Torry Holt (1 Viewer)

[jurrassic]

Is anyone worried Holt may not be his ususal self this year? He has already stated he is only 70% healthy on the leg and the Rams have already shown a commitment to the running game and have added two more targets in McMichael and Bennett. Have you knocked him down your ranking at all? Were do you have him?

 

[MDSkinner]

JMO, but he definitely is not the #2 or #3 receiver on the board heading into this year like he has been in the past. I think most still see him in the #5-#7 range, however. So I suppose it knocks him down slightly from previous years, but he still has to be considered one of the top tier guys.

 

[TheWick]

He has looked fine in the preseason games. I wouldn't worry about his health as much as the ball being spread around more. He'll still have 80+ catches, 1200+ yards, and 8+ TDs

 

[Tau837]

:honda:

This 70% comment has already been covered in one or more threads. It's old news.

 

[turleyfan]

In the Five Minute Drill (is that the right name?), they reminded us how many times Holt has been a top five fantasy receiver. Any guesses?

Wait for it...

Once.

And he was healthy.

Yeah, I am scared. I would take him as a WR2, but won't ever have that chance.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

In the Five Minute Drill (is that the right name?), they reminded us how many times Holt has been a top five fantasy receiver. Any guesses? Wait for it...Once.And he was healthy. Yeah, I am scared. I would take him as a WR2, but won't ever have that chance.

He's been a top five WR in my PPR league 3 of the last 4 years. edit: and he was #6 that one year he didn't make the top 5.

 

[TheFanatic]

Well, the way I see it he might be decoyed a lot in the first few games while he finishes recovery. Leaving Bruce, Bennett, McMichael, and SJax to pick up the recepts that he's not getting as he draws the double team away from the real play. That being said, he might be a good guy to target in the first 3 weeks if he is underperforming.

The fact that he is participating in training camp and not just standing around watching ala RMoss makes me not too nervous, I just don't see the guy jumping out of the gate this year. But by week 5-6 I think he's Holt of old and putting up monster numbers....

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Well, the way I see it he might be decoyed a lot in the first few games while he finishes recovery. Leaving Bruce, Bennett, McMichael, and SJax to pick up the recepts that he's not getting as he draws the double team away from the real play. That being said, he might be a good guy to target in the first 3 weeks if he is underperforming. The fact that he is participating in training camp and not just standing around watching ala RMoss makes me not too nervous, I just don't see the guy jumping out of the gate this year. But by week 5-6 I think he's Holt of old and putting up monster numbers....

Heya Fanatic,I disagree........I don't see this veteran rebounding if he is dinged up as much as they/he is leading on. This is either a decoy and he plays better than what 70 percent is for him or he's definately in for a declining year. I don't like the idea of choosing a player of his age at 70 percent and hoping he heals thru the year.....it's supposed to be the other way around.I am just not sold he's only 70 percent.

 

[YoUnG GuNz]

In the Five Minute Drill (is that the right name?), they reminded us how many times Holt has been a top five fantasy receiver. Any guesses? Wait for it...Once.And he was healthy. Yeah, I am scared. I would take him as a WR2, but won't ever have that chance.

Ahh in my league he was top 5 4 of the 5 past years.

 

[hellz_fireflies]

Holt at 70% is better then most WR's at 100%!

 

[gheemony]

Not many top 5s, but how many straight top 10s? Look at his actual points each year. He is a consistent fantasy producer at a position that is not very consistent.

He looked good enough in the preseason for me to make him my WR1. Anyone who thinks he has slipped to WR2 (i.e., 13-24 range) is nuts. He's definitely top 12. There are others in the group with less risk that should go ahead of him, but there are others with equal risk (e.g., Colston, TO).

The injury can go two ways: (1) he doesn't receover as well because of age and this starts his descent as 31-year old WRs typically do or (2) the surgery cleans up a nagging injury and he's able to continue to produce like other WRs of his elite caliber (Harrison, TO, Rice - all produced/producing into their mid-30s). I tend to believe that he is an elite talent and will maintain his production. In dynasty, expect a gradual decline, but not a huge drop. He still had 173 targets last year.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Holt at 70% is better then most WR's at 100%!

True story...but he's being drafted as WR 5 according to FBG's ADP data. So that means he has to be better than guys like:Wr6:Reggie WayneWr7: Larry FitzgeraldWr8:Roy Williamsat 70 percent.You don't have to sell me that he's better than most at 70 percent, but he does have to be better than those guys mentioned at that percentage or you made a mistake in drafting him.

 

[ImTheScientist]

In the Five Minute Drill (is that the right name?), they reminded us how many times Holt has been a top five fantasy receiver. Any guesses? Wait for it...Once.And he was healthy. Yeah, I am scared. I would take him as a WR2, but won't ever have that chance.

He's been a top five WR in my PPR league 3 of the last 4 years. edit: and he was #6 that one year he didn't make the top 5.

They assume Non-PPR footballguys scoring.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

Ignoring non-PPR(my league uses it), not only has Holt been top 5 plenty of times, but he's also one of the most consistent scorers across the board at WR in our format. Guys like Chad Johnson or Steve Smith(when healthy) may outscore him in total points, but Holt doesn't drop many clunkers on you. A few of the other top guys are spikey. Get a third of their points in 3 or 4 huge games and have an equal # of bad ones. Holt and Owens(and Harrison too, I guess. Don't have the #s in front of me for him) usually maintain a pretty consistent PPG in my league's format.

One could probably make a decent argument that getting double digit(or near double digit) points almost every single game from your WR1 is more attractive than a guy who may outscore him by 20 or 30 points, but do a lot of damage in a few games and have an equal # of horse collars, in head-to-heads.

The 70% thing isn't exactly what you want to hear....but Holt was probaly playing at 70% AT BEST a year ago. Still looked like Torry Holt to me. And that was with Jackson going ape like he did and getting all those catches.

 

[KellysHeroes]

In the Five Minute Drill (is that the right name?), they reminded us how many times Holt has been a top five fantasy receiver. Any guesses? Wait for it...Once.And he was healthy. Yeah, I am scared. I would take him as a WR2, but won't ever have that chance.

dude... u need to read some of the other T Holt posts... as already stated, hes been top 5 WR many times in PPR leagues.

 

[nygiants56]

Is anyone worried Holt may not be his ususal self this year? He has already stated he is only 70% healthy on the leg and the Rams have already shown a commitment to the running game and have added two more targets in McMichael and Bennett. Have you knocked him down your ranking at all? Were do you have him?

I'm big time worried about Holt.That offense has shown in preseason,it's moving away from a pass-first mentality, they seem more content to be a power running team now..Holt gets his #'s in bunches, and, seems to only do well against subpar defenses, such as those in the nfc weast alst season.he failed to score a td in 9 games last season.defenses in the nfc west should be improved, SF should be vastly improved.he's 31, and has leg problems..I'm worred about the ST Lou wr's as a whole, actually.they're all old and/or brittle..I don't think he catches more than 75-80 balls in 2007.

 

[ltaylor]

Why is this 70% statement being brought up now? They said all along that their goal was to get him to 100 percent by opening day. I have seen nothing to convince me otherwise. In fact, I have seen evidence to the contrary considering he caught four balls in the first quarter of last week's preseason game. We have heard of no setbacks.

So I have to think he is atleast 85-90% by now and getting better everyday. I don't know how some of you guys can just make up facts to try to support your claim. The facts are that under Leinhan last year Holt had an absolutely enermous amount of targets. Holt and Bulger connected on a lower percentage of those targets than in season's past in my opinion because they were adjusting to a new scheme.

I think Holt will catch 100 balls this year and in my PPR league had him ranked as the #2 WR on the board.

 

[Tau837]

Why is this 70% statement being brought up now? They said all along that their goal was to get him to 100 percent by opening day. I have seen nothing to convince me otherwise. In fact, I have seen evidence to the contrary considering he caught four balls in the first quarter of last week's preseason game. We have heard of no setbacks.So I have to think he is atleast 85-90% by now and getting better everyday. I don't know how some of you guys can just make up facts to try to support your claim. The facts are that under Leinhan last year Holt had an absolutely enermous amount of targets. Holt and Bulger connected on a lower percentage of those targets than in season's past in my opinion because they were adjusting to a new scheme. I think Holt will catch 100 balls this year and in my PPR league had him ranked as the #2 WR on the board.

I hope my leage mates are thinking like most of the people in this thread.Holt = speed

 

[5-ish Finkle]

'm big time worried about Holt.That offense has shown in preseason,it's moving away from a pass-first mentality, they seem more content to be a power running team now..Holt gets his #'s in bunches, and, seems to only do well against subpar defenses, such as those in the nfc weast alst season.he failed to score a td in 9 games last season.defenses in the nfc west should be improved, SF should be vastly improved.he's 31, and has leg problems..I'm worred about the ST Lou wr's as a whole, actually.they're all old and/or brittle.

I don't see how he doesn't catch 80+, regardless of what the running game does. What'd they rush for a year ago? 1800ish on the ground I believe. And what were Holt's totals? 90+ for 1200-ish? I think his career is pretty indicative that he'll get his no matter how good the Rams running game may be.If the passing game does scale back, Holt's targets won't suffer much, if at all. Bennett's/Ike's/and especially Jackson's will. Jackson almost certainly won't get 80+ catches again regardless of how the running game performs.Also something to ponder: if we are to believe that the Rams are rededicating themselves to all this power running, why were two of their "bigger" offseason acquisitions a WR and a pass-catching TE?Linehan knows where his bread's buttered, IMO, and it's not lining up Jackson/Leonard behind the backup nose-guard in an elephant package. They still play against the same weak pass defenses in that division and aren't exactly a defensive juggernaut themselves. There will be games that they have to throw to win. They've been successful doing that in the past and they'll do it again when forced.As for him putting up his #s in bunches....I guess I just don't see it compared to the other top tier wideouts. In his last 3 seasons (46 games), he's had 35 of them with a minimum of 5 catches. Only 5 games with 3 or less. He's had 13 with 8 or more. 6 games with 10+. Compare that to Chad Johnson over his last 46 game span. CJ's had 33 games with a minimum of 5 catches. He had 9 games of 3 catches or less. 10 games with 8 or more catches. 4 games with 10+. Holt trumps him in TDs 33 to 24. How 'bout Steve Smith? Last 46 games he's had 32 games with at least 5 catches. Like Johnson, he's had 9 with 3 or less. Like Holt, he's had 13 games wit 8 or more catches. 4 with 10 or more. He's had 25 TDs in that span. Basically that was a long-winded way to illustrate what I mentioned earlier: Holt gets his numbers more consistently from week to week than some other top tier WRs. They'll have very similar year end totals most years, with the other two I used in this comparison typically outscoring Holt in total points, but Holt is more consistent game to game. More games of at least 5 catches, half the games with 3 catches or less and more TD receptions...yet you can draft him after the other two I compared him to in almost every draft that I've participated in so far? And sometimes after a couple other guys too? Sold. I don't predict Holt's going to be going off to the tune of 110 catches again any time soon, but I can't see how he doesn't fall right around his career normals if he's healthy enough to play a full season(even at "70%"). Near 90 catches and 1200-1300 yards. TDs are sorta random, of course, but I'd bet closer to double digits than not.

 

[BigRed]

:honda:This 70% comment has already been covered in one or more threads. It's old news.

You don't know where you are, do you

 

[turleyfan]

Apologies, in pairs no less:

1. I apologize for quoting Cecil without verifying his numbers. Not that I doubt them. Frankly, I don't have the time. Here is the link, if you missed it. You decide for yourself if the Holt discussion has any merit: http://www.onnetworks.com/videos/the-5-min...-wide-receivers

2. I apologize to those of you who play in PPR leagues. I don't. Never have. If there is a thread debating the merits of this format over others, I'll comment more there.

Re-stating my (Cecil's) point for clarity: Holt has only once been a top 5 receiver in regular scoring leagues. To draft him top 5 this year, you need to believe he'll be at least as good or better in 2007 than he has been before. It's fine if you do, I won't call on the carpet for it. I really do hope he falls down to WR8 or WR9 in my drafts, where I will happily claim him. But it's hard to convince myself that this will be a career year for him.

 

[CalBear]

Re-stating my (Cecil's) point for clarity: Holt has only once been a top 5 receiver in regular scoring leagues. To draft him top 5 this year, you need to believe he'll be at least as good or better in 2007 than he has been before.

Holt finished in the top 5 in 2006; he was tied with Driver for 5th. In 2005, he was 2 points behind Galloway for 5th. In 2004, he was 4 points behind Harrison. In 2001, he was 11 points behind Moss. And in 2000, he was 4 points behind Alexander.So you have a guy who has finished no worse than 11 points behind the top 5 in 6 out of the past 7 years. It's quite disingenuous to say "he's only finished top 5 once" and ignore the fact that he's been among the top producers at his position for that entire time. I'm not going to run the numbers right now, but I'm pretty sure Holt is the #2 fantasy point producer over the past 7 years, behind only Harrison.

There is also a more fundamental fallacy, which is assuming that Holt not finishing in the top 5 in the past means that there are 5+ WRs this year who should be selected ahead of him. Here are the other choices:

Steve Smith (only 1 top 5 performance, and finished #8 last season, behind Holt)

Chad Johnson (3 top 5 performances, a legit choice)

Owens (two years older than Holt, new coach)

Harrison (fine)

Wayne (only 1 top 5 performance)

Why should Smith be selected ahead of Holt? Why should both Harrison and Wayne be selected ahead of Holt? Do you really want Owens over Holt?

The next tier of WRs are frankly ridiculous to choose ahead of Holt; Fitzgerald, Roy Williams, Boldin, Housh. Holt is as talented as any of those and is in a better situation.

 

[SSOG]

I haven't cared about what percentage athletes say they're at since Soldja Winslow Jr. said he'd never in his career be better than 75% and then went out for 89 catches.

 

[turleyfan]

Why should Smith be selected ahead of Holt? Why should both Harrison and Wayne be selected ahead of Holt? Do you really want Owens over Holt? The next tier of WRs are frankly ridiculous to choose ahead of Holt; Fitzgerald, Roy Williams, Boldin, Housh. Holt is as talented as any of those and is in a better situation.

I bet I am coming across as more of a hater than I really am. I think he is an outstanding football player, and a very good fantasy player. Returning to the original question... does Holt's health scare me? The answer is "yes". A 100% healthy Holt, in my mind, deserves consideration to be chosen as the first receiver off the board. None of us is an insider here (AFAIK), so we have to either consider or ignore the information we have to work with... namely, that Holt is not healthy. In addition, I have seen nothing in preseason to assuage whatever concerns I had before. I am choosing to use there information to pass on Holt unless he falls significantly below his ADP. You better believe I would take Owens, Harrison, Wayne, Smith, and Roy before Holt. Maybe Fitzgerald too. After that, I can't say for certain.Clearly, you and I disagree on this. Intelligent people can come to different conclusions on the same information.

 

[CalBear]

Why should Smith be selected ahead of Holt? Why should both Harrison and Wayne be selected ahead of Holt? Do you really want Owens over Holt? The next tier of WRs are frankly ridiculous to choose ahead of Holt; Fitzgerald, Roy Williams, Boldin, Housh. Holt is as talented as any of those and is in a better situation.

I bet I am coming across as more of a hater than I really am. I think he is an outstanding football player, and a very good fantasy player. Returning to the original question... does Holt's health scare me? The answer is "yes". A 100% healthy Holt, in my mind, deserves consideration to be chosen as the first receiver off the board. None of us is an insider here (AFAIK), so we have to either consider or ignore the information we have to work with... namely, that Holt is not healthy. In addition, I have seen nothing in preseason to assuage whatever concerns I had before. I am choosing to use there information to pass on Holt unless he falls significantly below his ADP. You better believe I would take Owens, Harrison, Wayne, Smith, and Roy before Holt. Maybe Fitzgerald too. After that, I can't say for certain.Clearly, you and I disagree on this. Intelligent people can come to different conclusions on the same information.

It is reasonable to drop Holt based on injury concerns. It is not reasonable to drop him based on the fact that he's only been in the top 5 twice, when the people you're putting above him have, for the most part, not been in the top 5 twice, either.

 

[gheemony]

From the FBG Email today:

Source: Jim Thomas, St. Louis Post-Dispatch

St. Louis Rams WR Torry Holt took part in pregame warm-ups Friday but didn't play a down in the game. "Last week (in practice), I didn't see the fresh legs that I like to see," HC Scott Linehan said. Holt apparently experienced some swelling in his repaired knee after a hard practice earlier in the week. It has been nearly seven months since Holt underwent surgery to repair meniscus cartilage in the knee, but it's becoming increasingly evident that he will not be 100 percent for Carolina. Holt insists his rehab and recovery are on schedule for the knee.

But he added, "It has its good days; it has its bad days. There's been swelling in there that I have to continue to control. There's still some tenderness in there. So if I can manage that, I'll be all right."

So.... now do we (Holt owners) start worrying? Or is two weeks off (no "hard practices") enough to get him healthy for a week 1 start?

I must say, if I had any drafts coming up, I would no draft Holt unless he slipped quite a bit. He would be the last WR in his tier that I would draft. I might even put him behind some WRs in the next tier. The last thing I need is a high draft pick to be questionable for week 1. Now, if he comes cheap, I may be willing to sit and wait a few weeks for him to get healthy and then ride him later in the season. I know owners who did that with Steve Smith (missed first two games with, if IIRC, a hammy strain) and were moderately pleased with that choice.

 

[TeamDingo]

:camera: