Where to draft Rob Gronkowski in 2012? (1 Viewer)

[General Tso]

As someone who has watched every play for the Patriots the last two years, I think you can make a convincing argument that Gronk is not only the best TE in football, but also the most dominant player overall. He's going in the first round at my draft next year. Guaranteed. And if I have the first pick, he's going #1 overall. Laugh all you want, but I will have just exceeded the point total of my competition's WR1 and TE1. It"ll be tough to pass on one of the big 3 QB's but Gronk is an absolute beast - and he's only getting better.

Think about this - last night Gronk scored more TD's in one half than I got all year from my TE position. Extreme example I know.

 

[Kenny Powers]

As someone who has watched every play for the Patriots the last two years, I think you can make a convincing argument that Gronk is not only the best TE in football, but also the most dominant player overall. He's going in the first round at my draft next year. Guaranteed. And if I have the first pick, he's going #1 overall. Laugh all you want, but I will have just exceeded the point total of my competition's WR1 and TE1. It"ll be tough to pass on one of the big 3 QB's but Gronk is an absolute beast - and he's only getting better.

Think about this - last night Gronk scored more TD's in one half than I got all year from my TE position. Extreme example I know.

I could probably play a WW TE all season and still get more than 3TDs. Thats your fault if you drafted Winslow or Cook or something and doesnt mean Gronk should go #1 because of that.

 

[pecorino]

i remember years back when folks with the first overall pick crossed their fingers to snag Antonio Gates at the swing picks 2.12/3.01. i don't recall how often Gates fell to that spot but my guess is about half the time. that's about when i'd look to take Gronkowski myself.

by the way, you might want to read up on the statistical concept regression to the mean Peyton Hillis might be able to help you with that one. I'll be looking for the anti-Gronks: the players who underperformed last year especially with regards to touchdowns which seem to be more sensitive than yardage (doug drinen was all over this a decade ago). see also: (WR) Bowe, Marshall, Crabtree, (RB) Hillis, and (TE) Jason Whitten.

1. Hillis is no Gronk as far as talent for his position. Horrible example, imo.2. We are all looking for those players. But players like Gronk can single handedly win you a championship. Even if you have to spend a 2nd round pick on him.

Hillis is my example of regression to the mean. Gates is my example of a dominant TE who some drafted in the mid-to-late 2nd round back in the day. i agree that a 2nd rounder on Gronkowski is reasonable and could be a title-bringer, as it was with Gates. at the same time, i'd be willing to wager that Gronkowski's TD numbers will regress, probably significantly, next year.

 

[dwyadog]

"i'd be willing to wager that Gronkowski's TD numbers will regress, probably significantly, next year. "

I guess it would be depend on scoring system but in my main league, if we took away 50% of gronks total td's and 200 yards he still would have finished as TE2, 3 ppg ahead of TE3. If thats what we're looking at for his floor, when he's still learning, I'd be all over that in the second as opposed to rolling the dice on a turner, sjax, gore etc depending on where adp shakes out for those guys.

eta: in a mando-te league, even taking away all those yards and td's, he'd still be huge in a h2h league.

 

[Major]

Having that type of production out of your TE is Never seen a TE drafted in the 1st round but it could happen. Thankfully, I have him as a 13th round keeper

 

[Sienna2012]

Depends on your league as to where Gronk or even Jimmy Graham for that matter will go. I know in my league, one of these guys will be there in third round. I am just not sure if I want to draft a TE that early. It is going to depend on who is available. Hernandez is a nice later round pick

 

[Bayhawks]

by the way, you might want to read up on the statistical concept regression to the mean

YOU might actually want to read up on it.According to this theory, if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on a second measurement, and, if it is extreme on a second measurement, it will tend to have been closer to the average on the first measurement

In Gronkowski's rookie season, he had a huge season, and many people believed he wouldn't be able to duplicate it, which is part of the reason why (on average) 8 other TEs were drafted ahead of him.

So, according to regression to the mean, since the "second measurement" was extreme, the "first measurement" will be closer to the average.

In plain english: since Gronk's 2nd season was so great, his first season will be closer to his "average."

A reminder, his 1st season: 11 starts, 42 catches, 547 yards, 10 TDs. Adjusting the stats for his status as a full-time starter, and you are looking at between 800-900 yards and double digit TDs, as his "average."

Whether that is worthy of a 2nd round pick or not is up for debate, but your attempt to use "regression to the mean" as justification for predicting significantly lower stats for Gronkowski is not based on fact or logic.

 

[DevilDog919]

by the way, you might want to read up on the statistical concept regression to the mean

YOU might actually want to read up on it.According to this theory, if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on a second measurement, and, if it is extreme on a second measurement, it will tend to have been closer to the average on the first measurement

In Gronkowski's rookie season, he had a huge season, and many people believed he wouldn't be able to duplicate it, which is part of the reason why (on average) 8 other TEs were drafted ahead of him.

So, according to regression to the mean, since the "second measurement" was extreme, the "first measurement" will be closer to the average.

In plain english: since Gronk's 2nd season was so great, his first season will be closer to his "average."

A reminder, his 1st season: 11 starts, 42 catches, 547 yards, 10 TDs. Adjusting the stats for his status as a full-time starter, and you are looking at between 800-900 yards and double digit TDs, as his "average."

Whether that is worthy of a 2nd round pick or not is up for debate, but your attempt to use "regression to the mean" as justification for predicting significantly lower stats for Gronkowski is not based on fact or logic.

I think people have forgotten what Gronk did as a ROOKIE. In New England with Brady throwing to him, I think he's a lock for 10+ TD's barring injury. His per game averages were 3.8 receptions, 49 yards, and 0.9 TD's per start as a ROOKIE. In 2011, he averaged 5.6 receptions, 83 yards, and 1.06 TD's per start. I assume if everyone thinks his ROOKIE season is going to be his average, this "regression to the mean" talk could be valid. I mean, if we want to take the average per start of his 2 seasons then we can. 4.7 receptions per game, 66 yards per game, 0.98 TD's per game. 75 receptions, 1056 yards, 16 TD's. I'll take his "regression".

Its a new, passing league now. Gronk is one of the most athletically gifted TE's with one of the best passers of all time throwing to him. Thats something Gates has never had. At least until Brady retires, I think Gronk easily outproduces Gates great years.

 

[Sinrman]

If you want the Gronk, you better be prepared to spend an early round 2 pick.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

all leagues are different, but in my league he was about the 5th highest scoring w/r/t, with I think only foster, mccoy, and rice significantly outscoring him.

people are simply in the habit of taking the te in certain rounds, but I'd be curious to hear why, other than that reason, he shouldn't just be treated as the 5th highest scoring guy and drafted accordingly.

the other consideration, aside from raw points, is positionsl scarcity, which is why you typically see so many rb go before wr, but in gronk's case positional scarcity would work to actually bubble him up higher than the rb.

traditionally, you might see a te go in round 4, let's say, but traditionally there hasn't ever been a te with this kind of production.

the other argument to keep him in the 'te rounds' would be regression to the mean, but people get kind of ######ed with this, because it sounds like statistical jargon to them and they think it makes them sound smarter than they really are.

I doubt 90% of people who use that phrase on a fantasy football message board have any idea wtf they're talking about.

if you really wanted to go deep into it, while positional scarcity should already give him the edge against the higher scoring rb position -- what about injuries?

any player can get injured, and foster 'regressed to the mean' this year as a whole by missing games.

I wouldn't normally put a lot of weight on guessing who gets injured, but comparing positions, and needing reliable production from an early pick, how many rb injuries do you normally see vs the te position?

traditionally, the qb goes below the stud rb and wr in most drafts, but I think in recent years you might've seen a brees, rodgers, or vick get drafted unusually high because of unusual production.

and this is at a position where scarcity is not as strong as in gronk's case.

 

[Sienna2012]

You had a point?

The only thing I did was explain why he won't be a 2nd rounder. I didn't say anything about his numbers this year not being worth a 2nd round pick. If he could put up these numbers next year, then he's worth a 2nd rounder. And probably a late 1st.

You didn't make a point, or back it up, or provide anything resembling an argument. Tell us what you project for his numbers next year, and why he is so much better than other TE options. Or do you just project every player to put up the same numbers they put up the previous year??

Or you could make us a list of 24 guys you'd draft before Gronk.This should be good.

[standard 12-team 1 PPR league]

Just so I am crystal clear here: You refuse to provide a projection for Gronkowski next year, or make a decent argument for him, aside from some vague 'I like wins' clutter, yet want me to list every player I would draft before him?

Are you serious?

Funny thing is, I am not even saying he won't deserve it next year. I owned Gronkowski this year, and I think he's s stud. I am explaining why he won't go in the 2nd round, on average, next year.

His ADP next year is not going to be 24 or above. That's my only argument. I don't think TE cannot go in the 2nd, or be worth a 2nd. I am just saying, in most leagues, he isn't going in the top 24 picks.

If ESPN (heck, Berry has him 9th right now) and Yahoo have him top 24, he'll be going top 24.I personally would target him as a mid-late 2nd round pick as is. If they add Lloyd or another talented WR, I might switch to targetting Graham in the 3rd or Hernandez in the 5th-6th.

Like you, I am targeting Graham in the third. I am not reaching for Gronk or Graham in the second. If I cant get either on in the third, oh well. Hernadez and a host of other tight ends will be there in the fifth. Heck I won my league with Antonio Gates.

 

[Thunderlips]

I thought Sharks came here???

I'm going with the value play....that being Aaron Hernandez.

 

[Zeff]

He's got to prove it again, first. He might, but history suggests you'd be a rube to wager on it.

Seems like every year, some TE (or maybe two of them) really separates himself (/separate themselves) from the pack, and the following year, somebody in every draft invests a 2nd/3rd rounder on them.

We have a name for these guys.

"Suckers."

Because the pick never pans out value wise. Do Gronk's #'s merit that kind of consideration? For sure. But you have to be awfully new to this hobby not to know we've been through this a trillion times with the Winslows and the Coateses and the Sharpes and the Gonzos and the Gateses. Same story, inflated #'s across the board, different year.

Learn from history or be left behind.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

here is what I learned from the gateses:

rookie - 24/389/2

2nd year - 81/964/13

3rd year - 89/1101/10

 

[Bayhawks]

He's got to prove it again, first. He might, but history suggests you'd be a rube to wager on it.

Seems like every year, some TE (or maybe two of them) really separates himself (/separate themselves) from the pack, and the following year, somebody in every draft invests a 2nd/3rd rounder on them.

We have a name for these guys.

"Suckers."

Because the pick never pans out value wise. Do Gronk's #'s merit that kind of consideration? For sure. But you have to be awfully new to this hobby not to know we've been through this a trillion times with the Winslows and the Coateses and the Sharpes and the Gonzos and the Gateses. Same story, inflated #'s across the board, different year.

Learn from history or be left behind.

This guy gets it. You have to learn from history. You don't want to waste a high pick on a "flash-in-the-pan" TE. Sharpe: 1992-1998-SEVEN CONSECUTIVE top-4 FF TE finishes

Coates: 1993-1998-SIX CONSECUTIVE top-3 FF TE finishes

Gonzalez: 1998-2011-FOURTEEN CONSECUTIVE top-10 FF TE finishes (11 of them were top-5)

Gates: 2004-2011-EIGHT CONSECUTIVE top-7 FF TE finishes (7 of them were top-4)

Yeah, why would you spend a high pick on a TE like that? "Suckers."

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

 

[Zeff]

He's got to prove it again, first. He might, but history suggests you'd be a rube to wager on it.

Seems like every year, some TE (or maybe two of them) really separates himself (/separate themselves) from the pack, and the following year, somebody in every draft invests a 2nd/3rd rounder on them.

We have a name for these guys.

"Suckers."

Because the pick never pans out value wise. Do Gronk's #'s merit that kind of consideration? For sure. But you have to be awfully new to this hobby not to know we've been through this a trillion times with the Winslows and the Coateses and the Sharpes and the Gonzos and the Gateses. Same story, inflated #'s across the board, different year.

Learn from history or be left behind.

This guy gets it. You have to learn from history. You don't want to waste a high pick on a "flash-in-the-pan" TE. Sharpe: 1992-1998-SEVEN CONSECUTIVE top-4 FF TE finishes

Coates: 1993-1998-SIX CONSECUTIVE top-3 FF TE finishes

Gonzalez: 1998-2011-FOURTEEN CONSECUTIVE top-10 FF TE finishes (11 of them were top-5)

Gates: 2004-2011-EIGHT CONSECUTIVE top-7 FF TE finishes (7 of them were top-4)

Yeah, why would you spend a high pick on a TE like that? "Suckers."

Having a "top X finish" is not even remotely close to the same thing as returning value for a pick. So not only are you one of those early TE-drafting suckers who get steamrolled, but you're also a statistical nincompoop. Kudos.The ONLY way a TE earns value on a pick like that is when he finishes as the runaway-train-#1 TE again...with numbers that dwarf his contemporaries. You're pretty much citing a lot of evidence of exactly the opposite.

People who are ignorant of history may be doomed to repeat it, but people who aren't able to grasp the simple concepts behind it should probably just give up trying.

 

[Warrior]

As someone who has watched every play for the Patriots the last two years, I think you can make a convincing argument that Gronk is not only the best TE in football, but also the most dominant player overall. He's going in the first round at my draft next year. Guaranteed. And if I have the first pick, he's going #1 overall. Laugh all you want, but I will have just exceeded the point total of my competition's WR1 and TE1. It"ll be tough to pass on one of the big 3 QB's but Gronk is an absolute beast - and he's only getting better.

Think about this - last night Gronk scored more TD's in one half than I got all year from my TE position. Extreme example I know.

to both

 

[Chigurh]

As someone who has watched every play for the Patriots the last two years, I think you can make a convincing argument that Gronk is not only the best TE in football, but also the most dominant player overall.

I agree (even though I'm not from New England and not a Patriots fan). I think he has become the most dominant receiver I've watched since Jerry Rice. Calvin Johnson is a beast, no doubt, but he can be shut down or game planned out of a game every now and then. Gronkowski has become unstoppable. He's freakishly huge and fast, has hands the size of frying pans, can't be covered by LBs, CBs, or safeties, and can't even be tackled by most DBs and many LBs.No veteran WR or extra emphasis on Hernandez will change the fact that Gronkowski is a total monster. Barring injury, he will get his numbers game after game after game. If we were talking about Brady possibly retiring next year, then I'd definitely be more cautious about Gronk. But as long as he and Brady are playing, Gronk is a top 12 pick in any league. I actually don't think I could make a list of 11 guys I'd take before him.

 

[Shutout]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

 

[DevilDog919]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

Wes Welker has had 112 or more receptions 4 of the last 5 years. When the Pats have a clearly dominant weapon, they continue to use that.

 

[Tau837]

by the way, you might want to read up on the statistical concept regression to the mean

YOU might actually want to read up on it.According to this theory, if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on a second measurement, and, if it is extreme on a second measurement, it will tend to have been closer to the average on the first measurement

In Gronkowski's rookie season, he had a huge season, and many people believed he wouldn't be able to duplicate it, which is part of the reason why (on average) 8 other TEs were drafted ahead of him.

So, according to regression to the mean, since the "second measurement" was extreme, the "first measurement" will be closer to the average.

In plain english: since Gronk's 2nd season was so great, his first season will be closer to his "average."

A reminder, his 1st season: 11 starts, 42 catches, 547 yards, 10 TDs. Adjusting the stats for his status as a full-time starter, and you are looking at between 800-900 yards and double digit TDs, as his "average."

Whether that is worthy of a 2nd round pick or not is up for debate, but your attempt to use "regression to the mean" as justification for predicting significantly lower stats for Gronkowski is not based on fact or logic.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

you mean like the marino record.....?wait........

or, scoring 10 td as a rookie te........

this doesn't shatter existing records, but certainly hasn't been done or approached much in the 50 yrs since ditka.

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, and they'll be switching back to mcdaniels next year, but one of the underlying assumptions implicit in these 'regression to the mean' type discussions is brady's performance --- gronk can't ordinarily get the ball without brady throwing the td, and one reason he scores an assload of td's is brady throws quite a few of them.

does anyone expect brady to 'regress to the mean' in terms of td production next year, and what would that mean be?

if we were to use gates as a kind of benchmark to underline what I'm talking about ---- gates had a qb throwing more than 30 td's one season in his career, and that was 34.

as contrast, brady has averaged about 38 the last 4 years he played, and spiked at 50.

if people want to harp on these long standing records from 30 years ago, and throw around 'regression to the mean' type arguments, I think there needs to be a little recognition that we very nearly had 4 5k passers this past year, and players on certain teams in 2011 aren't in the same situation as players on whatever random team 30 yrs ago.

now, the flip side of this is that if the league is trending in a certain direction, the other te's would benefit as well, meaning gronk wouldn't automatically lap the field, but that's up to everybody to decide how much edge you get from gronk vs drafting graham, waiting on hernandez, or whoever else.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

by the way, wtf are you talking about "a long standing record"??

vernon davis just had 13 td 2 years ago, which tied the gates record from just a few years before that.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Barring an injury to himself or Brady, he should produce like crazy again. The guy is virtually uncoverable. Unfortunately, someone will take him late 1st/early 2nd next year, and he will basically have to repeat 2011's numbers for that FF owner to get full value out of him. The question will be, do you want to take that chance? Odds are that his touchdowns and yards will come down a bit, but even with that, he should still dominate.

 

[Kwai Chang Caine]

In a semi-keeper league. I just traded Gronk for Graham. Would have to take Gronk round 2 and I'm thinking someone may actually take him in the first. Shooting for Graham ion the third.

 

[Chigurh]

Unfortunately, someone will take him late 1st/early 2nd next year, and he will basically have to repeat 2011's numbers for that FF owner to get full value out of him.

I'm not sure this is totally accurate. If we could all go back to August and draft with everyone in our league knowing what the stats for 2011 will be, you'd be hard-pressed to find a league where Gronkowski slips to the end of the 1st or early 2nd. Given position scarcity, I doubt he would get past 6. In 2012, I think if he just gets reasonably close to what he did this year, he'll easily be worth the early 2nd pick. If he continues to get better and surpasses this year's stats, he'll be a steal. He just way too good to pass up for the type of guy that would be available 12-15 picks into the draft.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I won't draft Gronkowski at all next year until I read:

this thread

this thread

and,

this thread

And, even then, I'll probably just start another thread, asking when I should draft Gronkowski, because by then we'll have a unanimous decision, and we'll need anew thread on the topic.

 

[thatguy]

The only RB's I'd take before him are Foster, McCoy, Rice, maybe MJD. I'd probably take Rodgers and Brees ahead of him, maybe Brady. The only WR I'd consider taking ahead of him is CJ, and even then, I might prefer Gronk. That makes him at worst 9th for me, but probably closer to 6th or 7th. IMO he really is that good and is not going to slow down... What would we great would be drafting at the turn and having him and Brady still available. I'd jump on that in a second, RB's and WR's be damned.

 

[Bayhawks]

He's got to prove it again, first. He might, but history suggests you'd be a rube to wager on it.

Seems like every year, some TE (or maybe two of them) really separates himself (/separate themselves) from the pack, and the following year, somebody in every draft invests a 2nd/3rd rounder on them.

We have a name for these guys.

"Suckers."

Because the pick never pans out value wise. Do Gronk's #'s merit that kind of consideration? For sure. But you have to be awfully new to this hobby not to know we've been through this a trillion times with the Winslows and the Coateses and the Sharpes and the Gonzos and the Gateses. Same story, inflated #'s across the board, different year.

Learn from history or be left behind.

This guy gets it. You have to learn from history. You don't want to waste a high pick on a "flash-in-the-pan" TE. Sharpe: 1992-1998-SEVEN CONSECUTIVE top-4 FF TE finishes

Coates: 1993-1998-SIX CONSECUTIVE top-3 FF TE finishes

Gonzalez: 1998-2011-FOURTEEN CONSECUTIVE top-10 FF TE finishes (11 of them were top-5)

Gates: 2004-2011-EIGHT CONSECUTIVE top-7 FF TE finishes (7 of them were top-4)

Yeah, why would you spend a high pick on a TE like that? "Suckers."

Having a "top X finish" is not even remotely close to the same thing as returning value for a pick. So not only are you one of those early TE-drafting suckers who get steamrolled, but you're also a statistical nincompoop. Kudos.

Um, ok. I was refuting your implication that top TEs (like Sharpe, Coates, Gonzo, Gates, and now possibly Gronk & Graham) have had seasons with "inflated numbers." Since those guys ALL have multiple consecutive years in the top-5, that argument is weak.

The ONLY way a TE earns value on a pick like that is when he finishes as the runaway-train-#1 TE again...with numbers that dwarf his contemporaries.

Wrong. He doesn't have to "dwarf" his contemporaries at all. If he does, that's gravy. But if he puts up 1000/10 (nowhere near his record year), that's essentially an extra WR in your line-up, each week. That is value.

People who are ignorant of history may be doomed to repeat it, but people who aren't able to grasp the simple concepts behind it should probably just give up trying.

People who don't understand that history can be a guide, but is not static, should probably stop posting. 1-History shows that top TEs DO tend to repeat top performances.

2-Gronkowski has two excellent seasons, so looking at 2011 as a "fluke" is foolish.

3-The league is different now than it was 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. It is a passing league, so while IN THE PAST, it wouldn't have made much sense to draft a TE so early, that is not the case now.

 

[Cecil_Pooples]

Lot of old folks posting.

We realize it difficult to adjust to new things, but this isn't your father's....or your...NFL anymore.

Deal with it.

 

[thatguy]

Let me ask a question.

This season, Gronk performed at the same level as the top WR's (had more points than all but 1 WR, Calvin). His situation going into 2012 is going to be the same. He is still going to be Brady's second favorite target, and his go to guy in the red zone. Teams have now had 2+ seasons to learn how to stop him in the red zone and haven't figured it out. That isn't going to change.

So, my question is: Do you still believe that Gronk will put up points in line with the top WR's?

If so, he is absolutely worth a first round pick, and potentially worthy of being picked before any WR.

If not, then he could fall to the second or third round based on your expectations, but I can't see any justification for passing on him in the third round. I for one see him having the same role and again scoring in the 200 point range (standard non-ppr), thus performing like a stud WR.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I'd say a very similar situation, but not exactly the same as they now have mcd at oc.

 

[Kenny Powers]

He's got to prove it again, first. He might, but history suggests you'd be a rube to wager on it.

Seems like every year, some TE (or maybe two of them) really separates himself (/separate themselves) from the pack, and the following year, somebody in every draft invests a 2nd/3rd rounder on them.

We have a name for these guys.

"Suckers."

Because the pick never pans out value wise. Do Gronk's #'s merit that kind of consideration? For sure. But you have to be awfully new to this hobby not to know we've been through this a trillion times with the Winslows and the Coateses and the Sharpes and the Gonzos and the Gateses. Same story, inflated #'s across the board, different year.

Learn from history or be left behind.

This guy gets it. You have to learn from history. You don't want to waste a high pick on a "flash-in-the-pan" TE. Sharpe: 1992-1998-SEVEN CONSECUTIVE top-4 FF TE finishes

Coates: 1993-1998-SIX CONSECUTIVE top-3 FF TE finishes

Gonzalez: 1998-2011-FOURTEEN CONSECUTIVE top-10 FF TE finishes (11 of them were top-5)

Gates: 2004-2011-EIGHT CONSECUTIVE top-7 FF TE finishes (7 of them were top-4)

Yeah, why would you spend a high pick on a TE like that? "Suckers."

Having a "top X finish" is not even remotely close to the same thing as returning value for a pick. So not only are you one of those early TE-drafting suckers who get steamrolled, but you're also a statistical nincompoop. Kudos.The ONLY way a TE earns value on a pick like that is when he finishes as the runaway-train-#1 TE again...with numbers that dwarf his contemporaries. You're pretty much citing a lot of evidence of exactly the opposite.

People who are ignorant of history may be doomed to repeat it, but people who aren't able to grasp the simple concepts behind it should probably just give up trying.

Is this a JuSt CuZ alias, because Im starting to feel like it is

 

[Kenny Powers]

Let me ask a question.

This season, Gronk performed at the same level as the top WR's (had more points than all but 1 WR, Calvin). His situation going into 2012 is going to be the same. He is still going to be Brady's second favorite target, and his go to guy in the red zone. Teams have now had 2+ seasons to learn how to stop him in the red zone and haven't figured it out. That isn't going to change.

So, my question is: Do you still believe that Gronk will put up points in line with the top WR's? YES

If so, he is absolutely worth a first round pick, and potentially worthy of being picked before any WR. NO

If not, then he could fall to the second or third round based on your expectations, but I can't see any justification for passing on him in the third round. I for one see him having the same role and again scoring in the 200 point range (standard non-ppr), thus performing like a stud WR.

Even the past few years, in my money leagues Ive only seen 1 WR go in the first (AJ or Fitz depending on the year, IIRC). Next year it will be Calvin.I could definitely see Gronk going in the 2nd, in fact, I expect that in most leagues. It will be early-mid 2nd in all liklihood though.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I'd say a very similar situation, but not exactly the same as they now have mcd at oc.

Was he calling the plays on saturday?? Just wondering. I dont think he'll go out of his way to try and target the non-Gronkinators in that offense.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Let me ask a question.

This season, Gronk performed at the same level as the top WR's (had more points than all but 1 WR, Calvin). His situation going into 2012 is going to be the same. He is still going to be Brady's second favorite target, and his go to guy in the red zone. Teams have now had 2+ seasons to learn how to stop him in the red zone and haven't figured it out. That isn't going to change.

So, my question is: Do you still believe that Gronk will put up points in line with the top WR's? YES

If so, he is absolutely worth a first round pick, and potentially worthy of being picked before any WR. NO

If not, then he could fall to the second or third round based on your expectations, but I can't see any justification for passing on him in the third round. I for one see him having the same role and again scoring in the 200 point range (standard non-ppr), thus performing like a stud WR.

I could definitely see Gronk going in the 2nd, in fact, I expect that in most leagues. It will be early-mid 2nd in all liklihood though.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Let me ask a question.

This season, Gronk performed at the same level as the top WR's (had more points than all but 1 WR, Calvin). His situation going into 2012 is going to be the same. He is still going to be Brady's second favorite target, and his go to guy in the red zone. Teams have now had 2+ seasons to learn how to stop him in the red zone and haven't figured it out. That isn't going to change.

So, my question is: Do you still believe that Gronk will put up points in line with the top WR's? YES

If so, he is absolutely worth a first round pick, and potentially worthy of being picked before any WR. NO

If not, then he could fall to the second or third round based on your expectations, but I can't see any justification for passing on him in the third round. I for one see him having the same role and again scoring in the 200 point range (standard non-ppr), thus performing like a stud WR.

I could definitely see Gronk going in the 2nd, in fact, I expect that in most leagues. It will be early-mid 2nd in all liklihood though.

Are you the guy I wanted to bet halfway thru the year that Gronk wouldnt go in the top 2 rounds??

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Let me ask a question.

This season, Gronk performed at the same level as the top WR's (had more points than all but 1 WR, Calvin). His situation going into 2012 is going to be the same. He is still going to be Brady's second favorite target, and his go to guy in the red zone. Teams have now had 2+ seasons to learn how to stop him in the red zone and haven't figured it out. That isn't going to change.

So, my question is: Do you still believe that Gronk will put up points in line with the top WR's? YES

If so, he is absolutely worth a first round pick, and potentially worthy of being picked before any WR. NO

If not, then he could fall to the second or third round based on your expectations, but I can't see any justification for passing on him in the third round. I for one see him having the same role and again scoring in the 200 point range (standard non-ppr), thus performing like a stud WR.

I could definitely see Gronk going in the 2nd, in fact, I expect that in most leagues. It will be early-mid 2nd in all liklihood though.

Are you the guy I wanted to bet halfway thru the year that Gronk wouldnt go in the top 2 rounds??

I still inquire anyone to put a list together of 24 guys they'd take over Gronk. As I still see some folks saying third round. [i think that's just the standard answer for when they used to draft Gates/Witten. And when the NFL was less pass happy]

 

[Sweetness_34]

I amseriously thinking of going Gronkowski, Graham with my 1st two picks in the FBGPC and follow it up with Gates or Clark a few rounds later or a Celek....

These TEs are $$$......you can find WRs from WW every year......see Cruz this year

...

 

[Coeur de Lion]

He's obviously pretty likely to regress - after all this was a ridiculous record shattering year. I see no reason, though, to project less than 1000/10 for next year, barring injury to him or Brady. Given that, he'll be good value in the late 2nd. If he goes for 1200/12, which is still significantly less than he put up this year and still a reasonable "upside" projection, he'll carry late 1st or early 2nd round value, easily. He'll be a league-winning value for anyone getting him in the 3rd, which certainly won't happen in any league that I'm in. Rice, McCoy, Foster, Calvin, Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Cam should probably go before him in most systems, but after that, who offers more from a low-risk / high upside perspective?

The league has changed, and getting a piece or two of the video-game passing system teams seems like it's going to be the way to go.

 

[Shutout]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

Wes Welker has had 112 or more receptions 4 of the last 5 years. When the Pats have a clearly dominant weapon, they continue to use that.

While 100+ catches are great year in and year out, Welker hasn't been a consistent dominant weapon for them.This year he was great (but finished 2nd fiddle to gronk)

2010-It was BJGE who had the 13 Tds and 1000+ season and Hernandez and Gronk combining for 16Tds and 1100+ that was the story there. Welker was "dominant".

2009-It was Moss. Moss and welker had similar yardages but it was Moss with 13 Tds and Welker with 4.

2008-Similar story but Moss had 11 Td, Welker had only 3.

2007-MOss sets the TD record.

And then of course the years before Welker, and when the Patriots D was a lot better, It was the running game for the previous few years.

So, Welker IS a very productive player for the Patriots. And he is very productive (especially in PPR) in FF. But its not accurate to say they use him as a dominant player (like he is a clear focal point all the time). They just simply use him, period and its a high scoring team.

And the broader point is that the Patriots demonstrate, by their history, that they change. They are not a team that is synonymous with a suffocating defense each year. Or the team that airs it out ad naseum to their WRs. They approach every single game as its own entity. And they are one of the teams in the league that would be first in line to attack you in various ways each week versus trying to do the same thing 17 straight weeks.

Gronk is awesome. He is going to be very fantasy relevant and will probably be a leader at the position for a while. But when you start taking him at the 16-24 overall top player, that means you expect him to basically repeat this year and dominate his position and give you an advantage and that MIGHT not be the best thing to do because unless he DOES put up numbers that basically set all time NFL records again, then he is a top TE but not one that gives you the advantages he did this year. A person might be taking a Gronk but passing on a Stafford or Aj or Newton (the type of player that is very likely to hold an advantage at the position). History with the Patriots and trends show that its not a guarantee by any means.

I don't blame anyone taking him really high. Just don't know if a person will get what they pay for.

 

[Shutout]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

you mean like the marino record.....?wait........

or, scoring 10 td as a rookie te........

this doesn't shatter existing records, but certainly hasn't been done or approached much in the 50 yrs since ditka.

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, and they'll be switching back to mcdaniels next year, but one of the underlying assumptions implicit in these 'regression to the mean' type discussions is brady's performance --- gronk can't ordinarily get the ball without brady throwing the td, and one reason he scores an assload of td's is brady throws quite a few of them.

does anyone expect brady to 'regress to the mean' in terms of td production next year, and what would that mean be?

if we were to use gates as a kind of benchmark to underline what I'm talking about ---- gates had a qb throwing more than 30 td's one season in his career, and that was 34.

as contrast, brady has averaged about 38 the last 4 years he played, and spiked at 50.

if people want to harp on these long standing records from 30 years ago, and throw around 'regression to the mean' type arguments, I think there needs to be a little recognition that we very nearly had 4 5k passers this past year, and players on certain teams in 2011 aren't in the same situation as players on whatever random team 30 yrs ago.

now, the flip side of this is that if the league is trending in a certain direction, the other te's would benefit as well, meaning gronk wouldn't automatically lap the field, but that's up to everybody to decide how much edge you get from gronk vs drafting graham, waiting on hernandez, or whoever else.

I really didn't see the reasoning of this as a regression to the mean. I just simply see the two things being that he set a record that doesn't get approached often at all. So, yes, its a new pass happy NFL, but to accomplish the level of performance he did just seems extraordinary and far less likely to be repeated than repeated.

And then the other thing being that the Patriots just have a history of adapting and doing things differently moreso than just doing the same thing each year.

Like I said, I think Gronk is a great pick and it might be that he repaeats this type of performance next season. I just think it is less likely than likely and would have to think really hard to use a #16 or so overall on him, compared ot who is available. Could I pass on a Stafford or Cam Newton or any of a list of players that might be more valuable in their position than gronk is to his? Of course the answer is "yes" if I thought Gronk was going to be used by the Patriots in the same way and put up record numbers again. But what if he is just "merely" a consensus top 5 TE and the Patriots use Hernandez more? Or get a big time WR? Or have a better defense and run the ball more? What if Gronk is Jason Witten or, on the high end, Dallas clark from a couple of seasons ago; that TE that is head and shoulders above other TEs and makes an advantage but, at the same time, isn't putting up Calvin Johnson numbers? In the latter case, I think people will regret making him the 2nd guy on their team. Beauty of FF. we get to see what trends are really trends and what is just lightning in a bottle in a season.

People swore foster couldn't do it again...and were wrong. Then again, people said just a year ago that Hernandez and finley were on the cusp of the perenial top TE spots. Chris Johnson was supposed to be the next dominant player for years to come following his record setting season and, as we saw, sometimes when you pump a player up based on the past and extrapolating it into the future, you get let down. I think, easily, there were more posts the past few years on how Chris Johnson, the no-brainer top 3 RB to grab on draft days, had killed people's teams. Sometimes it just doesn't keep rolling on.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

In the last four years here are the TEs who had 50+ VBD in standard scoring:

2011 Gronk (144 - 7th)

2011 Graham (100 - 13th)

2010 Witten (58 - 27th)

2009 Davis (75 - 13th)

2009 Clark (73 - 15th)

2009 Gates (65 - 21st)

2008 Gonzo (83 - 13th)

2007 Witten (78 - 15th)

2007 Gates (74 - 17th)

2007 Gonzo (69 - 19th)

2007 Winslow (62 - 23rd)

So Gronk could lose 60 points off his 2012 total (300 yards and 5 TDs) and still justify a pick in the early 2nd. He might not live up to that, but of the guys available after the uberstuds are gone in the mid-first he and Graham probably have a better chance than anyone else. Really don't think there's any way they slip past 13-15.

 

[butcher boy]

Let me ask a question.

This season, Gronk performed at the same level as the top WR's (had more points than all but 1 WR, Calvin). His situation going into 2012 is going to be the same. He is still going to be Brady's second favorite target, and his go to guy in the red zone. Teams have now had 2+ seasons to learn how to stop him in the red zone and haven't figured it out. That isn't going to change.

So, my question is: Do you still believe that Gronk will put up points in line with the top WR's? YES

If so, he is absolutely worth a first round pick, and potentially worthy of being picked before any WR. NO

If not, then he could fall to the second or third round based on your expectations, but I can't see any justification for passing on him in the third round. I for one see him having the same role and again scoring in the 200 point range (standard non-ppr), thus performing like a stud WR.

I could definitely see Gronk going in the 2nd, in fact, I expect that in most leagues. It will be early-mid 2nd in all liklihood though.

Are you the guy I wanted to bet halfway thru the year that Gronk wouldnt go in the top 2 rounds??

I still inquire anyone to put a list together of 24 guys they'd take over Gronk. As I still see some folks saying third round. [i think that's just the standard answer for when they used to draft Gates/Witten. And when the NFL was less pass happy]

Guys I would take over Gronk (in no particular order). It's nowhere near 24 playersDefinitely take before Gronk

Aaron Rodgers

Drew Brees

Tom Brady

Ray Rice

Arian Foster

Lesean McCoy

Maybe take before Gronk

Matt Forte

Calvin Johnson

I might be forgetting a couple guys, but that's about it. In some drafts, that could leave me looking at him as early as the end of the first round which I think on paper is too early, but I'm pretty steadfast in my strategy of NOT taking a Mendenhall or a DMC at the end of round 1 next year. Value may dictate that RBs are scarce and I should grab a RB in round 1 regardless, but I've been burned way too many times taking questionable guys in the first round just for the sake of "value" that next year I'm going for sure things regardless of position.

I've been almost positive that if I get a late first round pick, I'm going stud QB, but now I have to bring Gronk into the picture. Interesting scenario indeed.

 

[the Hood]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

you mean like the marino record.....?wait........

or, scoring 10 td as a rookie te........

this doesn't shatter existing records, but certainly hasn't been done or approached much in the 50 yrs since ditka.

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, and they'll be switching back to mcdaniels next year, but one of the underlying assumptions implicit in these 'regression to the mean' type discussions is brady's performance --- gronk can't ordinarily get the ball without brady throwing the td, and one reason he scores an assload of td's is brady throws quite a few of them.

does anyone expect brady to 'regress to the mean' in terms of td production next year, and what would that mean be?

if we were to use gates as a kind of benchmark to underline what I'm talking about ---- gates had a qb throwing more than 30 td's one season in his career, and that was 34.

as contrast, brady has averaged about 38 the last 4 years he played, and spiked at 50.

if people want to harp on these long standing records from 30 years ago, and throw around 'regression to the mean' type arguments, I think there needs to be a little recognition that we very nearly had 4 5k passers this past year, and players on certain teams in 2011 aren't in the same situation as players on whatever random team 30 yrs ago.

now, the flip side of this is that if the league is trending in a certain direction, the other te's would benefit as well, meaning gronk wouldn't automatically lap the field, but that's up to everybody to decide how much edge you get from gronk vs drafting graham, waiting on hernandez, or whoever else.

I really didn't see the reasoning of this as a regression to the mean. I just simply see the two things being that he set a record that doesn't get approached often at all. So, yes, its a new pass happy NFL, but to accomplish the level of performance he did just seems extraordinary and far less likely to be repeated than repeated.

And then the other thing being that the Patriots just have a history of adapting and doing things differently moreso than just doing the same thing each year.

Like I said, I think Gronk is a great pick and it might be that he repaeats this type of performance next season. I just think it is less likely than likely and would have to think really hard to use a #16 or so overall on him, compared ot who is available. Could I pass on a Stafford or Cam Newton or any of a list of players that might be more valuable in their position than gronk is to his? Of course the answer is "yes" if I thought Gronk was going to be used by the Patriots in the same way and put up record numbers again. But what if he is just "merely" a consensus top 5 TE and the Patriots use Hernandez more? Or get a big time WR? Or have a better defense and run the ball more? What if Gronk is Jason Witten or, on the high end, Dallas clark from a couple of seasons ago; that TE that is head and shoulders above other TEs and makes an advantage but, at the same time, isn't putting up Calvin Johnson numbers? In the latter case, I think people will regret making him the 2nd guy on their team. Beauty of FF. we get to see what trends are really trends and what is just lightning in a bottle in a season.

People swore foster couldn't do it again...and were wrong. Then again, people said just a year ago that Hernandez and finley were on the cusp of the perenial top TE spots. Chris Johnson was supposed to be the next dominant player for years to come following his record setting season and, as we saw, sometimes when you pump a player up based on the past and extrapolating it into the future, you get let down. I think, easily, there were more posts the past few years on how Chris Johnson, the no-brainer top 3 RB to grab on draft days, had killed people's teams. Sometimes it just doesn't keep rolling on.

You could be right on all the reasons for a Gronk regression. It's also very easy to make ones for the other guys you mention as "safer" picks. Stafford put up the 5th most passing yds and 7th most TD's EVER from a QB. Is it really a given he will repeat such amazing stats? The Lions had no running game this year which led to all Stafford's passing. All the Lions talk after the playoff loss was that they had to improve and rely more on a running game. Stafford numbers could suffer greatly.

Newton set the all time rushing QB record. A longer held record than what Gronk broke. Have to think there's a chance they don't rely so much on him and let the RB's try to get some more. If only to try to keep him healthy.

This was also Calvin Johnson's career year by a long ways as well. Why is it guaranteed he'll repeat such high numbers? 7th most rec yds all-time and 14th most TD's.

Lots of extraordinary numbers were put up by QB's, WR's and TE's this year. They all might suffer.

 

[Chigurh]

Rice, McCoy, Foster, Calvin, Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Cam should probably go before him in most systems, but after that, who offers more from a low-risk / high upside perspective?

I agree with this. And I don't think Jimmy Graham is too far behind. In a shark league where you can start another TE at the flex spot, going with Gronk and Graham in the late 1st and early 2nd would be a championship move. (If you play with a bunch of idiots, then you could maybe get one or both of them at the 3/4 turn.)

 

[todisco1]

Rice, McCoy, Foster, Calvin, Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Cam should probably go before him in most systems, but after that, who offers more from a low-risk / high upside perspective?

I agree with this. And I don't think Jimmy Graham is too far behind. In a shark league where you can start another TE at the turn, going with Gronk and Graham in the late 1st and early 2nd would be a championship move. (If you play with a bunch of idiots, then you could maybe get one or both of them at the 3/4 turn.)

It might be a championship move in 2011, but I don't know that it would work out quite that great in 2012.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

everybody's already aware of the numbers he put up, hence the creation of the thread, but just to underline how far above the 'mean' he is for the position.

9-11 td -- fairly common the last 50 yrs, average of about once/year --- this is your annual top guy

12 td -- just a very few select te managed to sneak past the 11 td barrier the last 50 yrs

13 td -- superte gates managed to one better the elite and set this record in 2004, being matched by vernon davis just a couple years ago

gronk just matched this 13 td season record in his last 8 games.

 

[DevilDog919]

I'm always leery of chasing a player too high when they have just finished setting a long-standing NFL record.

Yes, on one hand you can argue that he set it because he was the right talent at the right time and place (and with today's NFL rules, who's to say it won't continue?). But, on the other hand, you have to aknowledge that what he accomplished was something that had been a long standing record and isn't done or appraoched often. So, just based on what we see each year, it is not likely to be repeated.

But the bigger part that makes me leery is that this is the Patriots. If this were some team with limited playmakers, I might be more inclined to say "yeah, they will just ride this guy out all the time". But this is the Patriots and they make a habit of re-inventing themselves. One year they run for 16+ TDs, then the next they flirt with passing records. Then they beat you silly with the deep ball, then the slot, and now the TE. Just seems like, if anything, next year will be the year of Hernandez or maybe they go put and get a big time WR with speed.

I think that is one of the things that makes the Patriots the Patriots. They will let every other team in the league spend all off-season thinking up ways to deal with Gronk and then when we see them in Week 1 next year, they will kill someone with the running game and play action passes down deep. its just the way they are.

So I'm sure Gronk will be a top TE again next year over the course of the year and I'm sure he will have some big big games. But I think if people draft him as high as is being suggested here, then they are expecting pure dominance again and might miss the mark.

For me, I think I will go back and look at what value a guy like Gates or Clark or some of those guys have had when they have been "clear and above" the others and I will look at that as Gronk's fair place. Because that is what I expect; better than almost all, but not THIS dominant.

Wes Welker has had 112 or more receptions 4 of the last 5 years. When the Pats have a clearly dominant weapon, they continue to use that.

While 100+ catches are great year in and year out, Welker hasn't been a consistent dominant weapon for them.This year he was great (but finished 2nd fiddle to gronk)

2010-It was BJGE who had the 13 Tds and 1000+ season and Hernandez and Gronk combining for 16Tds and 1100+ that was the story there. Welker was "dominant".

2009-It was Moss. Moss and welker had similar yardages but it was Moss with 13 Tds and Welker with 4.

2008-Similar story but Moss had 11 Td, Welker had only 3.

2007-MOss sets the TD record.

And then of course the years before Welker, and when the Patriots D was a lot better, It was the running game for the previous few years.

So, Welker IS a very productive player for the Patriots. And he is very productive (especially in PPR) in FF. But its not accurate to say they use him as a dominant player (like he is a clear focal point all the time). They just simply use him, period and its a high scoring team.

And the broader point is that the Patriots demonstrate, by their history, that they change. They are not a team that is synonymous with a suffocating defense each year. Or the team that airs it out ad naseum to their WRs. They approach every single game as its own entity. And they are one of the teams in the league that would be first in line to attack you in various ways each week versus trying to do the same thing 17 straight weeks.

Gronk is awesome. He is going to be very fantasy relevant and will probably be a leader at the position for a while. But when you start taking him at the 16-24 overall top player, that means you expect him to basically repeat this year and dominate his position and give you an advantage and that MIGHT not be the best thing to do because unless he DOES put up numbers that basically set all time NFL records again, then he is a top TE but not one that gives you the advantages he did this year. A person might be taking a Gronk but passing on a Stafford or Aj or Newton (the type of player that is very likely to hold an advantage at the position). History with the Patriots and trends show that its not a guarantee by any means.

I don't blame anyone taking him really high. Just don't know if a person will get what they pay for.

Your whole point on Welker makes little sense. In the history of the NFL, 70 WR's have passed 100 receptions. Welker has had 4 of those. That is pretty dominant. To me, using him as a reception monster that racks up YAC is using him as a weapon consistently. You are using TD's as the only measure for consistency and dominance here. He's never been their redzone target, I wasn't saying that. I'm saying they stick with using Welker in the short game because it works. And as you showed they also used Moss as the redzone target while he was there because it worked for 4 straight years. Brady has also been a pretty consistent passer year in and year out. They will continue to use Gronk as the main redzone target because it has worked. When they have something that is clearly dominant and works, they don't change that.I'd argue for the most part you showed consistency apart from last season. Welker was coming back from a major surgery, they lost Moss, and their TE's were rookies. They relied heavily on the run game because they had no other real options.