Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

ZWK's Dynasty Rankings (WR updated April 2021)


Recommended Posts

Sammy Watkins: in 2015 he was WR9 (ppg), with 60/1047/9 in 12 games. I did like him coming into the league, and on the whole I think his NFL career so far has looked more promising than Amari Cooper's or Allen Robinson's (setting aside the injury).

Dez Bryant vs. Doug Baldwin: I think Dez has more talent, and if they were both FAs on the open market I expect that their contracts would back that up. Dez's 2012-14 is significantly better than anything that Baldwin has done.

Tyreek Hill: my impression is that (unlike early career Harvin) he got most of his production on designed plays like WR screens, not on receiver routes where he had to beat the coverage to get open. And receivers are unlikely to have much fantasy value unless they can do receiver things (as seen with Patterson & Austin). It's possible that I'm underrating his ability to get open on routes; I'd move him up if I thought he showed potential there.

Parker & Doctson: I think they're ranked about right, although there's a big dropoff after WR15 Michael Thomas. And Corey Coleman might deserve his own tier.

Adam Humphries: I missed him; he should be on there somewhere in the bottom 2 tiers. Although it's worth noting that my last tier of WRs should probably not be rostered in the league size that I'm making these for. I wasn't very careful with that tier; just noticed that I still have Brice Butler listed in Oakland which is 2 years out of date.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've been looking over historical TE VBD from the past 30 years. Three patterns jumped out: 1. How top-heavy the position is. A few guys account for a large fraction of all fantasy value. Last ye

Post-draft WR rankings. Assuming PPR, start 3 WR, about 250 position players rostered. Age as of 9/1/18. Prev from 3/24/18. Tr    Rk    Player    Team    Age    Prev 1    1    Odell Beckham Jr.

WR rankings after 4.1 weeks. PPR, start 3 WR, about 300 position players rostered. Age as of 10/8/20. Prev from my unpublished draft rankings 9/9/20 (which weren't fully up-to-date); my last posted ra

7 hours ago, ZWK said:

Dez Bryant vs. Doug Baldwin: I think Dez has more talent, and if they were both FAs on the open market I expect that their contracts would back that up. Dez's 2012-14 is significantly better than anything that Baldwin has done.

I don't disagree on any of this. However, IMO the odds are greater in 2017 that Baldwin matches or exceeds his 2016 output than that Bryant gets close to his 2012-2014 form. The main surprise to me was that you had them separated by 2 tiers.

7 hours ago, ZWK said:

Sammy Watkins: in 2015 he was WR9 (ppg), with 60/1047/9 in 12 games. I did like him coming into the league, and on the whole I think his NFL career so far has looked more promising than Amari Cooper's or Allen Robinson's (setting aside the injury).

Well, MFL and PFR both show him with 13 games in 2015, which is the difference between WR9 and WR16. I'm guessing you are ignoring game 1, since he didn't accumulate any stats, but he played 50 snaps and was targeted 3 times in that game. I assume you wouldn't weigh this difference heavily and would hold your ranking, but the fact remains that he has never been better than WR16 in PPR format.

Thanks for the replies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, FUBAR said:

Maybe, but he finished wr18 in ppr as a rookie.  #11 ppg after the Chiefs bye week.  That combined with his youth doesn't add up to a receiver outside the top 30 in dynasty even with the risk of him being a Harvin clone (which I don't completely buy anyway)

He'll never score so many long tds again. It was a fluke. When you take a lot of those away his yards and catches are below average. Guys like him have proved to be what they are and haven't improved much as their careers go forward. He may become a good wr but it's a long shot. And I said low wr2 so where you are cherry picking top 30 from I'm not sure other than to make yourself look better.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, voiceofunreason said:

He'll never score so many long tds again. It was a fluke. When you take a lot of those away his yards and catches are below average. Guys like him have proved to be what they are and haven't improved much as their careers go forward. He may become a good wr but it's a long shot. And I said low wr2 so where you are cherry picking top 30 from I'm not sure other than to make yourself look better.

The top 30 "cherry pick" (whatever that means) is in reference to ZWK's ranking, not your post.  It's not about you. 

"Make yourself look better"? Wtf? I don't have hill anywhere, it's not about me either. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:
11 hours ago, ZWK said:

Sammy Watkins: in 2015 he was WR9 (ppg), with 60/1047/9 in 12 games. I did like him coming into the league, and on the whole I think his NFL career so far has looked more promising than Amari Cooper's or Allen Robinson's (setting aside the injury).

Well, MFL and PFR both show him with 13 games in 2015, which is the difference between WR9 and WR16. I'm guessing you are ignoring game 1, since he didn't accumulate any stats, but he played 50 snaps and was targeted 3 times in that game. I assume you wouldn't weigh this difference heavily and would hold your ranking, but the fact remains that he has never been better than WR16 in PPR format.

Thanks for the replies.

You're right. I was looking at FF Today because I like how their tables are formatted, and they left out his wk1 (which is odd, because they do include targets). That might be enough to move him down a spot, behind Hopkins, who was neck-and-neck with him in my eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill was a top 10 WR in the second half of the season in PPR. Don't think upside is an issue. Even if his number of big plays drops, he can compensate with more targets. He was just a rookie. He was also pretty raw when you consider his background (one season at OSU, one season at a tiny school). He is probably still improving and can keep getting better.

Seems like people might be sleeping on his rookie year because of the "out of nowhere" factor. Let's pretend that Tavon Austin had put up the same numbers as a rookie. How high would he have been in dynasty WR lists in the offseason? Probably top 10. Now obviously the career outlook is better in general for the top 10 NFL draft pick vs. the late rounder, but my point is that his performance last season warrants a good amount of optimism/hype.

I think typically when a WR posts a top 25 season as a rookie, you would think it's a sign of things to come and not the peak of his career. Obviously it can go the bad way sometimes (Michael Clayton? Eddie Royal?), but I still take it as a good sign when a player comes into the league and flashes like that. And if last year was just the beginning, I'm excited to see the rest of the story.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen much of Hill play but his rookie season looks similar to Cordarralle Patterson.

Patterson 77 targets 45 receptions 469 yards 10.4 ypr 4 TD 2.8 rec/gm    29.3 yds/gm    58.4%    12 rushing attempts 158 yards    3 TD     

Hill 83 targets 61 receptions 593 yards 9.7 ypr    6 TD    3.8 rec/gm    37.1 yds/gm    73.5%    24 rushing attempts 267 yards 3 TD    

Hill had twice as many rushing attempts as Patterson and higher catch rate as well as yards per target (6 YPT compared to 7 YPT) and Hill scored 2 more TD

Does this performance seem sustainable? Something that could be built on? Or was it mostly a result of constraint plays and because Jamal Charles wasn't available?

Andy Reid has been the coach for KC four seasons now. A WR has been the top receiving player once over those 4 years in 2015 Jeremy Maclin who got 115 targets that season. Twice it was Kelce and once it was Charles.

Is Tyreek Hill the Chiefs top WR? Or is it still Maclin? Maclin has been Reids top WR with two different teams now.

While Hills numbers are impressive, it reminds me too much of Pattersons rookie season. I don't think this performance is sustainable. One of his big runs was off a fake punt. Hard to expect that to be repeated with any consistency.

Because of Kelce, Maclin,and possibly a new RB I don't see room in the offense for Hill to get more opportunity. He would need to surpass Maclin and Kelce in targets to improve much on his rookie season. I would expect Hill to score fewer times with similar touches in 2017
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I haven't seen much of Hill play but his rookie season looks similar to Cordarralle Patterson.

Patterson 77 targets 45 receptions 469 yards 10.4 ypr 4 TD 2.8 rec/gm    29.3 yds/gm    58.4%    12 rushing attempts 158 yards    3 TD     

Hill 83 targets 61 receptions 593 yards 9.7 ypr    6 TD    3.8 rec/gm    37.1 yds/gm    73.5%    24 rushing attempts 267 yards 3 TD    

Hill had twice as many rushing attempts as Patterson and higher catch rate as well as yards per target (6 YPT compared to 7 YPT) and Hill scored 2 more TD

Does this performance seem sustainable? Something that could be built on? Or was it mostly a result of constraint plays and because Jamal Charles wasn't available?

Andy Reid has been the coach for KC four seasons now. A WR has been the top receiving player once over those 4 years in 2015 Jeremy Maclin who got 115 targets that season. Twice it was Kelce and once it was Charles.

Is Tyreek Hill the Chiefs top WR? Or is it still Maclin? Maclin has been Reids top WR with two different teams now.

While Hills numbers are impressive, it reminds me too much of Pattersons rookie season. I don't think this performance is sustainable. One of his big runs was off a fake punt. Hard to expect that to be repeated with any consistency.

Because of Kelce, Maclin,and possibly a new RB I don't see room in the offense for Hill to get more opportunity. He would need to surpass Maclin and Kelce in targets to improve much on his rookie season. I would expect Hill to score fewer times with similar touches in 2017
 

 

Sure. But he doesn't have to improve on his season to be a top 30ish receiver.  He's already there. 

Maybe I'm overrating the stat but his 73% reception rate is significantly better than Patterson's rookie year. (Although equal to CP's 2016)

Hill looks to be a better player, but if I wanted to buy I'd sell this comparison. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I haven't seen much of Hill play but his rookie season looks similar to Cordarralle Patterson.

Patterson 77 targets 45 receptions 469 yards 10.4 ypr 4 TD 2.8 rec/gm    29.3 yds/gm    58.4%    12 rushing attempts 158 yards    3 TD     

Hill 83 targets 61 receptions 593 yards 9.7 ypr    6 TD    3.8 rec/gm    37.1 yds/gm    73.5%    24 rushing attempts 267 yards 3 TD   

I think it looks a hell of a lot more like 2015 Tyler Lockett, and we all know how (over) hyped he was coming into 2016.

69 targets, 51 receptions, 664 yards, 6 TD

 

And if you're in a league that rewards for return TDs and/or yardage, he's significantly more valuable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FUBAR said:

Sure. But he doesn't have to improve on his season to be a top 30ish receiver.  He's already there. 

Maybe I'm overrating the stat but his 73% reception rate is significantly better than Patterson's rookie year. (Although equal to CP's 2016)

Hill looks to be a better player, but if I wanted to buy I'd sell this comparison. 

In terms of points per game (12.4) from 2014 to 2016 Tyreek Hill was 99th overall and WR 38th. Players in similar range are Allen Hurns, Willie Snead, DeSean Jackson, Anquon Boldin, Marcus Wheaton. 

So no I wouldn't say he is already there and I don't think the 9 TD will be consistently repeatable, if Hill only scores 7 TD with the same yards in 2017 for example it will drop him to WR 40 or so.

I agree with you the catch rate significantly higher than Pattersons was and that makes a big difference in terms of yards per target. The average catch rate for a RB is 73% so he is right there in that sense as I assume most of his targets were higher percentage throws (Alex Smith duh). 

From what little I have seen of Hill, he may be faster than Patterson, not sure what other areas he would be considered better than Patterson in. Despite the poor catch rate as a rookie, Patterson actually has pretty good hands. He just struggles with routes and tracking the ball on the deeper ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tangfoot said:

I think it looks a hell of a lot more like 2015 Tyler Lockett, and we all know how (over) hyped he was coming into 2016.

69 targets, 51 receptions, 664 yards, 6 TD

 

And if you're in a league that rewards for return TDs and/or yardage, he's significantly more valuable.

i really like Tyler Lockett so maybe this is a better comparison. What I like about Lockett was how well he runs routes and gets open in different ways. His play for Kansas was awesome, demonstrating command of the full route tree and their offense seemed closer to an NFL offense as a result. Great player from what I have seen of him and deserving of the high praise that likely got out of control.

I haven't watched Hill nearly enough to say if he is a crafty route runner like Lockett, but I am guessing I should have heard something about that by now if it were the case. What I have heard people praise Hill for is his speed. Collinsworth comparing his speed to Randy Moss for example. That doesn't make me think of Lockett as similar (although Lockett is very fast too) but maybe Hill has more route running skill than I am aware of.

Points for returns would certainly change things, but I don't think ZWK or most people are accounting for that in their rankings. Completely agree he is more valuable in that format.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I haven't seen much of Hill play but his rookie season looks similar to Cordarralle Patterson.

Patterson 77 targets 45 receptions 469 yards 10.4 ypr 4 TD 2.8 rec/gm    29.3 yds/gm    58.4%    12 rushing attempts 158 yards    3 TD     

Hill 83 targets 61 receptions 593 yards 9.7 ypr    6 TD    3.8 rec/gm    37.1 yds/gm    73.5%    24 rushing attempts 267 yards 3 TD    

Hill had twice as many rushing attempts as Patterson and higher catch rate as well as yards per target (6 YPT compared to 7 YPT) and Hill scored 2 more TD

Does this performance seem sustainable? Something that could be built on? Or was it mostly a result of constraint plays and because Jamal Charles wasn't available?

Andy Reid has been the coach for KC four seasons now. A WR has been the top receiving player once over those 4 years in 2015 Jeremy Maclin who got 115 targets that season. Twice it was Kelce and once it was Charles.

Is Tyreek Hill the Chiefs top WR? Or is it still Maclin? Maclin has been Reids top WR with two different teams now.

While Hills numbers are impressive, it reminds me too much of Pattersons rookie season. I don't think this performance is sustainable. One of his big runs was off a fake punt. Hard to expect that to be repeated with any consistency.

Because of Kelce, Maclin,and possibly a new RB I don't see room in the offense for Hill to get more opportunity. He would need to surpass Maclin and Kelce in targets to improve much on his rookie season. I would expect Hill to score fewer times with similar touches in 2017
 

 

IMO this is not great analysis. You can take stats for any player's rookie year, decide he's going to be a bust/success, and then find an arbitrary player with similar rookie stats who supports your narrative. It honestly proves nothing. I can just as easily point to Brandin Cooks and Percy Harvin as players who had similar rookie years and ended up being good (Harvin was good before all of his durability/off-field stuff impacted his performance).

Hill isn't built like Patterson and doesn't really move like him or play like him. The only similarity is that they're versatile players who were used in a variety of roles as rookies. Style wise, Hill reminds me more of people like Harvin, Austin, Cobb, Cooks, and Welker. If that's the general wheelhouse for his career, he's going to make a lot of his dynasty owners happy.

Also, Maclin and Kelce aren't going to prevent a Pro Bowl type of athlete from getting touches. If Antonio Brown were traded to the Chiefs tomorrow for Hill, people might say the situation is a downgrade from Pittsburgh, but they wouldn't say that there won't be enough looks to go around. Great players get the ball. Coaches make sure of that. Is Hill a great player? Obviously we don't know for sure yet, but he has rare athletic traits and his rookie year was really impressive. I think he was one of the focal points of KC's offense in the second half of the season and I'd expect to see his role expand, if anything.

Edited by EBF
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EBF said:

IMO this is not great analysis. You can take stats for any player's rookie year, decide he's going to be a bust/success, and then find an arbitrary player with similar rookie stats who supports your narrative. It honestly proves nothing. I can just as easily point to Brandin Cooks and Percy Harvin as players who had similar rookie years and ended up being good (Harvin was good before all of his durability/off-field stuff impacted his performance).

Hill isn't built like Patterson and doesn't really move like him or play like him. The only similarity is that they're versatile players who were used in a variety of roles as rookies. Style wise, Hill reminds me more of people like Harvin, Austin, Cobb, Cooks, and Welker. If that's the general wheelhouse for his career, he's going to make a lot of his dynasty owners happy.

Also, Maclin and Kelce aren't going to prevent a Pro Bowl type of athlete from getting touches. If Antonio Brown were traded to the Chiefs tomorrow for Hill, people might say the situation is a downgrade from Pittsburgh, but they wouldn't say that there won't be enough looks to go around. Great players get the ball. Coaches make sure of that. Is Hill a great player? Obviously we don't know for sure yet, but he has rare athletic traits and his rookie year was really impressive. I think he was one of the focal points of KC's offense in the second half of the season and I'd expect to see his role expand, if anything.

That is fine I never claimed it was. My post was in response to FUBAR sayting Hill was already a WR 30 which by the numbers I am looking at, he was lower than that. There are a lot of WR who can have WR 3 seasons.Why will Hill be consistently better than that?

As far as comparing him to Patterson, I do not mean stylistically, I have only seen a few highlights of Hill play. I do not know much about him specifically. I have not evaluated Hill as a prospect. The point of comparing him to Patterson is, do you remember how batty people were about Patterson after his rookie season? Because of a few stunningly amazing plays he made? Does that bear any similarity here? I think it does.

Will Hill end up having a different career path than Patterson? Of course he could.He likely will. I don't know if he has any of the many issues Patterson has/had and those things as well as just circumstances of a change in coaching have affected Patterson's career. Not saying Hill is on the same team or in the same situation at all.

The point about where will Hill be in the pecking order of the offense is all about trying to quantify how much he will score in years ahead. Something we don't know, but by making a guess about that is necessary in order to value him relative to other players.

There are a finite number of plays to be distributed on every team. The KC Chiefs have averaged 969 offensive plays over the last 3 seasons. This is on the lower end of the spectrum as far as offensive plays run by teams (average of 1026 plays). That is about a games worth difference between KC and an average NFL offense. The run to pass ratio has been 51% pass to 49% run. 

The main difference in the offense of 2016 was the absence of Jamal Charles, they passed the ball 55% of the time and I think the higher number of total plays was a result of that. Part of this is because Alex Smith did not run the ball as much as he did in 2015 (or 2013) and another part of it was because the defense wasn't playing as well.

Now perhaps this is the way forward, I just note that Reid had Alex Smith throw the ball fewer than 500 times in 2015 and 2014 with a good defense and reliable running game, so that could be the formula this season or over the next few seasons still, if the defense is up to the task and can keep them in positive game scripts.

Why all of that matters is just to guess what the pie will look like for KC players in 2017. Are there 550 targets to go around or are there only 470?

Then how will the targets be distributed?

My point is I would expect Kelce to be the top target of the Chiefs as he has been two out of the last four seasons, if he isn't he will be close to it. Jeremy Maclin is likely still the most targeted WR, so if these two things are true, that would make Hill at best 3rd in targets on his team. The 3rd most targeted player on the team has had less than 60 targets twice (2015 and 2014) so if that did accompany low overall passing attempts (less than 500) Hill might only see 60-90 targets over the season. Now maybe he gets more opportunity than Maclin moving forward, and that would change things, as far as his opportunity increasing, but I consider it more likely Maclin continues his role in the offense than Hill overtakes him in 2017 but I don't necessarily have a strong opinion about that. The difference between these two things would be a median 100 target projection (as the WR 1) or a median 75 target projection (as the WR 2). While that difference may seem small, it is in the area where a player can go from a strong WR 3 to a WR 4.

As I mentioned Jamal Charles was the leading receiver for KC in 2013 and Reid has shown a tendency to throw to RB a lot with the Eagles as well. Now Charles is likely done but that doesn't mean they won't draft a new RB who they end up throwing the ball to a lot, which I do think would affect Hills opportunities somewhat, as I think he was used in a similar role as Charles on some of those passing plays. What happens to Hill if KC ends up drafting Cook or McCaffrey? Those RB would likely command more targets, which could decrease opportunity for Hill.

Lots of different things could happen and I would be happy to listen to why Hill is going to surpass Maclin in terms of targets or why Hill is better than a WR 3 in fantasy sustainably. 

Edited by Biabreakable
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2017 at 3:51 AM, King of the Jungle said:

Kevin White at 30 seems optimistic as well. I was high on him coming into the league but he looked awkward when on the field and then of course missing most of his first two years seems like an awful big hurdle.

I agree that he has looked bad on the field, which is a major negative. The missed time doesn't seem as important.

3 hours ago, spider321 said:

Is this where I post that you should rank all of my players higher?

If you think they should be and have arguments, then sure. I own a lot of Sammy Watkins and have him ranked higher than most people do, and those two facts are not unrelated: he was my top player to try to acquire in October.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

That is fine I never claimed it was. My post was in response to FUBAR sayting Hill was already a WR 30 which by the numbers I am looking at, he was lower than that. There are a lot of WR who can have WR 3 seasons.Why will Hill be consistently better than that?

Snip 

Lots of different things could happen and I would be happy to listen to why Hill is going to surpass Maclin in terms of targets or why Hill is better than a WR 3 in fantasy sustainably. 

Snipped just to shorten my reply post, your analysis is well worth reading.  

Whether hill already is a top 30 receiver I guess depends on your definition and format.  I play in leagues where players get points for returns, and Hill was the #8 wide receiver on the year (18 in leagues without return points).  Color it anyway you want to, the fact is he was a top 30 as a rookie.  Can he continue that level of success going forward?  I'll agree with your basic answer (along with your analysis) of not the same as 2016, but some of that is offset by both his learning the game (Reid complimented his improvement throughout the year) and his first month he wasn't overly involved.   The kid is a playmaker.  Reid isn't going to stop using his playmakers.  

You're probably right on the pecking order, kelce, Maclin, and a healthy charles likely mean fewer targets for hill per game.  But when he was involved more heavily, the guy performed.  I'll cherry pick a stat here - when hill got more than 5 targets, the Chiefs were 7-1 with the sole loss back in week 4.  (Granted, the Chiefs were 12-4 on the season)  

I don't think he gets more targets than Maclin, but I'd bet his ypr is higher.  

You're right that Reid likes to use his RB in the passing game, you're also right that if they draft one of the top players, his opportunity probably decreases.  But that's a pretty big if and the same can be said about most players drafted in dynasty outside the top 20 at their position.  

It's just weird to see a player who was top 10 (return leagues) or 20 as a rookie being ranked below #40.  Maybe it was all a fluke, time will tell.  I don't think it's a perfect comparison, but he's similar to DeSean Jackson in many ways.  Most years, DeSean was easily a top 30 receiver.  Even while Maclin was also top 30 (granted, they didn't have kelce). 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely feel like I am behind everyone in regards to evaluation of Hill. I only got to see KC in the playoffs vs. the Steelers although I think I did catch one of their earlier games. Anyhow not a good example of his ability or potential most likely.

DeSean Jackson is pretty high praise. From what little I have seen of Hill he does have a similar build and maybe he is similarly fast as well? If we were to say that Hill's career will be like Jacksons (which has had its ups and downs) then that would be a WR 3 with upside because of the TD potential which Hill has already demonstrated.

I still am not sure where to rank him relative to other WR or overall. I could see him being anywhere from 30 as FUBAR suggested to as low as 60 or 70 in an overall list (WR 40 or so) 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

I definitely feel like I am behind everyone in regards to evaluation of Hill. I only got to see KC in the playoffs vs. the Steelers although I think I did catch one of their earlier games. Anyhow not a good example of his ability or potential most likely.

DeSean Jackson is pretty high praise. From what little I have seen of Hill he does have a similar build and maybe he is similarly fast as well? If we were to say that Hill's career will be like Jacksons (which has had its ups and downs) then that would be a WR 3 with upside because of the TD potential which Hill has already demonstrated.

I still am not sure where to rank him relative to other WR or overall. I could see him being anywhere from 30 as FUBAR suggested to as low as 60 or 70 in an overall list (WR 40 or so) 

Similarly?   dude. You could argue a few things against Hill, but speed is not one of them.  

http://www.chiefs.com/news/article-2/Rookie-Tyreek-Hill-Proves-He’s-the-Fastest-Player-in-the-NFL/a5e05335-aef0-4503-ae05-ff95e96c5515

Quote

On Sunday against the Denver Broncos, the Kansas City Chiefs’ rookie fifth-round pick,  Tyreek Hill , who reportedly ran a 4.24 40-yard dash at his pro day last Spring, hit a top speed of 22.77 miles per hour during his 86-yard touchdown return midway through the second quarter.

It was his pro day, but Hill's time matched the fastest ever in the combine (Chris Johnson).  Or maybe that was 2nd fastest to Bo... either way, it's damn fast. 

FWIW, Hill's on field / game speed was the fastest in 2016

the top 10 ball-carrier speeds recorded by NFL players during the 2015 regular season:

 
  • Robert Alford, Cornerback, Atlanta Falcons: 22.60 mph
  • John Brown, Receiver, Arizona Cardinals: 22.60 mph
  • Ted Ginn, Jr., Receiver, Carolina Panthers: 22.44 mph
  • Martavis Bryant, Receiver, Pittsburgh Steelers: 22.30 mph
  • Jeremy Maclin, Receiver, Kansas City Chiefs: 22.15 mph
  • Torrey Smith, Receiver, San Francisco 49ers, 22.13 mph
  • Sammy Watkins, Receiver, Buffalo Bills: 22.13 mph
  • Allen Robinson, Receiver, Jacksonville Jaguars: 22.11 mph
  • David Johnson, Running Back, Arizona Cardinals: 22.05 mph
  • Darrius Hayward-Bey, Receiver, Pittsburgh Steelers: 22.01 mph
Edited by FUBAR
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, FUBAR said:

It was his pro day, but 

That's a huge "but". Pro day stats are questionable at best.

He's fast, but never compare pro day to combine stats.

That said, my vote is a much lower ranking until he proves himself as a WR. Fluky TDs always inflate value despite everyone knowing better. Does anyone remember DeSean's value after his 2nd year? It went crazy. He set a record for most TDs over 40 yards, but no one wanted to be talked down. He was a playmaker and that was the end of the debate, or so it seemed. To me DeSean was a much more polished WR than Hill. I'd say DeSean is his ceiling and Tavon is his more likely reality. Spend those auction dollars or draft picks on more proven commodities.

Edited by FF Ninja
typo
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

That's a huge "but". Pro day stats are questionable at best.

He's fast, but never compare pro day to combine stats.

That said, my vote is a much lower ranking until he proves himself as a WR. Fluky TDs always inflate value despite everyone knowing better. Does anyone remember DeSean's value after his 2nd year? It went crazy. He set a record for most TDs over 40 yards, but no one wanted to be talked down. He was a playmaker and that was the end of the debate, or so it seemed. To me DeSean was a much more polished WR than Hill. I'd say DeSean is his ceiling and Tavon is his more likely reality. Spend those auction dollars or draft picks on more proven commodities.

That's fair.  But the on field speed means more anyway. 

Fwiw, the points made by you, bia, and others about not going crazy over him are absolutely right.  I'm just saying there seems to be the opposite effect going on here.  

Edited by FUBAR
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at the game logs. It looks like Hills first good game happens week 7 against the Colts ( 6 targets 5 receptions 98 yards). In week 8 Maclin gets injured, as you see Hillts targets go way up game 9 the first game Maclin was out that they game planned for against Carolina. 13 targets 10 receptions. He has 10 targets in game 11 against Denverand 2 TD. Hill has 5 or more targets for seven consecutive weeks from game 7 to game 13. 

Maclin returns to the lineup in game 13 and plays 76% of the snaps but only 3 targets (working him back in) and Hill 6 targets 6 receptions 66 yards. In game 14 Hills gets 3 targets but does not catch any of them, game 15 5 targets no receptions, but he gets most of his rushing yards in two games. One off of the fake punt game 14 and then in game 15 six rushing attempts 95 yards and he scored TD in each of those games, so no one cared about him not getting any receptions.

Part of why I think Maclin remains the most targeted WR is that once he came back to the line up he had more snaps and targets than Hill did. 

Hills snap counts look like they are in the 20 to 30 per game range except for the weeks that Maclin was out where he gets more in games 8 to 11. Hill did play more and was used more in game 17

 

I wasn't arguing about Hills speed. That is why I used a question mark. I have heard about how fast he is. Jackson has been one of the fastest players in the NFL.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ZWK said:

I agree that he has looked bad on the field, which is a major negative. The missed time doesn't seem as important.

 

The missed time in and of itself is not important - but the fact that he's had multiple serious lower leg injuries does concern me. They seem to have had a cumulative effect on some players in the past (Hakeem Nicks for one) and ruined promising careers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Biabreakable said:

Just looking at the game logs. It looks like Hills first good game happens week 7 against the Colts ( 6 targets 5 receptions 98 yards). In week 8 Maclin gets injured, as you see Hillts targets go way up game 9 the first game Maclin was out that they game planned for against Carolina. 13 targets 10 receptions. He has 10 targets in game 11 against Denverand 2 TD. Hill has 5 or more targets for seven consecutive weeks from game 7 to game 13. 

Maclin returns to the lineup in game 13 and plays 76% of the snaps but only 3 targets (working him back in) and Hill 6 targets 6 receptions 66 yards. In game 14 Hills gets 3 targets but does not catch any of them, game 15 5 targets no receptions, but he gets most of his rushing yards in two games. One off of the fake punt game 14 and then in game 15 six rushing attempts 95 yards and he scored TD in each of those games, so no one cared about him not getting any receptions.

Part of why I think Maclin remains the most targeted WR is that once he came back to the line up he had more snaps and targets than Hill did. 

Hills snap counts look like they are in the 20 to 30 per game range except for the weeks that Maclin was out where he gets more in games 8 to 11. Hill did play more and was used more in game 17

 

I wasn't arguing about Hills speed. That is why I used a question mark. I have heard about how fast he is. Jackson has been one of the fastest players in the NFL.

I don't know that you're accounting for return yards here, perhaps you aren't in a league that rewards them?  One of the beautiful aspects of Hill is his safe floor because of those.  Hill's lowest scoring game of the year was 7.2 points - only three other WR can claim that (AB, Evans, Thomas).  So yes, his first "good" game was week 7, but he didn't have a "disaster" game at all thanks to the 2.3 PPG built into his floor.  Also, it's kind of nitpicking but week 4 he had 16.3 points.

I don't argue that a lot of his success was "fluky" and unlikely to repeat at that frequency, but I also believe he'll get more opportunities (a lot in the running game) and that will offset that.  He only carried the ball 24 times for 267.  He could easily see 100 carries and in that case the yards would increase (double?) which would offset even if he lost all three rushing TD's.  61/593/6 receiving seems extremely within reach to repeat.  Heck that's less than 10 yards per catch, so I could see that increasing a ton too as he progresses.

Nowhere to go but up for this kid IMO, I think we've seen his floor here.  The only risk is Reid, and unfortunately that's a biggie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spider321 said:

Can we get a separate Tyreke Hill thread?

No disrespect but ZWK is the OP, he's involved in the discussion. Hill's value is relevant in determining his true value in Dynasty. I'm not a 100% believer in Hill but this discussion could change my perception of him.

Tex

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Hankmoody said:

I don't know that you're accounting for return yards here, perhaps you aren't in a league that rewards them?  One of the beautiful aspects of Hill is his safe floor because of those.  Hill's lowest scoring game of the year was 7.2 points - only three other WR can claim that (AB, Evans, Thomas).  So yes, his first "good" game was week 7, but he didn't have a "disaster" game at all thanks to the 2.3 PPG built into his floor.  Also, it's kind of nitpicking but week 4 he had 16.3 points.

I don't argue that a lot of his success was "fluky" and unlikely to repeat at that frequency, but I also believe he'll get more opportunities (a lot in the running game) and that will offset that.  He only carried the ball 24 times for 267.  He could easily see 100 carries and in that case the yards would increase (double?) which would offset even if he lost all three rushing TD's.  61/593/6 receiving seems extremely within reach to repeat.  Heck that's less than 10 yards per catch, so I could see that increasing a ton too as he progresses.

Nowhere to go but up for this kid IMO, I think we've seen his floor here.  The only risk is Reid, and unfortunately that's a biggie.

100 carries? :unsure:

Ty Mongomery had 77 rushing attempts in 2016. So I suppose that is possible. It does seem like Hill is the replacement for the big play ability of Charles that was missing.

Tavon Austin's highest number of rushing attempts was 52 in 2015, with an offense built around him. That might be a more reasonable upside for him than 100. I am likely feeling gun shy about that prospect because of how Norv Turner handled Patterson. 

I do think there is a trend in the NFL of converting WR to RB and/or using WR as RB at times in recent years, and perhaps Hill is another example of that.

I used to play in leagues that gave points for return yards, but not recently. I completely understand the extra cushion in points that brings to offset the boom bust aspect of his opportunities. There are many examples of good return specialists being successful as offensive players later on in their careers, such as Antonio Brown as well. Perhaps Hill develops into more than a Tavon Austin type of player.(who also gets extra points from punt return yards).

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BigTex said:

I'm currently working a trade Hill for Hilton.

I have Andrew Luck and would love to have Hilton over Hill.

 

Tex

If you can get Hilton for Hill you should have to wear a mask and drive a getaway car.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Biabreakable said:

100 carries? :unsure:

Agree with this, can't see him getting close to that, barring significant missed time by KC RBs. Even if Charles is not back, Ware and West should again combine for 300+ carries, and Smith and other RBs should again combine for 50+ carries.

As some others have said, to me Austin is a much better comp than Desean Jackson or some others mentioned. I distinctly remember having similar conversations last offseason about how (un)likely it was that Austin would repeat his 2015 performance in 2016. Despite getting a big contract extension, Austin went from 907/9 to 688/4. IMO that example is applicable here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hankmoody said:

I don't know that you're accounting for return yards here, perhaps you aren't in a league that rewards them?  One of the beautiful aspects of Hill is his safe floor because of those.  Hill's lowest scoring game of the year was 7.2 points - only three other WR can claim that (AB, Evans, Thomas).  So yes, his first "good" game was week 7, but he didn't have a "disaster" game at all thanks to the 2.3 PPG built into his floor.  Also, it's kind of nitpicking but week 4 he had 16.3 points.

I don't argue that a lot of his success was "fluky" and unlikely to repeat at that frequency, but I also believe he'll get more opportunities (a lot in the running game) and that will offset that.  He only carried the ball 24 times for 267.  He could easily see 100 carries and in that case the yards would increase (double?) which would offset even if he lost all three rushing TD's.  61/593/6 receiving seems extremely within reach to repeat.  Heck that's less than 10 yards per catch, so I could see that increasing a ton too as he progresses.

Nowhere to go but up for this kid IMO, I think we've seen his floor here.  The only risk is Reid, and unfortunately that's a biggie.

Leagues that count return yards are by far the exception, not the rule.  Obviously in those leagues his value is orders of magnitude higher than in normal leagues and there are much fewer questions about his value there.  That's about as relevant to normal leagues though as discussing Ryan Tannehill's value in a league where Dolphins gets 50 points for touchdowns.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dexter McCluster, Tavon Austin, Devin Hester, Dante Hall, Cordarrelle Patterson.  When was the last time one of these gadget guys who got a good chunk of their value from running or return TDs actually panned out long term?

Percy Harvin is the closest thing to it that I can recall and his value came from him actually developing into a good WR for a while there.

Hill's value is 100% tied to whether or not he can develop into a good WR.  There's not been a top fantasy player that wouldn't still have been a top fantasy player if you took his rushing yards and return TDs away entirely.  That's not to say that Hill can't totally buck that trend and run the ball 70 times/year as a WR while returning 3 kicks for TDs every year, but it's a major major major uphill battle.]

Is he a good WR or is he going to be a good WR are the only questions I care about.  All the other gadget stuff is not sustainable long-term for creating a top fantasy asset.  I think it's quite likely that we've already seen his career high for both rushing TDs and return TDs in a season.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Leagues that count return yards are by far the exception, not the rule.  Obviously in those leagues his value is orders of magnitude higher than in normal leagues and there are much fewer questions about his value there.  That's about as relevant to normal leagues though as discussing Ryan Tannehill's value in a league where Dolphins gets 50 points for touchdowns.

I'd like to see a source for that.  As one point 4 or 6 leagues I was in rewarded return yards.  At a minimum, with a player like Hill it's worth the caveat of "for return yard leagues" just like most would say "in standard leagues vs. PPR" for a player like David Johnson..

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

100 carries? :unsure:

Ty Mongomery had 77 rushing attempts in 2016. So I suppose that is possible. It does seem like Hill is the replacement for the big play ability of Charles that was missing.

Tavon Austin's highest number of rushing attempts was 52 in 2015, with an offense built around him. That might be a more reasonable upside for him than 100. I am likely feeling gun shy about that prospect because of how Norv Turner handled Patterson. 

I do think there is a trend in the NFL of converting WR to RB and/or using WR as RB at times in recent years, and perhaps Hill is another example of that.

I used to play in leagues that gave points for return yards, but not recently. I completely understand the extra cushion in points that brings to offset the boom bust aspect of his opportunities. There are many examples of good return specialists being successful as offensive players later on in their careers, such as Antonio Brown as well. Perhaps Hill develops into more than a Tavon Austin type of player.(who also gets extra points from punt return yards).

100 carries is just over 6 per game. 

Montgomery had a learning curve in mid-season to work out, but his last 5 games he had 6, 9, 16, 9, and 8 carries which indicates he was getting into a groove with the roles and responsibilities.  That's 154 carries over 16 games.

I'm not banking on it, but when the coach makes it a point to say they need to get Hill the ball more, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe an extra 4.5 rushes per game are possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hankmoody said:

I'd like to see a source for that.  As one point 4 of 6 leagues I was in rewarded return yards.  At a minimum, with a player like Hill it's worth the caveat of "for return yard leagues" just like most would say "in standard leagues vs. PPR" for a player like David Johnson..

Just look at the tiny amount of time/resources dedicated (by FBG, forums, etc) to return yards or players that get all their value from return yards. It's a niche market. If we're dropping anecdotal evidence (you having 4 of 6), I'll share that I'm somewhere around 0 of 12. 

Counting return yards is just a gimmick to get more players in the player pool to encourage parity. "Did you miss out on real players that play on offense? Don't worry. Pick up this 6th string WR who runs no routes, plays zero offensive snaps, but returns kickoffs." A guy like Hill has much more value in those leagues, but for future reference if you are discussing a return yard league it is really important to state that because almost everyone will assume return yards count for nothing.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FF Ninja said:

Just look at the tiny amount of time/resources dedicated (by FBG, forums, etc) to return yards or players that get all their value from return yards. It's a niche market. If we're dropping anecdotal evidence (you having 4 of 6), I'll share that I'm somewhere around 0 of 12. 

Counting return yards is just a gimmick to get more players in the player pool to encourage parity. "Did you miss out on real players that play on offense? Don't worry. Pick up this 6th string WR who runs no routes, plays zero offensive snaps, but returns kickoffs." A guy like Hill has much more value in those leagues, but for future reference if you are discussing a return yard league it is really important to state that because almost everyone will assume return yards count for nothing.

Well you kind of make my point, because many time/resources do mention bumps in those leagues for players likely to get return yards and there are plenty of articles written about returners.  I don't share your condescension regarding returners, those yards are just as important toward scoring points as any other.  What exactly is the difference between Harvin returning a punt 80 yards to the 10 vs. fair catching the punt and catching an 80 yard pass on the next play?  They produce the exact same net to the offense.

Pretty much every one of my Hill posts has differentiated the extra value he brings in return yards and compares his ranking to a non-return yard league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hankmoody said:

Well you kind of make my point, because many time/resources do mention bumps in those leagues for players likely to get return yards and there are plenty of articles written about returners.  I don't share your condescension regarding returners, those yards are just as important toward scoring points as any other.  What exactly is the difference between Harvin returning a punt 80 yards to the 10 vs. fair catching the punt and catching an 80 yard pass on the next play?  They produce the exact same net to the offense.

Pretty much every one of my Hill posts has differentiated the extra value he brings in return yards and compares his ranking to a non-return yard league.

A casual mention is not the same as dedicated material.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hankmoody said:

100 carries is just over 6 per game.

I'm not banking on it, but when the coach makes it a point to say they need to get Hill the ball more, I don't think it's unreasonable to believe an extra 4.5 rushes per game are possible.

For anyone who thinks this, I would be quite interested to see your breakdown of projections for carries for the Chiefs. Here was 2016:

  • 214 Ware
  • 88 West
  • 48 Smith
  • 24 Hill
  • 13 Davis
  • 12 Charles
  • 4 Thomas
  • 4 Foles
  • 2 Wilson
  • 1 Kelce
  • 1 Maclin
  • 1 Poe
  • 412 total (#14 in NFL)

Where are the carries coming from to support Hill adding at least 76 carries? Or are the Chiefs going to have 488+ rushing attempts? The Cowboys led the NFL with 499.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Hankmoody said:

How about weekly articles as recently as 2015 season (aka the year before the great DFS sellout)?  Dedicated enough for you?  Or a preseason article dedicated to it?  How about including it in the rookie evaluations?

I didn't say there was zero content. Just not much. The fact remains that it is not a common league setting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My rankings are for leagues where players get no points for return yards or TDs. If you're in a league with points for return yards, then you obviously should value guys like Tyreek Hill more highly.

Looking at Hill's stats on offense: he had 860 yfs and 9 TDs, which is 1 TD every 96 yards. That TD-scoring rate is unsustainably good, as Adam Harstad has written about. On average receivers have about 1 TD every 157 yards, and Percy Harvin in Minnesota (who seems like the obvious comparison to Hill if you're being optimistic about Hill) had 1 TD every 166 yards. Yardage numbers are more predictive of future performance than TD numbers (or fantasy numbers), and for WRs I think their skillset at doing receiver things is also very important. The thing that would be most likely to cause me to move Hill in my rankings is an analysis of how he did at getting open when running routes down the field.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

For anyone who thinks this, I would be quite interested to see your breakdown of projections for carries for the Chiefs. Here was 2016:

  • 214 Ware
  • 88 West
  • 48 Smith
  • 24 Hill
  • 13 Davis
  • 12 Charles
  • 4 Thomas
  • 4 Foles
  • 2 Wilson
  • 1 Kelce
  • 1 Maclin
  • 1 Poe
  • 412 total (#14 in NFL)

Where are the carries coming from to support Hill adding at least 76 carries? Or are the Chiefs going to have 488+ rushing attempts? The Cowboys led the NFL with 499.

Remember, I'm basing a lot of this on Reid's comment he wanted to get Hill more involved, so my initial reaction would be "you'd have to ask him".  West wasn't particularly impressive and Ware obviously wasn't the apple of The Big Apple's eye (I thought he looked pretty good at times but Reid refused to ride him so something is up there), so it wouldn't surprise me at all if 25 each came from Ware, West, and as additional rushes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scoring systems that limit scoring to a handful of easily obtained stats became solidly entrenched in FF from the days when stats took work to find reliably...if it wasn't in the newspaper box score it wasn't in the scoring system.

We're way past that now, with near-real-time stats on everything, and next-day data from the next-gen metrics people, yet people still cling to out of date wcoring systems like there's something amazingly great about them.  

Return yardage is one small step toward the future of FF.  Even if it is still currently rare, it's on the way up.  Don't discount it because it's still in its infancy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Arodin said:

Scoring systems that limit scoring to a handful of easily obtained stats became solidly entrenched in FF from the days when stats took work to find reliably...if it wasn't in the newspaper box score it wasn't in the scoring system.

We're way past that now, with near-real-time stats on everything, and next-day data from the next-gen metrics people, yet people still cling to out of date wcoring systems like there's something amazingly great about them.  

Return yardage is one small step toward the future of FF.  Even if it is still currently rare, it's on the way up.  Don't discount it because it's still in its infancy.

I don't think we've had commissioners going through papers to determine fantasy points in 15-20 years.  The newer fantasy sites can do just about any exotic scoring that you want.

I'm in close to 20 leagues and none include return yardage.  I have 1-2 that do include TDs but they include all TDs (fumbles recovered in end zone etc.).

I was in a league that included return yardage years ago (now defunct) and I kicked-assed because I owned Darren Sproles - he was gold!  The problem with that league is there weren't 12 guys that could get you return yardage that actually played.  Most were specialist, some were even defensive players.  I guess you could play a Devin Hester type over a traditional flex player.  I still think you are talking about a real niche type of league.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ZWK changed the title to ZWK's Dynasty Rankings (WR updated April 2021)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...