’t define terms to begin with and we’re getting a bit both loose with language and then too exacting about that casualness. It can be resolved unless both sides are dug in.

FWIW I did define it. HSG just wants to be right, or he can't grasp the logic. I don't know him well enough to say which, but he claimed he has no interest in being right. To me, it still seems like he's more interested in quippy replies than examining his priors, but again, he said that's not his interest. The only reasonable conclusion left is he doesn't understand the argument (or he's lying about what he wants to get out of the discussion). Just to be clear - I don't know him. He could be a brilliant guy. I have no opinion on that (beyond knowing he does in fact make hot sauces I like using!). But all that's been demonstrated in the SP is that he'd like to be quippy and he's not allowed that interested in learning new info or engaging in an honest discussion. This thread is possibly the best evidence of that. (ETA: he hasn't asked an honest question or pointed out what he doesn't understand either. Another sign of lack of interest in learning. And every time he doesn't have any data or a logical response, he just disagrees with the premise or takes offense and bows out. Again, the only reasonable conclusions are he doesn't want to learn or engage, or he can't.)

Good for production means better than an average QB would be. Thats the only logical way to look at it. Given all his proclivities, the best conclusion I can draw would be Fields is at best a net neutral. Fields could have had somebody finish as the TE1 with 1500 yards, but if he held the offense back as a whole, there were no other good players, and you can see that pretty much anybody would have thrown to the TE every time too, I don't see how our imaginary TE is useful evidence.

That's the real difference here. We have a poster who doesn't want to (or can't) understand how various positions impact another. All he's been able to show, really, is that Kmet didn't suck, the Bears offense did, and Fields wasn't completely unable to get the ball to the only guys who could catch at a somewhat respectable rate. He's arguing about whether Kmet's two seasons were "good," - I thought we were discussing Justin Fields' impact on the TE position and how it would relate to Mason Taylor, since we're in the Mason Taylor thread.

 

[rockaction]

a lot of arguing about dynasty's top 3 TE in 26/27

I think clear definitions would help. I also think clarifying if you’re playing or talking about dynasty, redraft, or both would also help bridge the gap tremendously.

There’s a lot of miscommunication between decent people because we didn’t define terms to begin with and we’re getting a bit both loose with language and then too exacting about that casualness. It can be resolved unless both sides are dug in.

FWIW I did define it. HSG just wants to be right, or he can't grasp the logic. I don't know him well enough to say which, but he claimed he has no interest in being right. To me, it still seems like he's more interested in quippy replies than examining his priors, but again, he said that's not his interest. The only reasonable conclusion left is he doesn't understand the argument (or he's lying about what he wants to get out of the discussion).

Good for production means better than an average QB would be. Thats the only logical way to look at it. Given all his proclivities, the best conclusion I can draw would be Fields is at best a net neutral. Fields could have had somebody finish as the TE1 with 1500 yards, but if he held the offense back as a whole, there were no other good players, and you can see that pretty much anybody would have thrown to the TE every time too, I don't see how our imaginary TE is useful evidence.

That's the real difference here. We have a poster who doesn't want to understand how various positions impact another. All he's been able to show, really, is that Kmet didn't suck, the Bears offense did, and Fields wasn't completely unable to get the ball to the only guys who could catch at a somewhat respectable rate. He's arguing about whether Kmet's two seasons were "good," - I thought we were discussing Justin Fields' impact on the TE position and how it would relate to Mason Taylor, since we're in the Mason Taylor thread.

It is Mason's thread. I would love to talk about him. We did that huge mock at the beginning the year before the draft and I picked Membou and Mason Taylor for the Jets at #7 and #42. I'm pretty damn proud of nailing that, even though the beat writer for The Athletic had one where he nailed that also. I think I picked Jalen Royals in Rd. 3 and they blew me off. What a bunch of maroons.

You did the mock, too. I remember it. You were Carolina.

Post in thread 'FBG Mock Draft '25 Completed with all 101 picks inside'

Apr 7, 2025

42 - NY Jets - Mason Taylor - TE - LSU

The Jets take a player rising up draft boards after his pro day. Taylor, the son of Hall of Famer Jason Taylor, is a fluid athlete who runs solid routes and catches the football well. He has good hands, high points the football, and has very good instincts on the football field when plays break down on his quarterback. He is a competent blocker who can improve, but he shows a willingness to get in the trenches and give maximum effort, which is important because the Jets will be running the football often with Justin Fields at QB and a...

• rockaction

• 

I'm really just trying to make peace between two people I like. I'm going to remain out of it even though I chimed in, which might have been untoward. I'd just like to remind you that vague words can be defined by people in very different ways. Everyone has their own benchmark or numbers (or even categories of measure) behind what "good" and "net positive" might entail, especially in a statistical setting. I think if you guys had pinned down your definitions earlier then this would be cool like Fonzie when he backs up against the jukebox, kicks it, and that cool rock n' roll song comes on. But I'm out. Take care, Instinctive.

Best to you both. Peace.

 

[barackdhouse]

If this season Mason Taylor has 73/700/7, it won't have helped me win a single league.

then you're not very good at this

4. I don't think you have a very analytical mind for this, and that's ok. People provide value in other ways, and the world is better for it

dude your take sucks

HSG I'm usually on your side for most things but I don't think a 7th and 12th overall season qualifies as "good for" the TE position.

Lol good lord of course it does. What's the problem with math around here? There are usually well over 20 TEs rostered and another dozen that shuffle through rosters and waivers inseason. Finding the #7 is a major victory when you could get him at #14 in 2023.

For the love of God you guys should be figuring out ways to turn a squad with the #7 TE into a winner. You should assume that if you don't get a top 3 elite guy then this is your best case scenario. What do you just give up if you don't get one of those 3?

A serious lack of realistic expectations going around here. Anyway, Fields can find the TE and Taylor will be fine.

 

[wgoldsph]

a lot of arguing about dynasty's top 3 TE in 26/27

I think clear definitions would help. I also think clarifying if you’re playing or talking about dynasty, redraft, or both would also help bridge the gap tremendously.

There’s a lot of miscommunication between decent people because we didn’t define terms to begin with and we’re getting a bit both loose with language and then too exacting about that casualness. It can be resolved unless both sides are dug in.

From a dynasty perspective... Fields doesn't matter beyond this year. I picked Mason to ride my TS until Andrews falls off the cliff. The Jets will have a rookie QB next season unless Fields becomes a totally different player. Do I want him to be a top 3 TE in the future? You bet your *** I do. Am I betting on it? Nah, I'm thinking I got one of those 6-12 guys I will play matchups with.

For redraft I go back to my previous comments. Mason might end up as a top target on this offense because they have absolutely no second wr, but I don't see Fields as anything other than someone who is average around te and bad at QB.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

For redraft I go back to my previous comments. Mason might end up as a top target on this offense because they have absolutely no second wr, but I don't see Fields as anything other than someone who is average around te and bad at QB.

Even as a bad QB, if ~30% of his passing yards and ~37% of his TDs go to the TE, that is extremely likely to support an above average TE.

The Jets have a better OL, and IMO better coaching than Fields’ Bears team did, and IMO Taylor is a a better TE as a prospect than Kmet is as a current player. And I like Kmet.

You don’t think those factors could possibly help Taylor produce more in this environment than Kmet did in his?

I know I’m no big city data analyst, but I did spend 20+ years as a project manager analyzing data for a living. Maybe the statistics are indeed meaningful.

Or perhaps we should instead look to the stars for divine wisdom. Is Jupiter waxing? Do the fire signs line up? Maybe the oracle at Delphi has a take that would be meaningful here. There are many paths one can take when evaluating players. I chose math.

I will happily take Taylor at ADP if he’s available to me in redraft and in dynasty, and will have reasonable expectations for him. For I am but a humble traveler on the road of FF. You are welcome to avoid him if you prefer. I am not the boss of you. I’m merely opining on the player and his prospects.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

From a dynasty perspective... Fields doesn't matter beyond this year.

I mean, he might. He could blow away expectations and become the face of the franchise.

I wouldn’t bet on it, but we don’t really know what’s gonna happen with Fields and NYJ beyond this year.

His contract is 2 years, 40M. He’s a UFA in 2027.

 

[wgoldsph]

HSG I'm usually on your side for most things but I don't think a 7th and 12th overall season qualifies as "good for" the TE position.

Lol good lord of course it does. What's the problem with math around here? There are usually well over 20 TEs rostered and another dozen that shuffle through rosters and waivers inseason. Finding the #7 is a major victory when you could get him at #14 in 2023.

For the love of God you guys should be figuring out ways to turn a squad with the #7 TE into a winner. You should assume that if you don't get a top 3 elite guy then this is your best case scenario. What do you just give up if you don't get one of those 3?

A serious lack of realistic expectations going around here. Anyway, Fields can find the TE and Taylor will be fine.

Last year ppr Bowers had 248.1, 6th place Andrews had 173.4, 20th Noah Grey 112.6. A little napkin math tells me that the difference between 1st and 6th is 74 total points - 4.6 difference a game. And 6th to 20th is 60.8 - 3.8 per game. 1-20 is of course a 129.2 point difference which means that the point difference per game is 8.075

So, what does that tell us? It tells us that the majority of point difference between the top and las rostered TE is concentrated at the top. And sure, each position is like that, so why is TE so different that you'd argue having the 7th is as important as the 20th if you play matchups?

Because TE score less points overall. The difference between a good one and a playable one is almost negligible when put up against total team scoring. And almost no other position has such a steady drop between 6 and 20 (RB and QB are around 6 points a game difference, WR is similar to TE, but at minimum you need to play 2 in every league I've ever been in) that the ppg is replaceable by, again, playing matchups.

My problem is nobody would call the number 12 QB good, and it's really the best fantasy lineup parallel. You only start one, the top handful are elite, and if you don't have a solid starter playing matchups can work out better than sticking with the Kyler Murrays (12th last year) of the world week in and week out. It's not "good". It's serviceable. In Fields we have one year at "starting" quality in the 6th overall finish and one that is clearly not "good" at the last startable TE.

Now personal jab at my ability to run a fantasy team aaide... I have said repeatedly, play matchups. Getting a no 6 overall te is almost as good weekly as having the 20th, because math says so, so why not try for an /actual/ weekly advantage.

Your point about the draft value is completely irrelevant to the conversation we're having here.

 

[wgoldsph]

For redraft I go back to my previous comments. Mason might end up as a top target on this offense because they have absolutely no second wr, but I don't see Fields as anything other than someone who is average around te and bad at QB.

Even as a bad QB, if ~30% of his passing yards and ~37% of his TDs go to the TE, that is extremely likely to support an above average TE.

The Jets have a better OL, and IMO better coaching than Fields’ Bears team did, and IMO Taylor is a a better TE as a prospect than Kmet is as a current player. And I like Kmet.

You don’t think those factors could possibly help Taylor produce more in this environment than Kmet did in his?

I know I’m no big city data analyst, but I did spend 20+ years as a project manager analyzing healthcare data for a living. Maybe the statistics are indeed meaningful.

Or perhaps we should instead look to the stars for divine wisdom. Is Jupiter waxing? Do the fire signs line up? Maybe the oracle at Delphi has a take that would be meaningful here. There are many paths one can take when evaluating players. I chose math.

I will happily take Taylor at ADP if he’s available to me in redraft and in dynasty, and will have reasonable expectations for him. For I am but a humble traveler on the road of FF. You are welcome to avoid him if you prefer. I am not the boss of you. I’m merely opining on the player and his prospects.

My problem has never been with your Taylor hype. I'm in, he's on my teams.
And the Jets? Perfect storm for a TE to overshoot his fantasy adp.

Those numbers around Fields are one season. Yes he hasn't played much, but overall career he has never hit near those benchmarks again. Isn't it more likely it was a function of the offensive game plan (which btw was designed to play to every one of his weeknesses for the entire Bears career pretty much) than Fields own play style?

 

[Instinctive]

If this season Mason Taylor has 73/700/7, it won't have helped me win a single league.

then you're not very good at this

4. I don't think you have a very analytical mind for this, and that's ok. People provide value in other ways, and the world is better for it

dude your take sucks

HSG I'm usually on your side for most things but I don't think a 7th and 12th overall season qualifies as "good for" the TE position.

Lol good lord of course it does. What's the problem with math around here? There are usually well over 20 TEs rostered and another dozen that shuffle through rosters and waivers inseason. Finding the #7 is a major victory when you could get him at #14 in 2023.

For the love of God you guys should be figuring out ways to turn a squad with the #7 TE into a winner. You should assume that if you don't get a top 3 elite guy then this is your best case scenario. What do you just give up if you don't get one of those 3?

A serious lack of realistic expectations going around here. Anyway, Fields can find the TE and Taylor will be fine.

I'd be interested to see how many teams that get the 7th best out of 12 in a position for a season win. I imagine it's less than 1/12th.

Which still is mostly besides the point, which is whether this QB is a net positive for TE production. Which he isn't.

 

[Instinctive]

4. I don't think you have a very analytical mind for this, and that's ok. People provide value in other ways, and the world is better for it

dude your take sucks

You're probably right.

I've met HSG (he probably doesn't remember me) and he was a perfectly normal guy. Free hot sauce samples too, and good stuff! I should have been more surprised when he got all troll-y and rude and aggressive. Instead of giving it back to him (I mistakenly assumed he could take it if he could dish it out and he might realize he was being a jerk and apologize, vs doubling down and then running away), I probably should have assumed he was just having a bad day and not thinking that much before typing, and I should have had some grace and asked how he was doing vs assuming he intended to be so rude.

I've always been the kind to stand up to bullies. Just can't help myself. Absolutely have to put them in their place. It's probably my biggest flaw - fixing that stuff isn't my job. And it's not the right thing to do to dip down to the same level. It's very hard for me to give the benefit of the doubt (especially after it's called out once or twice).

I'm sorry to the whole thread (including HSG) for responding in kind. It's not the right way a mature adult should act. Hopefully I'll continue to learn and be better.

 

[Instinctive]

I think you're confusing "the TE had a solid season" with "the QB was good for his production." I'd argue given the lack of other receiving options in Chicago, that Fields probably held Kmet back.

I’d counter that by pointing out that a 23% target share is very solid for a TE on a team with DJM & Darnell Mooney, and that type of production is actually pretty excellent for a QB mostly known for his rushing ability.

It shows a concerted effort to get the ball to the Tight End, especially when talking about a QB who only threw 370x for 2562 yards.

That means Kmet’s production accounted for28% of Fields passing yardage & 37.5% of Fields TDs.

That, to me, is a much stronger data set than overall target share & clearly supports the contention that Fields is good for TE production.

You want to make a bet on it of some kind for this year? I'm happy to put his career against a single outlier season that I think still wasn't that good.

Not one retort to my data-driven commentary?

Challenging me to a bet over it officially ends my participation in what was a somewhat interesting discussion.

The fact is that I’ve already won the bet: Fields was, in fact, “good for TE production”. You acknowledged that yourself. He helped a TE to a 12th, then 7th finish at the position.

There it is. Fields has been good for TE production.

Again, I wish you a very good evening.

HSG I'm usually on your side for most things but I don't think a 7th and 12th overall season qualifies as "good for" the TE position. Quite frankly, most years there were 2-3 elite te and the field. I haven't checked, but I would put money on one of those two years a guy like Taysom Hill finished higher.

Also, can we really say anything outside the fact that for a few seasons Kmet was utilized more in the offense with that information? He's not an elite player, and it makes sense that the CHI has faded him from the gameplan. I can see the argument that Fields is a first read and run QB, and that means his first read will be something short to the TE in more plays than an average QB, which could explain the rise in targets from Kmet. Unfortunately, The fact is that the evidence says Fields overall career targets TE at league avg or lesser (instinctive's posts have the actual numbers) shows how he actually impacts the position. One highlight season seems to be the outlier.

So what exactly qualifies as him being good for a te? Two seasons of mid TE1 production? One of which is 12th overall, and you could probably do better streaming TE than riding with him every week. There's more evidence that the lack of a secondary target on the Jets boosts Taylor's overall targets.

I’m trying to follow along and all but

Maybe I’m crazy but a lot of separate arguments are happening at the same time

“QB good for the tight end” means….the tight end MUST produce at an elite level?

Like “Top 2-3 or bust”

Seems like an insane premise.

And the fact Cole Kmet produced TE7/TE12 seasons with a guy that has a career high of 17 TD passes, a rookie comes in, has 20, yet it’s also the worst stat season of Kmet since his rookie year, and they “phased him out” or something - does not that STRENGHTHEN the argument that Justin Fields is good for the position, since you’re saying “he’s not an elite player”

And us/we in the Mason Taylor thread are all in agreement this guy is a better prospect than Cole Kmet, right?

So Justin Fields makes “not elite” guys TE1s 2x, somehow we are to believe he’ll be “bad” for a guy who we all agree is a superior prospect?

Help me understand.

Is it TE1/2/3 and everyone else is “trash”?

I’m sure you’re not playing in 6-8 team league where TE6-12 don’t matter at all?

Trying to understand is all.

In case it wasn't clarified - I think Kmet's situation screams top 5 TE that season. If I told you all the injuries, how the offense was schemed, and his own health before hand, I'd be disappointed with a season that was closer to TE20 in PPG than TE3. The entire point is that:

1. TE7 isn't that good a season ( @barackdhouse the point isn't that you can't win with TE7...it's that you may as well not have a TE at all and just stream...you can probably cobble together TE5 production that way if you've been doing this with any level of thought for any amount of time - if I was stuck just starting TE7 all year it would be a failure)
2. TE7 is a bad season given how amazing the opportunity should have been for Kmet, where if you put any normal QB there, he's over 100 catches and 1000 yards, maybe pushing 10 TDs
3. I'd be scared the same thing happens here - there's tons of opportunity, but a real chance of underdelivery because the QB can't do what he needs to

"TE7" is a meaningless stat. PPG, PPG vs a baseline, VBD, etc...those are useful stats.

 

[wgoldsph]

@Instinctive *cough*thatwasme*cough*

Spent ten minutes ignoring the missus for that post because I actually can't do math.

 

[Instinctive]

@Instinctive *cough*thatwasme*cough*

Spent ten minutes ignoring the missus for that post because I actually can't do math.

lol sorry I missed it - I was just running through my little red dings and knocking out responses. Suffice to say you laid out the same point in clearer terms with more detailed stats to support! Nice work.

 

[socrates]

Spent ten minutes ignoring the missus for that post because I actually can't do math.

Ten minutes on a Saturday night must be multiplied by a factor of 1.5

 

[socrates]

Whether you like Fields or the Jets for TE value, I think most of us can agree the future is bright for Mason. I would not want to rely on year one numbers from any rookie TE, and that includes all of the Tight Ends in this talented class. However, I am not leaving any of my Rookie Drafts without grabbing a TE, whether it is Loveland, Warren, Mason, Arroyo, Ferguson, or even Fannin. I want to have one of this year's rookie Tight Ends.

 

[joey]

I’ve won it all with a TE7 when I drafted him late and focused on other skill position.

 

[JoeJoe88]

Emmanuel Wilson

If this season Mason Taylor has 73/700/7, it won't have helped me win a single league.

then you're not very good at this

4. I don't think you have a very analytical mind for this, and that's ok. People provide value in other ways, and the world is better for it

dude your take sucks

HSG I'm usually on your side for most things but I don't think a 7th and 12th overall season qualifies as "good for" the TE position.

Lol good lord of course it does. What's the problem with math around here? There are usually well over 20 TEs rostered and another dozen that shuffle through rosters and waivers inseason. Finding the #7 is a major victory when you could get him at #14 in 2023.

For the love of God you guys should be figuring out ways to turn a squad with the #7 TE into a winner. You should assume that if you don't get a top 3 elite guy then this is your best case scenario. What do you just give up if you don't get one of those 3?

A serious lack of realistic expectations going around here. Anyway, Fields can find the TE and Taylor will be fine.

I'd be interested to see how many teams that get the 7th best out of 12 in a position for a season win. I imagine it's less than 1/12th.

Which still is mostly besides the point, which is whether this QB is a net positive for TE production. Which he isn't.

I’ve won back-to-back dynasty championships and two years ago my TE1 was Jake Ferguson. Last year, it was some combination of him, Engram, Brenton Strange and Kyle Pitts.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

My problem has never been with your Taylor hype. I'm in, he's on my teams

I believe is the first time I’ve ever opined on him. It’s going swimmingly, thanks for asking.

My problem is nobody would call the number 12 QB good

I think a lot of people thought Tom Brady was goo-oh, wait. You meant…

4. I don't think you have a very analytical mind for this, and that's ok. People provide value in other ways, and the world is better for it

dude your take sucks

You're probably right.

I've met HSG (he probably doesn't remember me) and he was a perfectly normal guy. Free hot sauce samples too, and good stuff! I should have been more surprised when he got all troll-y and rude and aggressive.

Dude what? I didn’t get “troll-y and rude”. I opined on Taylor. I said Fields was good for TE production.

You came at me, and challenged me to prove that. I thought ok, sure - could be a fun exercise. I remembered Fields being decent. So I looked up some stuff I thought I’d remembered & posted some stats. I literally engaged in discussion with you with stats to back up my claim. I wasn’t rude to you in the slightest. I just said I thought it showed fields was good for TEs.

How is that troll-y and rude? The posts are right there.

Instead of giving it back to him (I mistakenly assumed he could take it if he could dish it out and he might realize he was being a jerk and apologize, vs doubling down and then running away), I probably should have assumed he was just having a bad day and not thinking that much before typing, and I should have had some grace and asked how he was doing vs assuming he intended to be so rude.

I was having a delightful day, thanks. I replied to you. Then you actually tried to bet me! Instead of replying with a reasoned approach as I tried to, you challenged me to a bet.

Seriously - that happened.

Again, what world are you describing here? The posts are all still there.

I've always been the kind to stand up to bullies. Just can't help myself. Absolutely have to put them in their place. It's probably my biggest flaw - fixing that stuff isn't my job. And it's not the right thing to do to dip down to the same level. It's very hard for me to give the benefit of the doubt (especially after it's called out once or twice).

I was a “bully” for replying to your challenge to prove Fields is good for TE production?

Incredible.

Should I have not replied to you when you engaged me in discussion?

I'm sorry to the whole thread (including HSG) for responding in kind. It's not the right way a mature adult should act. Hopefully I'll continue to learn and be better.

Your apology is worthless when you’re trying to reinvent very recent history.

Also I’m not the only one who took the side of fields, I’m just the one you wrote a 10,000 word dissertation and personally attacked numerous times. That was a choice. It was also way over the line of anything appropriate. Others have called you out for it.

Perhaps it was you who had a bad day. Or maybe this is a manic episode. Whatever it is, you can leave me out of it.

I’ve put you on ignore and blocked you on sleeper. Now please stop talking about me and stay away from my market booth.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The worst part about this nonsense is I don’t even care that much about Taylor. I have zero shares (so far)

If so, that's a real path to relevance, although maybe Fields-limited

Fields has actually been pretty good for his TE’s production.

Thats not my first thought. Do you have any evidence? Kmet has never been a top TE. Friermuth wasnt one last year.

2023 was Kmet’s best year - 90 targets from fields, 73/719/6

Friermouth also just had his best season but that’s a weird example to use because fields didn’t start all year, and the OC didn’t exactly have Fields throwing early and often.

But there’s definitely evidence to support Fields being a net positive for TE production.

Seen here: “bullying”.

Wut?

 

[greenmountaingoat]

The premise is simple. When the post is written about a poster, it’s probably garbage.

Personally I’m rubbernecking this steaming, brontosaurus sized pile of dung.

 

[oldmanhawkins]

I really like this TE class. There are 6-7 guys that all have a legit shot to be among our TE1s in a couple years. But not this year for most of those guys.

However, this year matters a lot for dynasty valuations. If Mason Taylor has a Kmet-like finish…he’s suddenly a top 5-8ish dynasty tight end. For reference, Tucker Kraft is dynasty TE8 and his best season was 50/800/7. Kincaid is TE9. Nuff said.

I think Taylor has the best chance of all the rookies except maybe Warren of getting 80 percent of the snaps and close to 100 targets. Sadly, I did not get him in any of my drafts.

 

[Instinctive]

I’ve won it all with a TE7 when I drafted him late and focused on other skill position.

I've won with Tim Tebow at QB. I've won with not drafting a TE at all.

None of that is useful. Just because things CAN happen doesn't mean they are the likeliest paths to victory. Being able to overcome an obstacle doesn't mean it wasn't an obstacle.

 

[Instinctive]

The premise is simple. When the post is written about a poster, it’s probably garbage.

Personally I’m rubbernecking this steaming, brontosaurus sized pile of dung.

HAHAHA.

I agree with your premise. I apologized and am moving on. Somebody has to be the bigger person. Thought I was being ignored anyway

 

[Instinctive]

The premise is simple. When the post is written about a poster, it’s probably garbage.

Personally I’m rubbernecking this steaming, brontosaurus sized pile of dung.

HAHAHA.

I agree with your premise. I apologized and am moving on. Somebody has to be the bigger person. Thought I was being ignored anyway

Reflecting again.

I'm trying to learn from @rockaction, who IMO often has posts where I tilt my head and think it's off topic and long and am tempted to skim it. But he's almost always sharing something that someone wise would read and learn from. A poor attempt at mimicry follows:

The weirdest course I ever took in life was called "Touchy Feely." I won't describe the whole thing, but I will share one of the greatest lessons about interpersonal dynamics. It's called the "net." The basic premise is only you know your intent. So however another person perceived your actions, if you truly care about how people think of you or how you impact them, must be accepted as true. You hit the ball over the net, it's in their court. If they think you were a jerk, it doesn't matter that you were trying to raise their spirits with a light-hearted joke - you were a jerk.

You can apply it here. HSG obviously has a very clear image of himself. He decided, apparently, to revoke my ignore status to do something that I consider hurtful, after already pointing out that I thought he engaged in a quippy, sarcastic, and harmful manner. I imagine he didn't intend that to be how he came off, based on the vigorous defense - but it doesn't matter. It is how he came off, even if only to me. And I reacted a certain way (that's my own cross to bear).

It's hard to let go of that control, but I try to get a little better every day at accepting the fact that the other person's perception is their reality. It's up to you to decide if you have care for the other person or for the way you are perceived.

Maybe that helps someone who is even just lurking here and wants to learn. But that's why I apologized, and will reiterate it here: I should not have reacted as I did, and I am sorry. I think explaining it may have helped others learn a little about me, but the apology remains unqualified - I was wrong to stick an insult in the middle of an incredibly well researched and well reasoned post about fantasy football prospects.

 

[rockaction]

The premise is simple. When the post is written about a poster, it’s probably garbage.

Personally I’m rubbernecking this steaming, brontosaurus sized pile of dung.

HAHAHA.

I agree with your premise. I apologized and am moving on. Somebody has to be the bigger person. Thought I was being ignored anyway

Reflecting again.

I'm trying to learn from @rockaction

LOL. *gasps* Did I just *gasps* Did I come from *gasp gasp* come from the FFA? Somebody hit me up on the Sky Tel?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

But that's why I apologized

You didn’t. I have a box full of DMs mocking you for that BS “apology” that wasn’t. But hey, keep patting yourself on the back for your “growth”.

Maybe that helps someone who is even just lurking here and wants to learn

I’m not lurking, and I do have you on ignore.

But because you’re going out of your way to post easily provable lies, someone quoted you & it tagged me. So I was forced to see you lying about me.

You’re still on ignore and you’ll stay there. You’ve clearly learned nothing from this experience, and you continue to paint yourself as victim when everyone can see you’re the antagonist here.

It wasn’t 1 insult - you just think you’re clever and that a half dozen soft-served insults are subtle. You’re not, and they are not.

So again: stop talking about me.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Somewhere up there, amid the dino excrement, @barackdhouse put it succinctly. If you can get the #7 TE at #14 TE value, you've won. Obviously, everyone's goal in any draft is to take the #1 finishing player at each position, but unless you're playing cards with your brother's kids, it ain't gonna happen. Getting that kind of value at a position where the scoring is typically less than other positions (allowing you to take more/better shots at RB/WR/QB sleepers) is how you win this game vs the Shark Pool.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Somewhere up there, amid the dino excrement, @barackdhouse put it succinctly. If you can get the #7 TE at #14 TE value, you've won. Obviously, everyone's goal in any draft is to take the #1 finishing player at each position, but unless you're playing cards with your brother's kids, it ain't gonna happen. Getting that kind of value at a position where the scoring is typically less than other positions (allowing you to take more/better shots at RB/WR/QB sleepers) is how you win this game vs the Shark Pool.

Well said (and by @barackdhouse as well, on all of his points)

The attempt to redefine “good” as “elite” is the moved goalpost in this discussion.

Fields was clearly good for his TE production. In FBG’s DD, the blurb for Taylor even says “we’ve seen that Justin Fields favors his tight ends”.

Matt Waldman’s blurb on Taylor contains the statement, “One area where Justin Fields has been successful as a thrower is targeting a quality TE.”

I could find a dozen more quotes to pull from various FF writers commenting on fields or Taylor, but it seems unnecessarily repetitive to continue to have to defend a statement that’s obviously true: Justin Fields is good for TE production.

What a weird hill to die on.

 

[wgoldsph]

I think we've moved way past the be excellent to each other benchmark

 

[smbkrypt24]

But that's why I apologized

You didn’t. I have a box full of DMs mocking you for that BS “apology” that wasn’t. But hey, keep patting yourself on the back for your “growth”.

Maybe that helps someone who is even just lurking here and wants to learn

I’m not lurking, and I do have you on ignore.

But because you’re going out of your way to post easily provable lies, someone quoted you & it tagged me. So I was forced to see you lying about me.

You’re still on ignore and you’ll stay there. You’ve clearly learned nothing from this experience, and you continue to paint yourself as victim when everyone can see you’re the antagonist here.

It wasn’t 1 insult - you just think you’re clever and that a half dozen soft-served insults are subtle. You’re not, and they are not.

So again: stop talking about me.

At some point you need to ask yourself why you are the one that is involved in all these written spats.
Why are you in so many written spats that lead to you putting others on ignore and putting the blame on everyone else.
Accountability needs to be had on both sides.

 

[Faust]

Jets WR Garrett Wilson sees bright future ahead for TE Mason Taylor: 'He came in ready'

 

[Instinctive]

But that's why I apologized

You didn’t. I have a box full of DMs mocking you for that BS “apology” that wasn’t. But hey, keep patting yourself on the back for your “growth”.

Maybe that helps someone who is even just lurking here and wants to learn

I’m not lurking, and I do have you on ignore.

But because you’re going out of your way to post easily provable lies, someone quoted you & it tagged me. So I was forced to see you lying about me.

You’re still on ignore and you’ll stay there. You’ve clearly learned nothing from this experience, and you continue to paint yourself as victim when everyone can see you’re the antagonist here.

It wasn’t 1 insult - you just think you’re clever and that a half dozen soft-served insults are subtle. You’re not, and they are not.

So again: stop talking about me.

At some point you need to ask yourself why you are the one that is involved in all these written spats.
Why are you in so many written spats that lead to you putting others on ignore and putting the blame on everyone else.
Accountability needs to be had on both sides.

If I may: You're not wrong, but you're talking to someone who has repeatedly demonstrated that they believe they can do no wrong. (you can see in the quote above about lurking LOL - it wasn't intended at him in any way shape or form but he sure acts like it was).

Can you please just let the thread get back on track and about football? Not everybody wants to be better. It's not our job to try and show this person the light. I don't need defending, and we don't need to keep feeding his trolling. Just stop. Who knows why he is being the way he is. Who knows why he left the FBG Bowl SP sleeper league even though nobody has ever made a comment or DM to him in a rude way. He was a bully, he got called out, and he ran away. That's what bullies do. We don't need to fix him. Just move on.

 

[Winning IS Everything]

I have been doing a TON of mocks on the Draft Dominator (deep keeper league). I think my team would be well served to shore up other positions early and letting Colston and Warren pass by and grabbing Taylor a bit later. I have Kittle as a starter and can wait on my next TE a bit.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I have been doing a TON of mocks on the Draft Dominator (deep keeper league). I think my team would be well served to shore up other positions early and letting Colston and Warren pass by and grabbing Taylor a bit later. I have Kittle as a starter and can wait on my next TE a bit.

I use the DD as well, and they have Taylor fairly low. Depending on the site you’re draft is hosted on (or the rankings your leaguemates use if you do a live/offline draft, I’d be a bit cautious trusting the DD on this one.

He’s been taken ahead of a dozen or so higher ranked TE in both of my recent drafts.

If you’re drafting online, check the default rankings to see how they jive with DD. Just a head’s up - FBG may have him ranked a bit lower than others.

 

[joey]

I have been doing a TON of mocks on the Draft Dominator (deep keeper league). I think my team would be well served to shore up other positions early and letting Colston and Warren pass by and grabbing Taylor a bit later. I have Kittle as a starter and can wait on my next TE a bit.

I use the DD as well, and they have Taylor fairly low. Depending on the site you’re draft is hosted on (or the rankings your leaguemates use if you do a live/offline draft, I’d be a bit cautious trusting the DD on this one.

He’s been taken ahead of a dozen or so higher ranked TE in both of my recent drafts.

If you’re drafting online, check the default rankings to see how they jive with DD. Just a head’s up - FBG may have him ranked a bit lower than others.

Agreed. I was going to post something similar.

If “a bit later” = mid-2nd-round of a rookie draft, then sure.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Agreed. I was going to post something similar.

If “a bit later” = mid-2nd-round of a rookie draft, then sure.

Yeah, he’s been going in the 7th of a start-up dynasty, and DD has him behind 12 other TE at that point.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Has a head coach that saw Laporta produce immediately as a rookie, I think he will be involved early and often as long as he is up to speed. I am sure they will try to make things as simple for Fields that they can and get the ball out of hands quickly.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Has a head coach that saw Laporta produce immediately as a rookie, I think he will be involved early and often as long as he is up to speed. I am sure they will try to make things as simple for Fields that they can and get the ball out of hands quickly.

Fields has been targeting TE since college. (I’m not familiar with Fields HS game) - Jeremy Ruckert was a frequent end zone target. So it’s not like it was just Kmet for 2 years (cough @wgoldsph cough)

 

[dipandglide]

Waldman compared Taylor to Mark Andrews, I believe. That is high praise and something Taylor owners should get excited about. I'm ready for some real football!

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Waldman compared Taylor to Mark Andrews, I believe. That is high praise and something Taylor owners should get excited about. I'm ready for some real football!

That is high praise.

Funny, because most of the time I look at a dude in DD it’s like 4 other writers are all “WR12, WR 14, WR11, WR14” and you’ll get to Waldman and it’s “WR42”.

Not even kidding - it’s a trend I’ve noticed. The dude is a harsh critic and looks at a lot of environmental influences beyond the player.

So to see him heal that sort of praise is impressive.

 

[wgoldsph]

Has a head coach that saw Laporta produce immediately as a rookie, I think he will be involved early and often as long as he is up to speed. I am sure they will try to make things as simple for Fields that they can and get the ball out .

Fields has been targeting TE since college. (I’m not familiar with Fields HS game) - Jeremy Ruckert was a frequent end zone target. So it’s not like it was just Kmet for 2 years (cough @wgoldsph cough)

College numbers? College? NFL Hall of Fame QB Tim Tebow coming right atcha.

I still say it's less a function of Fields preferring the TE as it is coaches trying to get the ball out of his hands fast. If he improves then he will take more time to find his second and third reads, and the coaches will open up the playbook to more than runs, qb draws, a verts package, and quick outs.

With that said there's a good chance Taylor becomes that second read after Wilson.

You mentioned the bears had Mooney... Mooney was the only wr 2021 (unless you consider the corpse of Allen Robinson an actual wr), playing better than he ever will. In 2022 Mooney falls off a cliff getting less than half his previous stats and still somehow ends up as the best actual wr on the entire team. Kmet, now the "best" pass catcher, also has a drop in stats across the board... Except he went from 0 to 7 tds. We all know TDs are a totally unreliable stat for year to year projections, and if Kmet scored one less that year he would have fallen out of the top ten, the TE finishes are that close. Then the bears get an alpha which opens up everyone.

What all the data we have on Fields tells us that he's not a good qb who also throws the ball less than other qbs. His 30% target share is the same amount of targets as someone with... Idk the math, a smaller percentage on a team that passes more. So while you can argue that he targets the TE, and I can argue that was basically his only option other than his wr1 (the situation and not Fields is the benefit to Taylor here) on top of the fact that his lower pass volume means less targets even if he does continue to target the TE at a higher rate when the offense is performing well. Saying that he targets the TE more often is faint praise, it's preferring eggshell to cloud white paint swatches.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

College numbers? College? NFL Hall of Fame QB Tim Tebow coming right atcha.

Never change, buddy.

 

[Winning IS Everything]

I have been doing a TON of mocks on the Draft Dominator (deep keeper league). I think my team would be well served to shore up other positions early and letting Colston and Warren pass by and grabbing Taylor a bit later. I have Kittle as a starter and can wait on my next TE a bit.

I use the DD as well, and they have Taylor fairly low. Depending on the site you’re draft is hosted on (or the rankings your leaguemates use if you do a live/offline draft, I’d be a bit cautious trusting the DD on this one.

He’s been taken ahead of a dozen or so higher ranked TE in both of my recent drafts.

If you’re drafting online, check the default rankings to see how they jive with DD. Just a head’s up - FBG may have him ranked a bit lower than others.

Agreed. I was going to post something similar.

If “a bit later” = mid-2nd-round of a rookie draft, then sure.

Yeah, I was thinking early third as opposed to spending a late first for Loveland or Warren.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Yeah, I was thinking early third as opposed to spending a late first for Loveland or Warren.

If I could land Loveland I probably would do that.

If not I think it’s a good plan.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Just landed him 9.11 in my 12/team TEP startup. I now have a share. @wgoldsph convinced me.