What is your tight end strategy? (1 Viewer)

[Leroy Hoard]

I think Crockett Gillmore has a chance, thinking of scooping him up but I'd have to cut Michael Floyd in a dynasty and I'm not sure I want to do that for a TE3 (behind Graham and Cook)

I tried but failed to get CG, I think he will be pretty solid going forward.

 

[boltsfan]

Lots of squats.

 

[flapgreen]

If tge second concussion keeps Ladarius out for a while, Gates may become even more valuable

 

[The Football Freak]

If tge second concussion keeps Ladarius out for a while, Gates may become even more valuable

Ladarius has a concussion?

 

[The Football Freak]

Huh. Just saw it on twitter. Missed that. Questionable and a limited participant in practice.

 

[avina1]

If tge second concussion keeps Ladarius out for a while, Gates may become even more valuable

Ladarius has a concussion?

yeah went under the radar for me too.

 

[VikingFrog]

If tge second concussion keeps Ladarius out for a while, Gates may become even more valuable

Ladarius has a concussion?

yeah went under the radar for me too.

Odd that both his and Holkins concussions were announced today. I have no proof and it's literally just my memory serving me, but aren't these usually announced after the games (if they happened in game) so that the league knows they are under the concussion protocol?

Just seems odd that both him and Hopkins were announced today with concussions that kind of both flew under the radar and both seemed to finish their games, although I can't say that for sure for Green.

 

[kolp]

If tge second concussion keeps Ladarius out for a while, Gates may become even more valuable

Ladarius has a concussion?

yeah went under the radar for me too.

Odd that both his and Holkins concussions were announced today. I have no proof and it's literally just my memory serving me, but aren't these usually announced after the games (if they happened in game) so that the league knows they are under the concussion protocol?

Just seems odd that both him and Hopkins were announced today with concussions that kind of both flew under the radar and both seemed to finish their games, although I can't say that for sure for Green.

the symptoms of a concussion aren't always immediately apparent after the game; it can sometimes take 2-3 days for symptoms to appear. Such was the case with these 2.

 

[zftcg]

Haven't heard anyone discuss this idea, but it just occurred to me and I think it could work: Pair Gates with one of the injury-risk guys like Cameron or Reed, who could both easily be TE1s if they stay healthy. All you need is for them to hold up for four games. If they bust out and Gates comes back strong, you can trade with a TE-needy team (or, in my league with a WR/TE flex, start both).

You're not eliminating risk, but you are diversifying it.

Took my own advice and paired Cameron with Gates. All I needed was for Cameron to stay healthy for four weeks ... DOH!

Had to pick up Gilmore this week as insurance. Hate having to roster 3 TEs.

 

[flapgreen]

I'm rostering 3 and I'm cool with it. May end of using one at flex

 

[Kenny Powers]

I'm rostering 3 and I'm cool with it. May end of using one at flex

Ive started rostering 2 TEs lately because both my money leagues have 2 flex spots. It all depends on how your roster/draft goes, but having a 2nd good TE can pay dividends. Kelce and Eifert both look to be in my starting lineup every week even though my RBs and WRs are still solid.

If you are strong at RB but weak at WR in this same scenario I could see rostering 3 TEs

 

[flapgreen]

Right. 16T and have Gilmore, Delanie, and Gates. May use all of them at some point during bye weeks. 3 flex spots

 

[MattFancy]

I'm rostering 3 and I'm cool with it. May end of using one at flex

I have 3 right now as well: Green, Gates, Julius Thomas. Once Thomas went down, I just needed Green to get me to Week 5 when Gates/Thomas come back. Been a roller coaster.

 

[3nOut]

So at the halfway point of the season, who do we see as the top 10 TEs going forward? The usual suspects:

Gronk

Olsen

Kelce

Eifert

Gates

After that I think it's all a crapshoot. Barnidge will still be utilized but I don't think he can sustain his current pace. When ASJ returns I think he can be a sleeper as well. Who else can post top 10 numbers from here on out (not necessarily finish in the top 10)?

 

[shadyridr]

Reed if he stays healthy but he won't

 

[Arodin]

Reed, when healthy, deserves consideration...

 

[shadyridr]

No way is Kelce top 5. I'll say Gronk, Eifert, Olsen, Barnidge, Reed

 

[Franknbeans]

we're supposed to have a strategy?

 

[MNTom]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

 

[TDorBust]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

He is just so much better than an other TE option its just crazy.

Those trying to hold up Barnidge would you bet he keeps his pace down the stretch? Or does he regress? Gronk will not regress....

 

[Ilov80s]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

He is just so much better than an other TE option its just crazy. Those trying to hold up Barnidge would you bet he keeps his pace down the stretch? Or does he regress? Gronk will not regress....

No chance in holy hell Barnidge keeps up on some kind of Gronk like pace. Gronk is the one and only.

 

[3nOut]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

 

[Ilov80s]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

 

[TDorBust]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.

Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

 

[Ilov80s]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.

Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

It is just so easy. Why wouldn't you want a guy that scores like a WR1 and can be played at TE?

 

[flapgreen]

Just start whoever is healthy.

 

[Biabreakable]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.

Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

There are QB who outperform the other QB by a similar margin as well. Most leagues only require that you start one QB or TE with maybe an option to play a second TE as a flex. Because of this there is less scarcity at the position because there are fewer positions to fill and more useful alternatives in free agency than there are at other positions.

Drafting Gronkowski or other elite TE in the past such as Gonzalez, even with the first pick overall is certainly worth considering. You have to weigh that against your ability to fill other positions that may require two or more starters and therefore more depth at those positions being owned.

The guy who picked up or maybe even drafted Gary Barnidge might have a better RB or WR than the owner who took Gronk.

There is an opportunity cost for using a 1st round pick at a position where you only need one starter. Later on in the draft you may see opportunities to take other TE for value, but you will be less likely to do so because you made a large ivestment at the position already and will likely try to use depth to support another position where your team is weaker.

 

[TDorBust]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

There are QB who outperform the other QB by a similar margin as well. Most leagues only require that you start one QB or TE with maybe an option to play a second TE as a flex. Because of this there is less scarcity at the position because there are fewer positions to fill and more useful alternatives in free agency than there are at other positions.

Drafting Gronkowski or other elite TE in the past such as Gonzalez, even with the first pick overall is certainly worth considering. You have to weigh that against your ability to fill other positions that may require two or more starters and therefore more depth at those positions being owned.

The guy who picked up or maybe even drafted Gary Barnidge might have a better RB or WR than the owner who took Gronk.

There is an opportunity cost for using a 1st round pick at a position where you only need one starter. Later on in the draft you may see opportunities to take other TE for value, but you will be less likely to do so because you made a large ivestment at the position already and will likely try to use depth to support another position where your team is weaker.

You can also argue:- RBs bust frequently in the 1st

- Carrying multiple TEs makes you lose out on high upside guys

- Gronk + RB3 > Streaming TE + RB1 for simply points

Gronk will likely end the year as a top 5 WR at the TE position.

PS- who's a QB who has out scored the field by 30-40%?

 

[BobbyLayne]

Just start whoever is healthy.

Hoping Jordan Reed moved into bubble boy's house.

The card says Moops. It's Moops.

 

[Biabreakable]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

There are QB who outperform the other QB by a similar margin as well. Most leagues only require that you start one QB or TE with maybe an option to play a second TE as a flex. Because of this there is less scarcity at the position because there are fewer positions to fill and more useful alternatives in free agency than there are at other positions.

Drafting Gronkowski or other elite TE in the past such as Gonzalez, even with the first pick overall is certainly worth considering. You have to weigh that against your ability to fill other positions that may require two or more starters and therefore more depth at those positions being owned.

The guy who picked up or maybe even drafted Gary Barnidge might have a better RB or WR than the owner who took Gronk.

There is an opportunity cost for using a 1st round pick at a position where you only need one starter. Later on in the draft you may see opportunities to take other TE for value, but you will be less likely to do so because you made a large ivestment at the position already and will likely try to use depth to support another position where your team is weaker.

You can also argue:- RBs bust frequently in the 1st

- Carrying multiple TEs makes you lose out on high upside guys

- Gronk + RB3 > Streaming TE + RB1 for simply points

Gronk will likely end the year as a top 5 WR at the TE position.

PS- who's a QB who has out scored the field by 30-40%?

Well if we assume 12 team league where the starting requirement is 1QB and 1TE the baseline would be 12.

2014 PPR scoring

Gronk 266 points

Donnell (TE12) 153 points

Difference in total points 103 or 6.4 points/game

Gronk scores 57.5% more than TE 12

Luck 466 points

Eli Manning (QB 12) 339 points

Difference in total points 127 or 7.9 points/game

Luck scores 72.7% more than QB 12

 

[MAC_32]

You're over complicating this. K.I.S.S. - Gronk is so much better than everyone else at the position. Pick him then forget about tight ends. Use all of your resources at other positions. It was a messy first few weeks, but as the season has gone on the lineup has taken shape.

 

[tangfoot]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

There are QB who outperform the other QB by a similar margin as well. Most leagues only require that you start one QB or TE with maybe an option to play a second TE as a flex. Because of this there is less scarcity at the position because there are fewer positions to fill and more useful alternatives in free agency than there are at other positions.

Drafting Gronkowski or other elite TE in the past such as Gonzalez, even with the first pick overall is certainly worth considering. You have to weigh that against your ability to fill other positions that may require two or more starters and therefore more depth at those positions being owned.

The guy who picked up or maybe even drafted Gary Barnidge might have a better RB or WR than the owner who took Gronk.

There is an opportunity cost for using a 1st round pick at a position where you only need one starter. Later on in the draft you may see opportunities to take other TE for value, but you will be less likely to do so because you made a large ivestment at the position already and will likely try to use depth to support another position where your team is weaker.

You can also argue:- RBs bust frequently in the 1st

- Carrying multiple TEs makes you lose out on high upside guys

- Gronk + RB3 > Streaming TE + RB1 for simply points

Gronk will likely end the year as a top 5 WR at the TE position.

PS- who's a QB who has out scored the field by 30-40%?

Well if we assume 12 team league where the starting requirement is 1QB and 1TE the baseline would be 12.

2014 PPR scoring

Gronk 266 points

Donnell (TE12) 153 points

Difference in total points 103 or 6.4 points/game

Gronk scores 57.5% more than TE 12

Luck 466 points

Eli Manning (QB 12) 339 points

Difference in total points 127 or 7.9 points/game

Luck scores 72.7% more than QB 12

Math is hard. 266-153 = 113 points, not 103 points.

113/153 = 73.85% Gronk scores almost 74% more than TE12.

127/339 = 37.46% Luck scores about 37.5% more than QB12

 

[NREC34]

I'm in one league where I can flex TE and WR but not RB. So I drafted Gronk and Ladarius which worked out perfect with Gronk's bye week 4 and Gates suspended. Now if Gates injury is serious I could be sitting on 2 TE1s. Oh yeah, Ebron foolishly got dropped and I was able to pick him up last week. I'm really happy about having those 3 guys.

 

[Biabreakable]

Draft Gronk. Play Gronk. Done.

OK, we get it. You drafted Gronk. This thread is not for you. What do the other 11 owners do?

Trade for Gronk?

Exactly and if he was drafted after your 1st round pick you missed on the simplest strategy on draft day.Didn't need to make the decision but I was contemplating him at 1.01 prior to the season.

I feel so many people punt the TE position when there is such a large advantage to be had with Gronk. You are talking about a guy who will score roughly 25-50% more points than any other TE available on the board.

If Peterson or Dez or Rodgers were scoring even 20% more points than everyone else at the position they would be a clear cut superstar who would be looked at as 1.01 value.

There are QB who outperform the other QB by a similar margin as well. Most leagues only require that you start one QB or TE with maybe an option to play a second TE as a flex. Because of this there is less scarcity at the position because there are fewer positions to fill and more useful alternatives in free agency than there are at other positions.

Drafting Gronkowski or other elite TE in the past such as Gonzalez, even with the first pick overall is certainly worth considering. You have to weigh that against your ability to fill other positions that may require two or more starters and therefore more depth at those positions being owned.

The guy who picked up or maybe even drafted Gary Barnidge might have a better RB or WR than the owner who took Gronk.

There is an opportunity cost for using a 1st round pick at a position where you only need one starter. Later on in the draft you may see opportunities to take other TE for value, but you will be less likely to do so because you made a large ivestment at the position already and will likely try to use depth to support another position where your team is weaker.

You can also argue:- RBs bust frequently in the 1st

- Carrying multiple TEs makes you lose out on high upside guys

- Gronk + RB3 > Streaming TE + RB1 for simply points

Gronk will likely end the year as a top 5 WR at the TE position.

PS- who's a QB who has out scored the field by 30-40%?

Well if we assume 12 team league where the starting requirement is 1QB and 1TE the baseline would be 12.

2014 PPR scoring

Gronk 266 points

Donnell (TE12) 153 points

Difference in total points 103 or 6.4 points/game

Gronk scores 57.5% more than TE 12

Luck 466 points

Eli Manning (QB 12) 339 points

Difference in total points 127 or 7.9 points/game

Luck scores 72.7% more than QB 12

Math is hard. 266-153 = 113 points, not 103 points.

113/153 = 73.85% Gronk scores almost 74% more than TE12.

127/339 = 37.46% Luck scores about 37.5% more than QB12

You are correct math is hard.

What I did was divide the new value (TE 12 and QB 12) by the old value ( TE 1 and QB 1) and that is the percentage change. The other way to do this would be by subtracting the the value (QB12 and TE12) from the value (Qb1 TE1) then dividing that number by the value (QB12 and TE 12) which gives different results.

According to this what you are calculating is how much less the percentage of QB 12 and TE 12 are compared to QB 1 and TE 1

I was incorrect about the difference in total points from TE 1 to TE 12 which is 113 points not 103. Happens when I do math in my head some times.

In terms of points per game this means Gronk scored 7.06 more points/game than Donnell in 2014 Luck scored 7.9 more points/game than Eli in 2014

Giving this some more thought I think we are both wrong as the method that should be used is percentage difference not percentage change.

"

Percentage Difference is used when both values mean the same kind of thing (for example the heights of two people)."

This would be

266-153 = 113
266+153 = 419/2 = 209.5

113/209.5 = 53.93%


466-339 = 127
466+339 = 805/2 = 402.5

127/402.5 = 31.55%

So Gronk scored about 22% more than Luck did compared to the players who finished at 12 at their positions.

 

[Ilov80s]

I don't need math to tell me Gronk was a better pick then Luck.

 

[ghostguy123]

what is with all the percentages?? Those are meaningless. The total points is what matters.

Either way, much of the arguments here are meaningless because, unfortunately, you dont know the final season stats before week 1. Sorry.