The lockout effect on rookie production (1 Viewer)

[Tchula]

Should be we taking rookies with an even bigger grain of salt than normal in redraft this year because of the lockout? I say yes. Their conditioning will not be what it ought to having missed the OTA's. This may lead to more injuries like pulled hamstrings. Yes the veterans are missing it, but they know more about what is expected of them. Rookies won't know the playbook as well as they need to, and they won't have as much team chemistry. The only positive effect of the lockout on rookies is if the season is reduced a couple games they may be less likely to hit the "Rookie Wall." Anyone able to convince me otherwise?

 

[krsone21]

I think your spot on. I can see a few of the rookie runningbacks doing good early on. However, I think the longer the lockout goes the more it will affect QB's WR's and TE's. Might see less production from these positions until later in the season if the lockout goes on for sometime yet. Let's hope to a quick end to the lockout.

 

[UnknownCoach]

I think your spot on. I can see a few of the rookie runningbacks doing good early on. However, I think the longer the lockout goes the more it will affect QB's WR's and TE's. Might see less production from these positions until later in the season if the lockout goes on for sometime yet. Let's hope to a quick end to the lockout.

Yep. Rookie RBs can hold out until the end of training camp and still produce IF given the opportunity. They are less likely to be handed that opportunity though. If the lockout is prolonged, forget about the rookie receivers this year. Nobody should take a rookie QB in a redraft league in any year unless you start 2.

 

[Jason Wood]

This extends not only to rookie players, but also rookie coaches and entire teams that will be implementing new systems/schemes.

There will be some sloppy football at the outset, but teams like Carolina, which made wholesale changes this offseason and are planning on a rookie QB to boot, will be devastatingly ill equipped to compete this year. Teams that have significant continuity are going to be potentially dominant in a way we haven't seen in some time. This will be a year of haves and have nots IMHO.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

This extends not only to rookie players, but also rookie coaches and entire teams that will be implementing new systems/schemes. There will be some sloppy football at the outset, but teams like Carolina, which made wholesale changes this offseason and are planning on a rookie QB to boot, will be devastatingly ill equipped to compete this year. Teams that have significant continuity are going to be potentially dominant in a way we haven't seen in some time. This will be a year of haves and have nots IMHO.

This is the most likely outcome, although if the whole thing will make for an interesting test of the hypothesis that continuity is very important to team success.

 

[Jason Wood]

This extends not only to rookie players, but also rookie coaches and entire teams that will be implementing new systems/schemes. There will be some sloppy football at the outset, but teams like Carolina, which made wholesale changes this offseason and are planning on a rookie QB to boot, will be devastatingly ill equipped to compete this year. Teams that have significant continuity are going to be potentially dominant in a way we haven't seen in some time. This will be a year of haves and have nots IMHO.

This is the most likely outcome, although if the whole thing will make for an interesting test of the hypothesis that continuity is very important to team success.

I'm sure there will be outliers, just like there are each season (e.g., San Diego struggling early last year, or Min/Dal sucking wind most of the season in spite of being preseason favorites), but I just can't fathom this being a year of marquis football where we hear many cries of parity.

 

[gandalas]

I for one think that this will make players like Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Brady, and the rest of the older players even more valuable than they already were.

You know those players were not learning anything in the off-season anyway. However, I would say that any young players that need the OTAs will be affected...even 2nd or possibly 3rd year players that could have taken a nice step forward this year may not have as easy of a time.

 

[Sabertooth]

This extends not only to rookie players, but also rookie coaches and entire teams that will be implementing new systems/schemes. There will be some sloppy football at the outset, but teams like Carolina, which made wholesale changes this offseason and are planning on a rookie QB to boot, will be devastatingly ill equipped to compete this year. Teams that have significant continuity are going to be potentially dominant in a way we haven't seen in some time. This will be a year of haves and have nots IMHO.

Like the Packers.

 

[Couch Potato]

I agree with those above who say teams with established continuity will be a lot more ready when the season begins. Pretty much a no brainer IMO, and personally I'll be scrutinizing NFL schedule match ups of the first 5-6 games of the season more than ever before. I've never made it much of a priority but this year I think the time spent could pay off.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I agree with Jason and Bloom here. I'd only look at the top two WRs as big contributors this year (Green, Jones) and even that would be tempered a bit. Rookie RBs "drop in" most easily into the offense, especially on first and second down as they just have to know which hole to hit on a given running play. Pass protection is a different ballgame.

 

[todisco1]

I don't know that any rookie WR should be counted on as a fantasy producer, ever. Even the *best* rookie WRs often struggle or start relatively slow their first season (Calvin, Fitz). There are usually a couple who bust out their first year, but it's difficult to predict which one. In redraft, I'd never try and put myself in a position where I had to rely on a rookie WR as a weekly starter.

This year should be much worse as the lockout drags on -- I doubt any rookie WR or QB would have any consistency as a fantasy starter if they got little to no practice time with the team before the season.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

This seems to be a consensus. I respectfully disagree with most of you.

Regardless of rounde drafted, the skill positions have delivered a nice return on investment in rookie RB's, TE's and WR's in recent years. College players are being coached in the pro style offenses and formations, and the learning curve is not as steep. Last year, Mike Williams was a 4th round rookie, and his teammate UDFA, L. Blount made a serious 2nd half run. 4th rounder Jacoby Ford came on in the second half as well. The Patriots hit big with both their two rookie TE's.

I will be tempering any expectations in the early season, as the defenses will likely dominate the offenses till they find their rhythm. But I will be expecting the rooks to soon find their footing. And it wouldn't surprise to see someone other than Green and Jones being fantasy ROY.

Rookies are going to be a good stash and hold for a few weeks. They will be excellent buy lows. While I agree that they won't produce as great a cumlative numbers, they will still be important players to have on your roster as the playoffs approach.

Bottom line is I am not going to downgrade a rookie by the "lockout" factor, even if the season is shortened. If I like what I see in preseason, however short that is, I am drafting accordingly. Whatever FF points I lose out on earlier in the season can be made up and then some when the games take on more meaning.