***** OFFICIAL Rob Gronkowski - taking his talents to TB *****

[shadyridr 14,318]

Gronk smash

[Amused to Death 7,113]

HE'S BACK!!!!!!!!!

[Sweetness_34 28]

His QB sucks.

[Leonidas 108]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

[Amused to Death 7,113]

Now if only Brady could play as well as Garopolo.

[Mighty Mice 106]

Still a beast. They HAVE to make an effort to get Gronk some touches to involve him in the offense.

[Amused to Death 7,113]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

Don't know your definition of "successful", but TE11 wasn't getting it done.

[SameSongNDance 7,014]

Gronk now has 45 TDs in 46 starts.

[thekidd2009 9]

Gronk now has 45 TDs in 46 starts.

unreal...make it 46 for 46 gronk

[Concept Coop 1,764]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

Don't know your definition of "successful", but TE11 wasn't getting it done.

It wasn't a given he would even start week 1 and nobody drafted him as though it was. Considering the snap count--the return is VERY promising. If you didn't account for that--you're disappointment is certainly understandable.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Concept Coop

[BigBlue_RI 155]

I have Kelce and strongly considering starting him over Gronk. I can flex TE's so it's going to be an interesting choice this week if I go with both.

[Amused to Death 7,113]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

Don't know your definition of "successful", but TE11 wasn't getting it done.

It wasn't a given he would even start week 1 and nobody drafted him as though it was. Considering the snap count--the return is VERY promising. If you didn't account for that--you're disappointment is certainly understandable.

The thing is, getting him at a discount (3rd round) already factored the slow start. That late TD was nice, but still only turned it from a horrible game to just a below average game (will finish week 4 as the 9th TE in my league). 3 targets in game #4. How much longer will it be till he's "Gronk" again? We're now 1/3 of the way thru his FFL regular season.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Amused to Death

[Adam Harstad 1,070]

Gotta be true since there's a link to it.

It's not the link that makes it true. It's the numbers. If we remove injured players from our sample, from 2010 to 2012 the correlation between fantasy points in games 1-4 and fantasy points in games 5-16 is 0.471. The correlation between preseason ADP and fantasy points in games 5-16 is 0.578. Of the 95 players I looked at in 2012, 59 had a ranking from games 5-16 that was closer to their preseason ADP than it was to their ranking from games 1-4. That's a 62% hit rate.

[Adam Harstad 1,070]

With 10 minutes to go in the 4th Q of a game they've trailed the entire time, Gronk has 2 targets for 1 catch of 18 yards. If his name wasn't "Gronkowski", how much more time would you suggest, Adam, we give him? 2 targets. He's either still hurt or he's not a big part of the game plan.

If his name wasn't Gronkowski, I wouldn't have even given him this long. And if Peyton Manning's name wasn't Peyton Manning, I'd recommend you drop him if he went through a stretch where he only threw 2 TDs in 4 weeks. And if Jamaal Charles' name was Donald Brown, I'd recommend you drop him as soon as he sprained his ankle. But these are silly hypotheticals, because his name is Rob Gronkowski, and that's exactly the point. The numbers show that, for guys who start the season slower than expected, their name value alone predicts future success. If Rob Gronkowski opens the season with 100 yards through four games, we'd expect him to be better going forward than if Delanie Walker opened the season with 100 yards through four games. Why? Because he's Rob Gronkowski.

I guess I'll put it another way. Through four games last year, Chris Johnson was RB28. He averaged 3.35 yards per carry. I called him a good buy low, and a lot of people told me that if his name wasn't Chris Johnson, I wouldn't want anything to do with him. They were right, of course, but it was irrelevant; Chris Johnson was RB7 over the rest of the season.

[MNTom 46]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

Don't know your definition of "successful", but TE11 wasn't getting it done.

It wasn't a given he would even start week 1 and nobody drafted him as though it was. Considering the snap count--the return is VERY promising. If you didn't account for that--you're disappointment is certainly understandable.

The thing is, getting him at a discount (3rd round) already factored the slow start. That late TD was nice, but still only turned it from a horrible game to just a below average game (will finish week 4 as the 9th TE in my league). 3 targets in game #4. How much longer will it be till he's "Gronk" again? We're now 1/3 of the way thru his FFL regular season.

When I drafted Gronk, I was not expecting "Gronk" type production until week 8 or 9. Was hoping for adequate production from him until then.

[Amused to Death 7,113]

With 10 minutes to go in the 4th Q of a game they've trailed the entire time, Gronk has 2 targets for 1 catch of 18 yards. If his name wasn't "Gronkowski", how much more time would you suggest, Adam, we give him? 2 targets. He's either still hurt or he's not a big part of the game plan.

If his name wasn't Gronkowski, I wouldn't have even given him this long. And if Peyton Manning's name wasn't Peyton Manning, I'd recommend you drop him if he went through a stretch where he only threw 2 TDs in 4 weeks. And if Jamaal Charles' name was Donald Brown, I'd recommend you drop him as soon as he sprained his ankle. But these are silly hypotheticals, because his name is Rob Gronkowski, and that's exactly the point. The numbers show that, for guys who start the season slower than expected, their name value alone predicts future success. If Rob Gronkowski opens the season with 100 yards through four games, we'd expect him to be better going forward than if Delanie Walker opened the season with 100 yards through four games. Why? Because he's Rob Gronkowski.

I guess I'll put it another way. Through four games last year, Chris Johnson was RB28. He averaged 3.35 yards per carry. I called him a good buy low, and a lot of people told me that if his name wasn't Chris Johnson, I wouldn't want anything to do with him. They were right, of course, but it was irrelevant; Chris Johnson was RB7 over the rest of the season.

Here's hoping he can be top 3, top 5 the rest of the way. 3 targets ain't gonna get it done. Hope you're right.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Amused to Death

[ap28.allday 14]

4th quarter TD won my game!! Wooo! Gronk go smash smash!!! AHAHAHAHAHH YES!!!

[Leonidas 108]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

Don't know your definition of "successful", but TE11 wasn't getting it done.

So glad I picked him up in the third instead of Antonio Brown.

Same here. Waste of a 3rd round pick at this point. He's gonna break out any week now....any week, or so we're told.

IF he finishes well today he'll have had 3 successful weeks out of 4 though. I mean, 10+ points in standard formats for a TE is a good week. But considering we could have had people like Brown (or Julius) it is certainly looking like a less than optimal choice.

I consider 10+ points from a TE in standard scoring (1 pt per 10 rec yards, 6 pt rec TD, zero PPR) to be a good week.

Soooo 3 out of 4 weeks have been successful. They haven't won you a matchup or anything, they aren't week 1 Julius, week 2 Graham, or week 3 Donnell...but again...we all (SHOULD HAVE) expected a slow start to the season anyway given the knee injury.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Leonidas

[jbz 75]

Worried he'll be asked to stay in and block more. Snap count wasn't the issue tonight from what I could tell. Routes ran and Brady targeting him was. Brady seems to have locked in on Edelman a bit too much. The Pats are a smart bunch though, so I think they'll figure it out somewhat and get Gronk going. Trading him now would be trading low and I don't think many owners would give up enough value for me to move him.

[Amused to Death 7,113]

And there it is.

3 out of 4 weeks can be considered successful. Given the slow start to the season we all expected, this is not a problem

Don't know your definition of "successful", but TE11 wasn't getting it done.

So glad I picked him up in the third instead of Antonio Brown.

Same here. Waste of a 3rd round pick at this point. He's gonna break out any week now....any week, or so we're told.

IF he finishes well today he'll have had 3 successful weeks out of 4 though. I mean, 10+ points in standard formats for a TE is a good week. But considering we could have had people like Brown (or Julius) it is certainly looking like a less than optimal choice.

I consider 10+ points from a TE in standard scoring (1 pt per 10 rec yards, 6 pt rec TD, zero PPR) to be a good week.

Soooo 3 out of 4 weeks have been successful. They haven't won you a matchup or anything, they aren't week 1 Julius, week 2 Graham, or week 3 Donnell...but again...we all (SHOULD HAVE) expected a slow start to the season anyway given the knee injury.

I understand expecting a slow start, but his targets have dropped or stayed the same in each game (11, 6, 6, 3) when I would hope they'd be increasing. He's going in the wrong direction. His best week was week 1.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Amused to Death

[thehornet 40]

Gotta be true since there's a link to it.

It's not the link that makes it true. It's the numbers. If we remove injured players from our sample, from 2010 to 2012 the correlation between fantasy points in games 1-4 and fantasy points in games 5-16 is 0.471. The correlation between preseason ADP and fantasy points in games 5-16 is 0.578. Of the 95 players I looked at in 2012, 59 had a ranking from games 5-16 that was closer to their preseason ADP than it was to their ranking from games 1-4. That's a 62% hit rate.

I'm not going to debate the data (meaning I'll take it at face value that's it's accurate) but I would caution against taking wholesale raw data and applying it to fit your debate. We have no preexisting data on Donnell so it's silly to use it against him. Edited September 30, 2014 by thehornet

[blake 33]

It wasn't a given he would even start week 1 and nobody drafted him as though it was. Considering the snap count--the return is VERY promising. If you didn't account for that--you're disappointment is certainly understandable.

The thing is, getting him at a discount (3rd round) already factored the slow start. That late TD was nice, but still only turned it from a horrible game to just a below average game (will finish week 4 as the 9th TE in my league). 3 targets in game #4. How much longer will it be till he's "Gronk" again? We're now 1/3 of the way thru his FFL regular season.

When I drafted Gronk, I was not expecting "Gronk" type production until week 8 or 9. Was hoping for adequate production from him until then.

Kind of shocked anyone taking the time to post on a fantasy football message board wouldn't be expecting the exact same thing. I traded *for* Gronk not expecting much until midseason and really, I was looking at Weeks 12-16 anyway. I want him to be rounding into form right now. It surprises me how anyone is whining that they aren't getting superstar Gronk this soon.

[SameSongNDance 7,014]

I think Brady is ####### awful. Any QB could make use of Gronk.

[Adam Harstad 1,070]

Gotta be true since there's a link to it.

It's not the link that makes it true. It's the numbers. If we remove injured players from our sample, from 2010 to 2012 the correlation between fantasy points in games 1-4 and fantasy points in games 5-16 is 0.471. The correlation between preseason ADP and fantasy points in games 5-16 is 0.578. Of the 95 players I looked at in 2012, 59 had a ranking from games 5-16 that was closer to their preseason ADP than it was to their ranking from games 1-4. That's a 62% hit rate.

I'm not going to debate the data (meaning I'll take it at face value that's it's accurate) but I would caution against taking wholesale raw data and applying it to fit your debate. We have no preexisting data on Donnell so it's silly to use it against him.

The fact that we have no pre-existing data on Larry Donnell absolutely *should* be used against him. I mean, we had, what, seven months this offseason to study everything about the Giants in detail? And it never occurred to us that Donnell might be any good? Donnell is a former UDFA who entered the year with 31 receiving yards. That's not a red flag?

I'm not saying Donnell is doomed to bust. Honestly, there are a lot of similarities between him and Julius Thomas last year. I'm also not saying Rob Gronkowski is destined to take off- Stevan Ridley and David Wilson both stood out as fantastic breakout candidates after four weeks based on the numbers last year. I'm just saying, we should naturally be a little bit more skeptical about scorching-hot starts when they come from a guy named Larry Donnell than we should if they come from a guy named, I don't know, Travis Kelce or Zach Ertz, or someone we already expected big things from to begin with.

I like Larry Donnell a hell of a lot more today than I did a month ago, but the fact that I didn't like him a month ago is still relevant to me. I have to constantly update my expectations to account for new data, but updating expectations is not the same as overwriting expectations entirely. After all, Donnell's 25/236/4 is a ridiculous start to the year, but it's just the 17th-best four-game start since 2002. We see a lot of familiar names ahead of him- Gronks and Grahams and Gonzos, 2013 Julius Thomas, etc. We also see, for instance, 2010 Dustin Keller, who had 19/254/5 at this point in the season. I remember selling high on Keller in dynasty because he was outperforming my expectations by so much. That's one I've definitely been happy about over the years. If I could get a similarly awesome deal for Larry Donnell, I'd take it and take my chances. I like Donnell a lot right now, but if I have to place a bet over who is going to score more points the rest of the way, I'm betting on The Gronk.

[cstu 6,086]

I think Brady is ####### awful. Any QB could make use of Gronk.

[Kendall The Great 11]

Dropped and grabbed kelce

[Faust 5,292]

Rotoworld:

Rob Gronkowski - TE - Patriots

Rob Gronkowski caught two passes for 31 yards and one touchdown in the Patriots' Week 4 loss to the Chiefs on Monday night.

Gronkowski was targeted just three times, and was sitting on one catch for 18 yards for much of the night before reeling in a 13-yard touchdown from Jimmy Garappolo late in the fourth quarter of this 41-14 blowout. While it was a bad night all around for the Patriots, it was at least encouraging to see Gronkowski playing a large chunk of the snaps. His usage rate continues to rise as he works his way back from knee surgery. But it remains clear that Gronk isn't 100 percent or back to his normal self. He's staying afloat fantasy-wise by scoring touchdowns. After four games, Gronk is on pace for a 52-588-12 receiving line. Look for him to easily top those catch and yards totals by season's end.

Sep 30 - 12:27 AM

[kolp 4]

The whole Pat offense looks bad, glad I traded him for Maclin last week. I still have Graham, Ertz, and Kelce.

[elbowrm 1,216]

Keep us updated.

[Faust 5,292]

Rapid Reaction: New England Patriots

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4769103/rapid-reaction-new-england-patriots-18

Excerpt:

Gronkowski's playing time. Tight end Rob Gronkowski continues to work himself into the mix. After playing 38, 28 and 42 snaps in the first three weeks, he was on for 31 of 49 snaps in this one.

[wally82 2]

If you can be patient I think the targets will come. That Touchdown he scored was nasty. It wasn't what I was hoping for but it salvaged a decent fantasy day.

[Leonidas 108]

The fact that we have no pre-existing data on Larry Donnell absolutely *should* be used against him. I mean, we had, what, seven months this offseason to study everything about the Giants in detail? And it never occurred to us that Donnell might be any good? Donnell is a former UDFA who entered the year with 31 receiving yards. That's not a red flag?

That's more receiving yardage than Julius Thomas had going into last season, BTW

Dropped and grabbed kelce

I don't find 6 team leagues to be much fun.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Leonidas

[bicycle_seat_sniffer 5,109]

its hard produce without targets, maybe he isnt getting that open, maybe brady just sucks. Hard to say

[Adam Harstad 1,070]

The fact that we have no pre-existing data on Larry Donnell absolutely *should* be used against him. I mean, we had, what, seven months this offseason to study everything about the Giants in detail? And it never occurred to us that Donnell might be any good? Donnell is a former UDFA who entered the year with 31 receiving yards. That's not a red flag?

That's more receiving yardage than Julius Thomas had going into last season, BTW

The next two sentences after that passage you quoted were: "I'm not saying Donnell is doomed to bust. Honestly, there are a lot of similarities between him and Julius Thomas last year."

[Concept Coop 1,764]

its hard produce without targets, maybe he isnt getting that open, maybe brady just sucks. Hard to say

He's getting targets, based on his target:snap ratio, aside from this contest. As bad as the Patriots looked, this game was still an anomaly. KC was able to take Brady's top two targets out of the game, stop the run, and get pressure in his face. That won't be a weekly occurrence.

[mbuehner 624]

Too many anomalies this season.

[Concept Coop 1,764]

Too many anomalies this season.

Not sure what you mean. Care to expand?

[humpback 1,142]

its hard produce without targets, maybe he isnt getting that open, maybe brady just sucks. Hard to say

He's getting targets, based on his target:snap ratio, aside from this contest. As bad as the Patriots looked, this game was still an anomaly. KC was able to take Brady's top two targets out of the game, stop the run, and get pressure in his face. That won't be a weekly occurrence.

The Pats did a pretty good job of taking their top target out of the game themselves- why isn't he getting more snaps?

[Concept Coop 1,764]

The Pats did a pretty good job of taking their top target out of the game themselves- why isn't he getting more snaps?

He is recovering from a serious injury and the Pats are easing him back into the offense. He played on 65% of the offensive snaps--a season high. As for Gronk being taken out of the game--I can really only comment on the few times I saw him out in his routes (not easy on TV), including the one target he didn't convert; he was being double teamed and NE couldn't make KC pay for it.

Gronk's certainly not himself yet; his looks will suffer until NE can stretch the field with other options; the team is being cautious in bringing him along. There are certainly concerns, but I think most of us accounted for that before investing at an ADP set by a market that did. 4 weeks in--he's setback free, scoring TDs, and his snap count is increasing. I think all of us had some hope of Gronk going ADP-Post-ACL-Mode, and he certainly hasn't. But I question why anyone would have pulled the trigger in the first place, if what we've seen to now is enough to sell at a discount.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Concept Coop

[Bayhawks 2,232]

I think all of us had some hope of Gronk going ADP-Post-ACL-Mode, and he certainly hasn't.

Are we sure he hasn't?

ADP's career averages: 5.0 YPC, 8.2 YPR, .9 TD/game

ADP's 1st 4 games after his ACL injury: 4.2 YPC, 6.4 YPR, .5 TD/game

Gronk's career averages: 14.2 YPR, 63 yards/game, .85 TD/game

Gronk's 1st 4 games after his ACL injury: 11.3 YPR, 37 yards/game, .75 TD/game

It seems like ADP was about 75-80% of his "self" for those 1st 4 games, and Gronk appears to be a little behind that, but not much. We remember ADP's monster season, but he had 1300 of his 2000 yards in the last 8 weeks of that season. He started out slower than normal, as was expected, as is Gronkowski.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Bayhawks

[humpback 1,142]

The Pats did a pretty good job of taking their top target out of the game themselves- why isn't he getting more snaps?

He is recovering from a serious injury and the Pats are easing him back into the offense. He played on 65% of the offensive snaps--a season high. As for Gronk being taken out of the game--I can really only comment on the few times I saw him out in his routes (not easy on TV), including the one target he didn't convert; he was being double teamed and NE couldn't make KC pay for it.

Gronk's certainly not himself yet; his looks will suffer until NE can stretch the field with other options; the team is being cautious in bringing him along. There are certainly concerns, but I think most of us accounted for that before investing at an ADP set by a market that did. 4 weeks in--he's setback free, scoring TDs, and his snap count is increasing. I think all of us had some hope of Gronk going ADP-Post-ACL-Mode, and he certainly hasn't. But I question why anyone would have pulled the trigger in the first place, if what we've seen to now is enough to sell at a discount.

That's the thing, his snap count isn't increasing- he's played 38, 28, 42, and now 31 snaps. I agree with most of the rest, I'm certainly not saying to sell him at a discount, but I'd be much more comfortable if his snap count was actually increasing each week, even if it started from a lower level and ended with the same 31 last night. The fact that it hasn't is a bit worrisome IMO, it hints that he isn't really progressing, which is what I wanted/expected to see.

[Steeler 2,917]

He was in the game at the end of both their blowout losses which is encouraging to me. They seem to have a plan for increasing his snap count and game circumstances don't seem to matter. They clearly could have rested him in those scenarios if there was any lingering doubt about his recovery.

[The General 24,566]

I'm probably more worried about Brady than Gronk. Snap count is also pretty depressing.

Really don't see anyone paying the price that it would take most Gronk owners to bite on a trade.

[humpback 1,142]

He was in the game at the end of both their blowout losses which is encouraging to me. They seem to have a plan for increasing his snap count and game circumstances don't seem to matter. They clearly could have rested him in those scenarios if there was any lingering doubt about his recovery.

Okay, then why haven't they increased his snap count?

[SameSongNDance 7,014]

You're looking at the wrong number as it pertains to the snap count. 44% - 42% - 59% - 65% shows a blatant easing in but also a blatant increase in his offensive involvement. If KC (and Brady) didn't keep the Pats off of the field the entire night, that 65% could have and most likely would have translated to his largest snap total of the year.

[The General 24,566]

You're looking at the wrong number as it pertains to the snap count. 44% - 42% - 59% - 65% shows a blatant easing in but also a blatant increase in his offensive involvement. If KC (and Brady) didn't keep the Pats off of the field the entire night, that 65% could have and most likely would have translated to his largest snap total of the year.

Great point, didn't look at that.

[Concept Coop 1,764]

That's the thing, his snap count isn't increasing- he's played 38, 28, 42, and now 31 snaps. I agree with most of the rest, I'm certainly not saying to sell him at a discount, but I'd be much more comfortable if his snap count was actually increasing each week, even if it started from a lower level and ended with the same 31 last night. The fact that it hasn't is a bit worrisome IMO, it hints that he isn't really progressing, which is what I wanted/expected to see.

You're looking at the wrong number as it pertains to the snap count. 44% - 42% - 59% - 65% shows a blatant easing in but also a blatant increase in his offensive involvement. If KC (and Brady) didn't keep the Pats off of the field the entire night, that 65% could have and most likely would have translated to his largest snap total of the year.

[humpback 1,142]

You're looking at the wrong number as it pertains to the snap count. 44% - 42% - 59% - 65% shows a blatant easing in but also a blatant increase in his offensive involvement. If KC (and Brady) didn't keep the Pats off of the field the entire night, that 65% could have and most likely would have translated to his largest snap total of the year.

I disagree- do you think the doctors/trainers are looking more at how many plays he can handle, or what percentage of plays he can handle?

FWIW, he used to play ~95% of offensive snaps.

[Kendall The Great 11]

Does it really matter what his snap count is if there isn't any other legit threat while he's on the field and he's being doubled covered and can't get separation?

Gronk will have some great games later on, but now he isn't producing and we're 1/3 into the season and some people don't have the luxury of waiting him out.....

[Amused to Death 7,113]

You're looking at the wrong number as it pertains to the snap count. 44% - 42% - 59% - 65% shows a blatant easing in but also a blatant increase in his offensive involvement. If KC (and Brady) didn't keep the Pats off of the field the entire night, that 65% could have and most likely would have translated to his largest snap total of the year.

While that's an encouraging sign, it hasn't lead to an increase in targets. Week 1 was his high (11) and the last game his low (3). They're actually decreasing. IMO, the number of targets is more important than the snap count. Hopefully one leads to the other. Soon.