What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

A word of warning to Tony Gonzalez owners... (1 Viewer)

SSOG

SSOG

Moderator
Just a reminder that Touchdown Tony G struggles mightily against the Denver Broncos, the best team in the league at defending TEs. Here are the results from Tony's last 4 games against Denver (since Bailey came to town, since Bailey is traditionally responsible for Gonzalez).

1/25/1

5/29/0

3/44/0

2/17/0

Remember that the bottom 2 games came in Gonzo's 102/1254/7 season (meaning he averaged 2.5/31/0 against Denver and 7/85/.5 against everyone else).

I'm not saying that Gonzo's going to suck this week by any stretch of the imagination... I just figured I'd remind everyone what he's up against. I wouldn't bench him for a Wiggins or a Stephen Alexander here, but he's probably going to be riding the pine in favor of Ben Watson in one of my leagues.

 
Thanks for that. I was leaning towards starting Heath Miller over Gonzo because of the loss of Green anyway. I think this thread may have just solidified my decision.

 
Not to mention Huard is the QB. Some may say this means he will rely on Gonzo, which he may TRY to, but the odds of him throwing a TD in this game are pretty slim, IMO.

I think the Broncos are going to lay the hammer down this week, and it's going to get nasty.

 
Hellfire Snail said:
Not to mention Huard is the QB. Some may say this means he will rely on Gonzo, which he may TRY to, but the odds of him throwing a TD in this game are pretty slim, IMO.I think the Broncos are going to lay the hammer down this week, and it's going to get nasty.
Click to expand...
I LOVE GONZO's shot with Huard as their QB as last game showed, look for a ton of passes thrown Gonzo and LJ's way. When Green (if) comes back, I would then look to trade Gonzo or expect his numbers to go down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Post 1.

SSOG said:
Just a reminder that Touchdown Tony G struggles mightily against the Denver Broncos, the best team in the league at defending TEs. Here are the results from Tony's last 4 games against Denver (since Bailey came to town, since Bailey is traditionally responsible for Gonzalez).
Click to expand...
Post 2.
Limp Ditka said:
Haven't the usually had Champ covering him since they acquired him?
Click to expand...
Emphasis mine to answer Ditka's question.
 
SSOG you are exactly right here. I've owned Gonzo the past two seasons and it was so painful watching him go against Champ twice a year.

 
I glanced at last week KC play-by-play.. I think there were a few passes to Dante Hall and Parker... other than that Huard went Gonzo REPEATEDLY mostly with success... including the TD drive that went over and over. Shortly they were too far down, with too little time, so LJ got zip, the D pulled back, and it was pointless.

I have to imagine Huard checks to Gonzo often. Denver stops LJ first, then looks at the passing game. 7/70/.4TD

 
It's subscriber content, but I would like to discuss the projections. Can we? It's tough to be pretty vague in this case. But I'm sure you can guess what it is I am thinking.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Game by game break down of what Denver has done to the TE in 2005

Team Player rec. yds TD

@ Miami R. McMichael 6 55 1

SD A. Gates 6 80 0

KC T. Gonzalez 5 29 0

@ Jax G. Wrighster 1 6 0

Wash C. Cooley 8 82 1

NE B. Watson/D. Graham 2 11 0 (Both TE's combined)

@ NYG J. Shockey 3 44 0

Philly L. Smith 1 1 1

@ Oak C. Anderson 1 18 0

NYJ D. Jolley 1 4 0

@ Dallas J. Witten 9 82 1

@ KC T. Gonzalez 1 25 1

Balt T. Heap 5 65 0

@ Buff M. Campbell 0 0 0

Oak C. Anderson 0 0 0

@ SD A. Gates 3 23 0

Suffice it to say, TE's do not fare well vs. Denver. Only five TD's credited to tight ends against Denver D. Also, it looks as though the thin air doesn't help the cause, with only 2 of those 5 TD's coming at a Mile High.

I play in a TE not-req league and I am benching Gonzo this week in favor of Michael Jenkins. Just seems like Denver in Denver has Gonzo's number and I am not one to play the odds and wonder when the pendulum will swing back. Now that I have said that, Murphy's Law says Gonzo will get 13 rec. 142 yds and 2 TD's. :bag:

 
Chase Stuart said:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)
Click to expand...
Here are the next three on the list.Donald Driver: 12.4 FP/G, 6.5 FP/G vs. Chicago; 31.1 FPs in two games in 2005.

Marvin Harrison: 18.3 FP.G, 9.8 FP/G vs. Houston; 43.3 FPs in two games in 2005.

Jimmy Smith: 13.8 FP/G, 7.6 FP/G vs. Tennessee; 22.5 FPs in two games in 2005.

That's six examples now, and the six most extreme: all six receivers averaged fewer than 60% of their season average FP total against these division rivals. Five of them dominated that same opponent the next year, and one performed about average. Gonzalez was at 56%; history seems to indicate that he's more likely, rather than less likely to do well against the Broncos.

This is largely muddled by the departures of #### Vermeil and Trent Green, but interesting from a theoretical standpoint regardless.

 
Does Bailey line up on Gonzo on EVERY play or only in obvious passing situations? I recall seeing Bailey on Gonzo before, but not what the down/distance situation was or the score. I would find it surprising if Denver used a permanent nickel just to take away Gonzalez.

Also, I watched Huard last week and his strategy was alternating...... throw it to Gonzalez or take the sack...... throw it to LJ or take the sack....... meaning if I were Denver I'd definitely put the ol bracket (and they say you can't learn things from video games) on Gonzalez this week.

 
I think that it's more that Denver concentrates on Gonzo more than anything else. Before they got Bailey Denver did a good job of keeping im in check, but it was due to a double-team back then. Now it's easier to put Bailey on him since they don't have that dominating wr. They also have their LB's concentrate on the RB out of the backfield on pass plays. You'll also notice that Denver throws alot more early in KC games. They want KC to play from behind, so they can play pass and just worry about LJ and Gonzo in the passing game. Denver has had mixed results with this strategy, but the won more than they've lost with it, so I suspect it to be repeated. Trent Green usually has a good game in a losing effort against them.

With Green out, everything could be null and void and they could play 8 in the box all day.

 
Chase Stuart said:
Chase Stuart said:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)
Click to expand...
Here are the next three on the list.Donald Driver: 12.4 FP/G, 6.5 FP/G vs. Chicago; 31.1 FPs in two games in 2005.

Marvin Harrison: 18.3 FP.G, 9.8 FP/G vs. Houston; 43.3 FPs in two games in 2005.

Jimmy Smith: 13.8 FP/G, 7.6 FP/G vs. Tennessee; 22.5 FPs in two games in 2005.

That's six examples now, and the six most extreme: all six receivers averaged fewer than 60% of their season average FP total against these division rivals. Five of them dominated that same opponent the next year, and one performed about average. Gonzalez was at 56%; history seems to indicate that he's more likely, rather than less likely to do well against the Broncos.

This is largely muddled by the departures of #### Vermeil and Trent Green, but interesting from a theoretical standpoint regardless.
Click to expand...
I would have figured this would have gotten some response. It seems to suggest there's no reason at all to read into this word of warning. :confused:
 
shakeybarn said:
I glanced at last week KC play-by-play.. I think there were a few passes to Dante Hall and Parker... other than that Huard went Gonzo REPEATEDLY mostly with success... including the TD drive that went over and over. Shortly they were too far down, with too little time, so LJ got zip, the D pulled back, and it was pointless.

I have to imagine Huard checks to Gonzo often. Denver stops LJ first, then looks at the passing game. 7/70/.4TD
Click to expand...
I know, and I'm not advising people to drop Gonzo off the face of the planet here... I'm just suggesting that people temper their expectations, and if they have a borderline stud #2 TE, play him instead. Personally, I think there are only maybe 5 or 6 TEs I'd start over Gonzo this week, just because he is likely going to be so involved in the offense... but still, that's 4 or 5 more TEs than I usually have in front of Gonzo.
QUEZILLA said:
Besides Denver, which defenses are the best at stopping TE's?
Click to expand...
Football Outsiders has a nice defensive breakdown by type of receiver.http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef.php

According to FO, the top defenses against TEs last season were Denver, Chicago, NYG, Jax, Ari, Cle, Was, Phi, StL, and San Diego (in that order). I don't know where everyone finished in 2004, but I know Denver was tops in the league that season, too.

Chase Stuart said:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)
Click to expand...
That's actually really interesting stuff, but I don't think it's entirely applicable in this season. First off, Cleveland, Oakland, and San Diego have never demonstrated that they're just unnaturally good at defending opposing WR1s... which means those low scores by those WR1s were more likely an aberration than a meaningful indicator, and the higher score the next year could then be viewed as simple regression to the mean. I mean, with the exception of Hines Ward, everyone else pretty much just posted their season average against that team in the next year (i.e. they went from poor against that team to average against that team). If that doesn't strike you as regression to the mean, I don't know what will.In Denver's case, however, they've demonstrated that not only are they exceptionally good at defending Tony Gonzo, they're actually exceptionally good at defending all TEs, period. For two straight seasons now, they've been the #1 defense in the league against TEs according to Football Outsiders- which is significant when you consider that they face Gonzo or Gates in 25% of the games they play. They've absolutely SHUT DOWN both guys for the past two seasons. There are also logical reasons that help explain Denver's dominance against TEs- first off, they frequently match Champ against the TEs, and second off, they have the fastest LBs in the entire NFL (and arguably the best in coverage). Finally, Denver has often used entirely different substitutions to defend these TEs (instead of a standard 3CB nickle package, against teams with great TEs Denver frequently goes to a "big nickle", which is 2 CBs and 3 Safeties)... meaning while these stud TEs might have a mismatch against any other team in the NFL, no team is more uniquely suited to defending these guys without allowing mismatches than the Denver Broncos.

I'm not ruling out the possibility for a big day against Denver- after all, Gates managed to go for 80 yards in week 2 against Denver last year. I'm just saying that expectations for Gonzo should certainly be lowered this week beyond where they already were given Denver's history defending him. He still deserves a high ranking, simply because of the sheer number of opportunities he'll be getting (just like you'd rank a 20 carry RB reasonably high, even with a poor matchup, just because every carry is an opportunity to score points).

SackDiesel808 said:
Does Bailey line up on Gonzo on EVERY play or only in obvious passing situations? I recall seeing Bailey on Gonzo before, but not what the down/distance situation was or the score. I would find it surprising if Denver used a permanent nickel just to take away Gonzalez.
Click to expand...
Actually, Denver doesn't use Bailey on Gates/Gonzo all the time. They vary the coverages up a lot. Some games Bailey will cover the TE the entire time, and other games, he won't line up against him once. The presence of Bailey certainly helps Denver cover Gates/Gonzo, though, because he frees up a second defender, leaving Gates/Gonzo either covered by Champ or double-teamed at all times... and as fast as Denver's LBs are, Gates/Gonzo really don't have the mismatches over the middle that they've grown accustomed to.
 
I would have figured this would have gotten some response. It seems to suggest there's no reason at all to read into this word of warning. :confused:

I mean..... I get it. The "HE'S DUE" theory. When a batter is 0-4 going into the ninth..... he's bound to get a hit right assuming his avg is at least .200....... HE'S DUE. Well, that's my interpretation of what you're saying..... makes sense...... I agree. :thumbup:

And it has nothing to do with the fact that I own Gonzo - swear.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
One check on these outlier rival games wouldbe to see if there was something else at play - like a blowout where they team had no reason to throw.

As an example, I'd bet the Raiders will look pretty good against Gates & SD WR this time next year with that game last week being averaged in - if they stink it up against SD again.

 
I dunno...I think I'd place the fact that Huard is new and probably will look to the TE safety valve factor ahead of the "denver has traditionally held him in check" factor. You'd have to have a serious boarderline stud te with a nice matchup to sit Gonzo this week, IMO. And if you too Gonzo early enough where you probably needed to get him, let's hope you didn't spend another pick too soon on a "near stud" TE.

 
JBTV said:
I dunno...I think I'd place the fact that Huard is new and probably will look to the TE safety valve factor ahead of the "denver has traditionally held him in check" factor. You'd have to have a serious boarderline stud te with a nice matchup to sit Gonzo this week, IMO. And if you too Gonzo early enough where you probably needed to get him, let's hope you didn't spend another pick too soon on a "near stud" TE.
Click to expand...
Gonzo ranked 15th in the NFL in targets in week 3 of last season with 9. Despite that, he still only posted 29 yards. In week 1 of 2004, despite 7 targets, Gonzo went 2/17/0. Just to show that a lot of targets doesn't necessarily mean a lot of value.Like I said, though, there are only 5 or 6 TEs I'd start over him this week. It just so happens in one league I happen to own one of them in addition to Gonzo (Ben Watson). And even then, I'm going back and forth on the decision. I agree that not many people are going to have a backup TE that's better than Gonzo, so the big impact this "Gonzo struggles vs. Denver" thing has will be on non-TE-required leagues.
 
Chase Stuart said:
Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded.
Click to expand...
This is very interesting Chase... and if you recall (on last week discussion about the "safe" way Dodds was doing projections - which was another very interesting topic) it all began on Larry Fitzgerald receiving totals against the 49ers and DeShaun Foster total yardage against the Panthers... and it ended when you confirmed to me that we shouldn't put too mch time looking at this by refering to the "Jamal Lewis against the Browns"...I'm with you on the fact that the previous 2/4/6 games against division foes probably don't mean much going forward (independant events) because much of the variables haved changed - or even if they are the same, why would history repeat itself for a particular player in that game (when so much variables are required in the equation)?...

But still, I think that we should look at this more closely - not just that one instance (Bailey/Gonzalez) - but in general when looking forward at Sunday...

In this example, as SSOG mentioned - the Broncos are reknowned for shutting down the opposing TE... Bailey is still there and has been covering Gonzalez since coming to Denver... Huard might checkdown quicker / or lock-in Gonzalez quickly in his reads - compared to Green... alot of variables that might mean a "upgrade / same / downgrade"...

There must be other instances like these that should help us dominate our draft... I just don't think that we should refute the fact that some matchups might help some players - simply by saying "Gonzo rolled a 1 with his last 4 die roll against the Broncos - there's nothing that should lead us to believe he won't roll a 6 this weekend"... he might be rolling a die that has 3 1-face, 2 2-face and 1 4-face when playing Denver, we need to look into that...

Obvisouly, as you have done, this is only interesting and meaningful for divison foes - even that sample size is small to begin with...

 
SSOG said:
Chase Stuart said:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)
Click to expand...
That's actually really interesting stuff, but I don't think it's entirely applicable in this season. First off, Cleveland, Oakland, and San Diego have never demonstrated that they're just unnaturally good at defending opposing WR1s... which means those low scores by those WR1s were more likely an aberration than a meaningful indicator, and the higher score the next year could then be viewed as simple regression to the mean. I mean, with the exception of Hines Ward, everyone else pretty much just posted their season average against that team in the next year (i.e. they went from poor against that team to average against that team). If that doesn't strike you as regression to the mean, I don't know what will.In Denver's case, however, they've demonstrated that not only are they exceptionally good at defending Tony Gonzo, they're actually exceptionally good at defending all TEs, period. For two straight seasons now, they've been the #1 defense in the league against TEs according to Football Outsiders- which is significant when you consider that they face Gonzo or Gates in 25% of the games they play. They've absolutely SHUT DOWN both guys for the past two seasons. There are also logical reasons that help explain Denver's dominance against TEs- first off, they frequently match Champ against the TEs, and second off, they have the fastest LBs in the entire NFL (and arguably the best in coverage). Finally, Denver has often used entirely different substitutions to defend these TEs (instead of a standard 3CB nickle package, against teams with great TEs Denver frequently goes to a "big nickle", which is 2 CBs and 3 Safeties)... meaning while these stud TEs might have a mismatch against any other team in the NFL, no team is more uniquely suited to defending these guys without allowing mismatches than the Denver Broncos.

I'm not ruling out the possibility for a big day against Denver- after all, Gates managed to go for 80 yards in week 2 against Denver last year. I'm just saying that expectations for Gonzo should certainly be lowered this week beyond where they already were given Denver's history defending him. He still deserves a high ranking, simply because of the sheer number of opportunities he'll be getting (just like you'd rank a 20 carry RB reasonably high, even with a poor matchup, just because every carry is an opportunity to score points).
Click to expand...
FP/G = FP/G from 2003-2004Riv = FP/G from 2003-2004 vs. specific rival

OPP = specific opponent

NFP/G = FP/G from 2005

NRiv = FP/G from 2005 vs. specific rival

Code: 
Name			  FP/G   Riv   OPP   NFP/G  NRivHines Ward		15.1   7.3   Cle   15.5   25.0Rod Smith		 13.3   6.5   Oak   14.5   15.1Eddie Kennison	13.0   6.8   Sdg   13.0   14.2Donald Driver	 12.4   6.5   Chi   14.9   15.6Marvin Harrison   18.3   9.8   Hou   17.8   21.7Jimmy Smith	   13.8   7.6   Ten   13.0   11.3Tony Gonzalez	 14.1   7.9   Den   ????   ????
The same arguments against starting Gonzalez could be made against starting Donald Driver against the Bears, or Marvin Harrison against the Texans. I'll go run some numbers to see how good Denver has been historically against tight ends. According to SSOG, they've been excellent. That might be enough to convince me, but otherwise, the data presented here seems to show that there's a good chance that Gonzalez' bad numbers against the Broncos are simply random. I agree though, the Broncos dominance against Gates and Gonzalez has been extremely impressive.
 
Very good work SSOG

I am a Gonzo owner, and I think I will be sitting him this week in favor of Whitten.

The ONLY factor that concerns me, is the new QB situation.

If he locks onto Gonzo as we seen, Gonzo could end up with 7-9 catches and a possible TD.

Which is a great game for any TE.

With that said, I am fairly confident in starting Whitten over Gonzo.

This reminds me one of my 1st years playing FF.

My commish thought I was nuts because I benched Herman Moore (when he was top 3 material) against WAS- who ALWAYS locked down #1 WR's. I benched him for someone I can't recall.

Anyway, that someone had a very good game, Moore finsihed with 2-27yds, and I looked like a genius.

This is the kind of info I find very informative.

Good job.

These trends don't lie.

Anything can happen, and players may be "due", but I put my lineup everyweek giving my squad the best shot to win each week.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
2005 FP allowed to TEs

cle 108.9car 117.0was 117.3nyg 118.0oti 118.3crd 119.4nor 119.9chi 120.6rav 122.6det 130.8atl 132.4jax 135.0htx 135.7tam 137.6nwe 142.7nyj 146.7sea 147.9sdg 148.9pit 151.7buf 153.1***den 155.3***rai 162.0ram 162.6gnb 167.6dal 170.2sfo 182.7mia 184.8min 190.9phi 201.9cin 202.6clt 211.6kan 232.8 :unsure: Against Denver:

Code: 
Name				 Tm	 Wk   Rec   Yd   TD	FP (PPR)Jason Witten		 dal	12	9	82	1	23.2Chris Cooley		 was	 5	8	82	1	22.2Randy McMichael	  mia	 1	6	55	1	17.5Antonio Gates		sdg	 2	6	80	0	14.0Todd Heap			rav	14	5	65	0	11.5Tony Gonzalez		kan	13	1	25	1	 9.5Tony Gonzalez		kan	 3	5	29	0	 7.9Jeremy Shockey	   nyg	 7	3	44	0	 7.4Mike Sellers		 was	 5	1	2	 1	 7.2L.J. Smith		   phi	 8	1	1	 1	 7.1Antonio Gates		sdg	17	3	23	0	 5.3Daniel Wilcox		rav	14	2	14	0	 3.4Courtney Anderson	rai	10	1	18	0	 2.8John Paul Foschi	 rai	16	1	11	0	 2.1Kris Wilson		  kan	13	1	11	0	 2.1Joel Dreessen		nyj	11	1	7	 0	 1.7Ben Watson		   nwe	 6	1	6	 0	 1.6Kris Wilson		  kan	 3	1	6	 0	 1.6George Wrighster	 jax	 4	1	6	 0	 1.6Daniel Graham		nwe	 6	1	5	 0	 1.5Doug Jolley		  nyj	11	1	4	 0	 1.4Robert Royal		 was	 5	1	4	 0	 1.4Jason Dunn		   kan	13	1	3	 0	 1.3												 155.3
:unsure:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
comfortably numb said:
Very good work SSOGI am a Gonzo owner, and I think I will be sitting him this week in favor of Whitten.The ONLY factor that concerns me, is the new QB situation.If he locks onto Gonzo as we seen, Gonzo could end up with 7-9 catches and a possible TD.Which is a great game for any TE.With that said, I am fairly confident in starting Whitten over Gonzo.This reminds me one of my 1st years playing FF.My commish thought I was nuts because I benched Herman Moore (when he was top 3 material) against WAS- who ALWAYS locked down #1 WR's. I benched him for someone I can't recall.Anyway, that someone had a very good game, Moore finsihed with 2-27yds, and I looked like a genius.This is the kind of info I find very informative.Good job.These trends don't lie.Anything can happen, and players may be "due", but I put my lineup everyweek giving my squad the best shot to win each week.
Click to expand...
:no: :no: :no:
 
I start Gonzo as a 3rd receiver and this info has made me re-think that. It looks like Muhammad will start over Gonzo

Another key stat: In 18 career games against the Broncos, Gonzalez has only 4 touchdowns on 70 receptions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chase Stuart said:
2005 FP allowed to TEs

cle 108.9car 117.0was 117.3nyg 118.0oti 118.3crd 119.4nor 119.9chi 120.6rav 122.6det 130.8atl 132.4jax 135.0htx 135.7tam 137.6nwe 142.7nyj 146.7sea 147.9sdg 148.9pit 151.7buf 153.1***den 155.3***rai 162.0ram 162.6gnb 167.6dal 170.2sfo 182.7mia 184.8min 190.9phi 201.9cin 202.6clt 211.6kan 232.8 :unsure:
Click to expand...
Denver faced Antonio Gates twice, Tony Gonzalez twice, Jeremy Shockey once, Jason Witten once, Chris Cooley once, Randy McMichaels once, Todd Heap once, and L.J. Smith once. The only TE in the entire NFL who finished in the top 9 and DIDN'T play a game against Denver was Crumpler. You don't think that maybe, possibly, that kind of sort of impacted the numbers a little bit?
Against Denver:

Code: 
Name				 Tm	 Wk   Rec   Yd   TD	FP (PPR)Jason Witten		 dal	12	9	82	1	23.2Chris Cooley		 was	 5	8	82	1	22.2Randy McMichael	  mia	 1	6	55	1	17.5Antonio Gates		sdg	 2	6	80	0	14.0Todd Heap			rav	14	5	65	0	11.5Tony Gonzalez		kan	13	1	25	1	 9.5Tony Gonzalez		kan	 3	5	29	0	 7.9Jeremy Shockey	   nyg	 7	3	44	0	 7.4Mike Sellers		 was	 5	1	2	 1	 7.2L.J. Smith		   phi	 8	1	1	 1	 7.1Antonio Gates		sdg	17	3	23	0	 5.3Daniel Wilcox		rav	14	2	14	0	 3.4Courtney Anderson	rai	10	1	18	0	 2.8John Paul Foschi	 rai	16	1	11	0	 2.1Kris Wilson		  kan	13	1	11	0	 2.1Joel Dreessen		nyj	11	1	7	 0	 1.7Ben Watson		   nwe	 6	1	6	 0	 1.6Kris Wilson		  kan	 3	1	6	 0	 1.6George Wrighster	 jax	 4	1	6	 0	 1.6Daniel Graham		nwe	 6	1	5	 0	 1.5Doug Jolley		  nyj	11	1	4	 0	 1.4Robert Royal		 was	 5	1	4	 0	 1.4Jason Dunn		   kan	13	1	3	 0	 1.3												 155.3
:unsure:
Click to expand...
Let's look at all of the TEs who scored well against Denver. You have Witten, Cooley, and Randy McMichaels who all scored well above their average against Denver. What do all three of those guys have in common? They all had a top-12 fantasy WR on their team. Is it possibly conceivable that the reason those three TEs scored so well is because Champ Bailey was covering this top-12 WR instead of this mid-level TE (I saw the games, and he was)?I also don't like how you used PPR stats there. It makes Gonzo's 5-for-29 performance last year look like a pretty solid outing, when in reality it was pretty brutally bad (Denver kept giving him all that underneath stuff and then stopping him after a 5 yard gain, short of the sticks, on third down). I do have to say that I think Gonzo's going to have value in PPR leagues this week, because I do expect a similar game- lots of useless underneath junk, no substantial fantasy contributions. Still, against TEs who are their team's primary weapon (Heap, Gates, Gates, Gonzo, Gonzo, Shockey), every single one underperformed his season average, some drastically, with the exception of Gonzo's 1/25/1 day.
 
Chase Stuart said:
Chase Stuart said:
Chase Stuart said:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)
Click to expand...
Here are the next three on the list.Donald Driver: 12.4 FP/G, 6.5 FP/G vs. Chicago; 31.1 FPs in two games in 2005.

Marvin Harrison: 18.3 FP.G, 9.8 FP/G vs. Houston; 43.3 FPs in two games in 2005.

Jimmy Smith: 13.8 FP/G, 7.6 FP/G vs. Tennessee; 22.5 FPs in two games in 2005.

That's six examples now, and the six most extreme: all six receivers averaged fewer than 60% of their season average FP total against these division rivals. Five of them dominated that same opponent the next year, and one performed about average. Gonzalez was at 56%; history seems to indicate that he's more likely, rather than less likely to do well against the Broncos.

This is largely muddled by the departures of #### Vermeil and Trent Green, but interesting from a theoretical standpoint regardless.
Click to expand...
I would have figured this would have gotten some response. It seems to suggest there's no reason at all to read into this word of warning. :confused:
Click to expand...
This is some really great analysis but it is hard to translate into actual execution as a FF player. For all of the examples you provided of guys who were able to turn it around I'm sure there are several cases of guys who didn't. If we could find a way to predict which players will break the trend this season that would be gold.Do they break the trend in the 3rd year? How many years before 2003 were these guys shut down by the same team. Is it completely random or is there a trend, what factors lead to the turnaround?

Great analysis but difficult to apply.

 
I know, and I'm not advising people to drop Gonzo off the face of the planet here... I'm just suggesting that people temper their expectations, and if they have a borderline stud #2 TE, play him instead. Personally, I think there are only maybe 5 or 6 TEs I'd start over Gonzo this week, just because he is likely going to be so involved in the offense... but still, that's 4 or 5 more TEs than I usually have in front of Gonzo.

Who are the 5-6 guys?

 
J-Rock said:
Chase Stuart said:
Chase Stuart said:
Chase Stuart said:
SSOG -- you prompted me to work on something which ended up taking quite awhile. But I won't hold that against you. ;)

Here are the parameters:

I looked at all WRs/TEs that scored at least 300 FPs from 2003-2004, combined. PPR scoring, no rushing stats considered. All WRs/TEs must have played at least 24 games, and been on the same team in 2003, 2004 and 2005. I then wanted to see which WRs did really poorly against a divisional opponent in those two years, and see how they did in 2005.

The lowest a receiver scored against a division opponent was 48% of his average FP/G. Hines Ward averaged 15.1 FP/G from 2003-2004, but only 7.3 FP/G against the Cleveland Browns. In 2005, Ward scored 49.9 FPs in two games against the Browns.

Rod Smith averaged 13.3 FP/G from '03-'04; against the Oakland Raiders, Smith averaged just 6.1 FP/G. Smith scored 30.1 FPs in two games in 2005 against the Raiders.

Eddie Kennison averaged 13.0 FP/G; against San Diego, he averaged just 6.8 FP/G. He scored 28.4 FPs in two games against the Chargers in 2005.

Those are just the first three receivers I saw. The table is way too ugly to paste here, but I'll answer any questions you like about specific receivers.

Conclusions

Splits happen. In four games out of thirty-two, picked at random, there would be a quartet of really ugly games for a star. I'm sure some stud RB has stunk it up in weeks 5 and 11 of the last two years. There's no logic behind that, of course.

The Gonzalez/Bailey phenomenon does have some logic though. Gonzalez averaged 7.9 FP/G in four games against Denver the past two seasons, despite averaging 14.1 FP/G in all games. That's really ugly, although not as bad as the three examples I showed you. So what does it all mean?

I don't think we can conclude with much certainty that Bailey shuts down Gonzalez. And I definitely don't think we can say that moving forward (i.e., this Sunday), that Gonzalez should be downgraded. Bailey is a very good CB, but he's not invincable; in fact, Jimmy Smith, Santana Moss and Terrell Owens toasted the Broncos for over 100 yards last year, with Deion Branch, Randy Moss and Plaxico Burress not too far behind. Gonzalez' poor performance against Denver in recent years is probably part luck, and part Bailey. But that's certainly not enough for me to downgrade Gonzalez much this weekend, in light of the three receivers I illustrated above.

(BTW, I think this is a fascinating topic. I hope you don't think I'm coming across as pulling crazy stats out to shoot you down. I ran the numbers, which took quite some time, and was going to post them either way. As I said, feel free to ping me for specific questions.)
Click to expand...
Here are the next three on the list.Donald Driver: 12.4 FP/G, 6.5 FP/G vs. Chicago; 31.1 FPs in two games in 2005.

Marvin Harrison: 18.3 FP.G, 9.8 FP/G vs. Houston; 43.3 FPs in two games in 2005.

Jimmy Smith: 13.8 FP/G, 7.6 FP/G vs. Tennessee; 22.5 FPs in two games in 2005.

That's six examples now, and the six most extreme: all six receivers averaged fewer than 60% of their season average FP total against these division rivals. Five of them dominated that same opponent the next year, and one performed about average. Gonzalez was at 56%; history seems to indicate that he's more likely, rather than less likely to do well against the Broncos.

This is largely muddled by the departures of #### Vermeil and Trent Green, but interesting from a theoretical standpoint regardless.
Click to expand...
I would have figured this would have gotten some response. It seems to suggest there's no reason at all to read into this word of warning. :confused:
Click to expand...
This is some really great analysis but it is hard to translate into actual execution as a FF player. For all of the examples you provided of guys who were able to turn it around I'm sure there are several cases of guys who didn't. If we could find a way to predict which players will break the trend this season that would be gold.Do they break the trend in the 3rd year? How many years before 2003 were these guys shut down by the same team. Is it completely random or is there a trend, what factors lead to the turnaround?

Great analysis but difficult to apply.
Click to expand...
That's the complete list of WRs/TEs that averaged fewer than 60% of their fantasy production against a division rival over the two year span. I wasn't just picking at random.
 
SSOG said:
In Denver's case, however, they've demonstrated that not only are they exceptionally good at defending Tony Gonzo, they're actually exceptionally good at defending all TEs, period. For two straight seasons now, they've been the #1 defense in the league against TEs according to Football Outsiders- which is significant when you consider that they face Gonzo or Gates in 25% of the games they play. They've absolutely SHUT DOWN both guys for the past two seasons.
Click to expand...
Chase Stuart said:
2005 FP allowed to TEs

cle 108.9car 117.0was 117.3nyg 118.0oti 118.3crd 119.4nor 119.9chi 120.6rav 122.6det 130.8atl 132.4jax 135.0htx 135.7tam 137.6nwe 142.7nyj 146.7sea 147.9sdg 148.9pit 151.7buf 153.1***den 155.3***rai 162.0ram 162.6gnb 167.6dal 170.2sfo 182.7mia 184.8min 190.9phi 201.9cin 202.6clt 211.6kan 232.8 :unsure:
Click to expand...
Denver faced Antonio Gates twice, Tony Gonzalez twice, Jeremy Shockey once, Jason Witten once, Chris Cooley once, Randy McMichaels once, Todd Heap once, and L.J. Smith once. The only TE in the entire NFL who finished in the top 9 and DIDN'T play a game against Denver was Crumpler. You don't think that maybe, possibly, that kind of sort of impacted the numbers a little bit?Let's look at all of the TEs who scored well against Denver. You have Witten, Cooley, and Randy McMichaels who all scored well above their average against Denver. What do all three of those guys have in common? They all had a top-12 fantasy WR on their team. Is it possibly conceivable that the reason those three TEs scored so well is because Champ Bailey was covering this top-12 WR instead of this mid-level TE (I saw the games, and he was)?I also don't like how you used PPR stats there. It makes Gonzo's 5-for-29 performance last year look like a pretty solid outing, when in reality it was pretty brutally bad (Denver kept giving him all that underneath stuff and then stopping him after a 5 yard gain, short of the sticks, on third down). I do have to say that I think Gonzo's going to have value in PPR leagues this week, because I do expect a similar game- lots of useless underneath junk, no substantial fantasy contributions. Still, against TEs who are their team's primary weapon (Heap, Gates, Gates, Gonzo, Gonzo, Shockey), every single one underperformed his season average, some drastically, with the exception of Gonzo's 1/25/1 day.
Click to expand...
Well if you said all that the first time I wouldn't have had to do any research. :P
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not to upset Chase, but SSOG is right here. The numbers don't tell the whole story. Watching Denver tells the story. They gameplan stopping Gonzales and Gates as they've astutely recognized that they are the primary receiving threats on their repsective teams, putting Bailey on them when they play. The results have generally favored Denver in this area in those matchups. So I would expect a sub par day from Gonzales and Gates when Gates play them - that's just how it is. Still, their sub par days are about the ceiling for most of the guys you'd have as backup tightends anyway, so it's doubtful you'd sit them.

 
Gr00vus said:
Not to upset Chase, but SSOG is right here. The numbers don't tell the whole story. Watching Denver tells the story. They gameplan stopping Gonzales and Gates as they've astutely recognized that they are the primary receiving threats on their repsective teams, putting Bailey on them when they play. The results have generally favored Denver in this area in those matchups. So I would expect a sub par day from Gonzales and Gates when Gates play them - that's just how it is. Still, their sub par days are about the ceiling for most of the guys you'd have as backup tightends anyway, so it's doubtful you'd sit them.
Click to expand...
Not so sure about that...Not only because it's not the case on my team, but there are ALOT more quality TE's now then there ever were. It used to be where, after Sharpe, Novachek and Coates everyone else was a crap shoot.

Now, at least in my league, several teams have a VERY good back up.

In other words, your starting TE is no longer guarnteed start EVERY week, at least IMO

 
I don't like SSOG's point that most of the TEs Denver played wound up in the top 9, therefore Denver was defending very well despite being below average in fantasy points allowed to TEs. Part of the reason those players were in the top 9 is that Denver allowed them a bunch of points. Obviously, Gates and Gonzo are exceptional cases, but Witten, McMichael, LJ Smith, and Chris Cooley are not; they're just TEs. The Raiders, who played against the same set of TEs, allowed just 6.7 more points to TEs for the year than Denver.

 
Gr00vus said:
Not to upset Chase, but SSOG is right here. The numbers don't tell the whole story. Watching Denver tells the story. They gameplan stopping Gonzales and Gates as they've astutely recognized that they are the primary receiving threats on their repsective teams, putting Bailey on them when they play.
Click to expand...
I'm having a hard time seeing how the Chiefs put up points this week.They are in Denver, where the Broncos defense feeds off the home crowd. Denver is pissed, having lost on 6 FGs last week. The Broncos put 39 men in the box to stop Johnson, and have Bailey shadow Gonzo. This could get ugly for Huard and Co. I see something like a 24-10 or 20-6 game.
 
CalBear said:
I don't like SSOG's point that most of the TEs Denver played wound up in the top 9, therefore Denver was defending very well despite being below average in fantasy points allowed to TEs. Part of the reason those players were in the top 9 is that Denver allowed them a bunch of points. Obviously, Gates and Gonzo are exceptional cases, but Witten, McMichael, LJ Smith, and Chris Cooley are not; they're just TEs. The Raiders, who played against the same set of TEs, allowed just 6.7 more points to TEs for the year than Denver.
Click to expand...
Denver TEs scored 15.1 FPs against Oakland; Oakland TEs scored 4.9 FPs against Denver.
 
RAIDERNATION said:
They are in Denver, where the Broncos defense feeds off the home crowd. Denver is pissed, having lost on 6 FGs last week. The Broncos put 39 men in the box to stop Johnson, and have Bailey shadow Gonzo. This could get ugly for Huard and Co. I see something like a 24-10 or 20-6 game.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, this week should be a tough one for Tony. I was speaking in more general terms about how the Broncos prepare for and play against Gates and Gonzo. Maybe you sit Gonzo this week if you've got a viable alternative.I've got the wonderfu hostage feeling of having to start Larry Johnson knowing full well he probably won't do much. :(
 
RAIDERNATION said:
Gr00vus said:
Not to upset Chase, but SSOG is right here. The numbers don't tell the whole story. Watching Denver tells the story. They gameplan stopping Gonzales and Gates as they've astutely recognized that they are the primary receiving threats on their repsective teams, putting Bailey on them when they play.
Click to expand...
I'm having a hard time seeing how the Chiefs put up points this week.They are in Denver, where the Broncos defense feeds off the home crowd. Denver is pissed, having lost on 6 FGs last week. The Broncos put 39 men in the box to stop Johnson, and have Bailey shadow Gonzo. This could get ugly for Huard and Co. I see something like a 24-10 or 20-6 game.
Click to expand...
This one's legit. The Broncos and Chiefs rank second and first respectively in HFA over the past 22 seasons.
 
J-Rock said:
I know, and I'm not advising people to drop Gonzo off the face of the planet here... I'm just suggesting that people temper their expectations, and if they have a borderline stud #2 TE, play him instead. Personally, I think there are only maybe 5 or 6 TEs I'd start over Gonzo this week, just because he is likely going to be so involved in the offense... but still, that's 4 or 5 more TEs than I usually have in front of Gonzo.
Click to expand...
Who are the 5-6 guys?
Click to expand...
Gates, Heap, and Shockey (no brainers). After that, I have Watson, Crumpler, and Gonzo in a pretty tight clump. I have Watson/Crumpler both a hair higher than Gonzo, but I'd consider starting Gonzo over them based on the "idiot factor" (i.e. I wouldn't feel dumb if I started Gonzo and Watson went off, but I'd feel like an absolute idiot if I started Watson and Gonzo went off).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear said:
I don't like SSOG's point that most of the TEs Denver played wound up in the top 9, therefore Denver was defending very well despite being below average in fantasy points allowed to TEs. Part of the reason those players were in the top 9 is that Denver allowed them a bunch of points. Obviously, Gates and Gonzo are exceptional cases, but Witten, McMichael, LJ Smith, and Chris Cooley are not; they're just TEs. The Raiders, who played against the same set of TEs, allowed just 6.7 more points to TEs for the year than Denver.
Click to expand...
Well, as I said, a large part of Denver's dominance against TEs has come when they put Bailey against the TEs or replace their nickle package with their "big nickle" package- steps they only take against the elite TEs (the Heap/Shockey/Gonzo/Gates that they faced 6 times last year, for instance).If you want some more statistical support, rather than just me saying "Denver's good against TEs", there's this link, and if you really want, I can find the discussion thread where the FOs let it be known that Denver was #1 against TEs in 2004, too.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
travdogg's favorite values as of 7/21
Replies
44
Views
2K
Deamon
Deamon
Instinctive
Instinctive's Most Divergent Projections - Upside players to take a second look at
2 3
Replies
106
Views
5K
pollardsvision
pollardsvision
T
My final 2022 mock draft, 3 rounds
2
Replies
56
Views
3K
travdogg
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top