Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Futz said:

I agree that Fleener is in no way as fluid of an athlete as Graham but he has enough ability and the opportunity to be top 8 TE this year. Brees started to show some lack of deep ball accuracy(shoulder injury induced or advancing age or both) and I could see him going underneath more in a Phil Rivers sort of way to finish his career. 

I'm pretty sure Rivers still throws a great deep ball, but that's beside the point. Fleener may not be that great of a NFL TE, but I agree he's in line for a top 8 season solely due to target volume/quality. New Orleans is pretty much the best landing spot possible for a TE. New England might be in the running, but that's kind of a chicken/egg situation whereas we know Brees makes tight ends.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 366
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I got interested in the whole "targets" part of this.  With 110+ being the benchmark, as that's what Watson got in this New Orleans offense last year. 2015 - 7 TEs had 110+ targets, they finished

I open this thread to make me feel smart, because I also still open the Ajayi thread to feel sad.

IMO, Allen fits the Colts better and Fleener fits the Saints better.  WIn/win for everyone, all the way around.

1 hour ago, FF Ninja said:

I'm pretty sure Rivers still throws a great deep ball, but that's beside the point. Fleener may not be that great of a NFL TE, but I agree he's in line for a top 8 season solely due to target volume/quality. New Orleans is pretty much the best landing spot possible for a TE. New England might be in the running, but that's kind of a chicken/egg situation whereas we know Brees makes tight ends.

Yes, if you have a FA TE and get to hand pick the location, New Orleans with Brees has to be your top 1-2 option and then its a gap in the tier.

Assuming relative good health by the offense, it is difficult to imagine Fleener not easily being inside the top 10 and, as a whole, when you look at Brady's suspension, Eifert's and Reed's injury history, Graham's recent injury, Kelce with Jamaal Charles back, changes in the way Tennessee will do business (D. Walker), and Bennett leaving Chicago, it might be hard to find a way to keep him out of the top 6-7. 

I guess Olsen, Ebron, Ertz, ASJ, J. Thomas, Green would ALL have to hit this year to blend in with the above list in some fashion to keep Fleener lower. I don't have much confidence in both these scenarios being avoided. 

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

I'm pretty sure Rivers still throws a great deep ball, but that's beside the point. Fleener may not be that great of a NFL TE, but I agree he's in line for a top 8 season solely due to target volume/quality. New Orleans is pretty much the best landing spot possible for a TE. New England might be in the running, but that's kind of a chicken/egg situation whereas we know Brees makes tight ends.

We'll have to agree to disagree about Rivers because that's why Gates and Allen have been target hos with the intermediate routes in that offense. Rivers was floating a ton of throws. I agree though, that's beside the point. Fleener may not do a ton between the 20s but I could see double digit TDs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Futz said:

We'll have to agree to disagree about Rivers because that's why Gates and Allen have been target hos with the intermediate routes in that offense. Rivers was floating a ton of throws. I agree though, that's beside the point. Fleener may not do a ton between the 20s but I could see double digit TDs.

Agree on Fleener and not to get side tracked but I think Rivers' worst problems with the deep ball has been the injury last year and the lack of a true quality big receiver that can get deep (that he has had a chance to consistently play with). Since the departure of VJAX, injuries and lack of talent in some combo or another has really prevented the Chargers from having that presence week in and week out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Futz said:

We'll have to agree to disagree about Rivers because that's why Gates and Allen have been target hos with the intermediate routes in that offense. Rivers was floating a ton of throws. I agree though, that's beside the point. Fleener may not do a ton between the 20s but I could see double digit TDs.

Who else was he going to throw to? As Shutout mentioned, he hasn't had a really good deep threat since V-Jax. Rivers still managed 18.7 YPR to Malcom Floyd last year. Combine the fact that the offensive line has struggled for the past 3-4 years and it wouldn't surprise me if he shied away from the deep ball even if he had a legit deep threat. Will be interesting to see how he does with Benjamin this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is there not to love about Fleener in NO? I don't understand "top 8" I'd think top-5 is a must. QB throws for 4800+ yards, 30+ TDs, Colston's gone, Watson's gone, Coleman hasn't become a RZ threat, the line should be better with Peat.... Fleener is going to be targeted heavily and he will be in the end zone often.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Fleener is a lock for big production as long as they keep Payton and Brees. I'm expecting numbers between Watson and Graham. Fleener actually has a faster 40 than Graham did, obviously that accounts for only a small portion of athletic ability, but it's there. And perhaps only New England more heavily features their TE's in their offense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ShamrockPride said:

Yeah, Fleener is a lock for big production as long as they keep Payton and Brees. I'm expecting numbers between Watson and Graham. Fleener actually has a faster 40 than Graham did, obviously that accounts for only a small portion of athletic ability, but it's there. And perhaps only New England more heavily features their TE's in their offense.

Yeah, just on a simple eyeball test, Fleener appears athletic enough to be a fit in this offense and we all know what Brees and the Saints means for TES. If nothing else, think about how Watson, at age 34 last year put up nearly 200 points in ppr FF.  If the guys stay healthy, Fleener almost has to be top 8 just by showing up to work every day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

What is there not to love about Fleener in NO? I don't understand "top 8" I'd think top-5 is a must. QB throws for 4800+ yards, 30+ TDs, Colston's gone, Watson's gone, Coleman hasn't become a RZ threat, the line should be better with Peat.... Fleener is going to be targeted heavily and he will be in the end zone often.

I'm with you on top 5. I didn't want him before free agency, but targeted him in both the PDSL and SSL leagues after he signed with NO. The only concern would be the addition of Mike Thomas. As a big slot guy I could see him competing with Fleener for RZ targets. But even with the rookie, target volume alone should net him a top 5 finish. But his ADP is up to TE7 now, so that's not a huge jump.

He's got TE2 upside, I suppose. I don't feel good about Reed (injury history and competition for targets), I doubt Olsen is over 12 ypr this year much less at 14.3, Kelce will probably hover around 100 targets again, Walker isn't going to repeat 133 targets and 94 rec, and Eifert has a foot injury (least concerning red flag of all of them really). The TE position typically gets 150-180 targets. How big of a share of that he gets will determine Fleener's upside. I never thought Graham was all that special, so I don't see why Fleener couldn't get 130 targets, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2016 at 11:40 PM, Wooters said:

People want a 1st rounder for this guy.  Give me a break. 

Still feel that way?  Got to the end of the first round in my draft and was thinking about Hunter Henry.  I still see Fleener as a much better dynasty TE prospect. 

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

Still feel that way?  Got to the end of the first round in my draft and was thinking about Hunter Henry.  I still see Fleener as a much better dynasty TE prospect. 

Paying a first rounder for Fleener is a bargain for the buyer in dyno leagues.  You get a guy that barring injury almost can't finish less than 7-8 and if you keep the 1st you're looking at 2-3 years to develop your own TE. Of course, I'm thinking back end of the first, not the top 6-8 picks but overall I think people get too hung up on rookie 1st round value. Everyone thinks they will draft the next big thing but it probably happens about 20% of the time. And if you need a TE, its one of the hardest positions to get and plug and play early. Part of what you are paying for is the couple of years someone else ate the roster spot and waited for him to develop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Coby Fleener - TE -  Saints

After watching Coby Fleener's Colts tape, Drew Brees observed that the athletic tight end seemed to be "always open."

"I'm watching Colts film or Fleener film," Brees recalled. "It was like, 'Man, this guy has an uncanny ability to separate.' He's always open. There's always a place to throw the ball where he can get it." The New Orleans Times-Picayune says Fleener, Brandin Cooks, and Willie Snead were the "three most-targeted players" by Brees at Saints minicamp. Signed to a five-year, $36 million deal by New Orleans, Fleener offers mid-range TE1 upside in one of the league's pass-heaviest offenses with one of the league's premier passers.
 
 
Jun 20 - 10:15 AM
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, massraider said:

I'm not a Fleener guy,  but still,  it must be said: Brees pumps up his receivers like he's their PR rep.  

Stills, Meacham, Coleman,  on and on.  

But the thing is he delivers. I remember him pumping up Ben Watson all the time last year and at the end of the day, the 34 year old put up about 200 in my ppr leagues.

Honestly, It looks good to have Brees talk up a teammate, as it does for any player but it's not necessary. Anyone who follows football knows the Saints throw all day and they know Brees LOVES to use his TE so it is not difficult to connect legitimate dots on this one: If they stay healthy, Fleener is going to be top 5. Its that simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's getting drafted that way,  so he better.

Still trying to understand why going from Luck to Brees is such a massive leap.

 

I understand. Brees used Watson and Graham.   But what if the new guy's not any good? Would Brees still use him?

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

He's getting drafted that way,  so he better.

Still trying to understand why going from Luck to Brees is such a massive leap.

 

I understand. Brees used Watson and Graham.   But what if the new guy's not any good? Would Brees still use him?

I dont think its a stretch to say fleener is better than watson and could surpass his numbers. 

 

You seem to have an anti fleener bias. I thinks he a good candidate to put up good number this year in the saints system. Shrug

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

He's getting drafted that way,  so he better.

Still trying to understand why going from Luck to Brees is such a massive leap.

 

I understand. Brees used Watson and Graham.   But what if the new guy's not any good? Would Brees still use him?

I don't necessarily think the change in philosophy/qb is what will help Fleener perform better.  There were two things working against him in Indy.  The first was having, an arguably better TE on the team in Allen, and the second was the time that Luck played hurt or was out all together.  When Fleener was the guy and Luck was healthy, Fleener did pretty well.

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

I dont think its a stretch to say fleener is better than watson and could surpass his numbers. 

 

You seem to have an anti fleener bias. I thinks he a good candidate to put up good number this year in the saints system. Shrug

Why wasn't he decent in Indy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of age, I'd think going from Luck to Brees is a good thing.  What has Luck done that Brees hasn't?  Admittedly, I'm biased as a Saints fan.  But as a fan, I think he has less competition for targets as well.

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

Why wasn't he decent in Indy?

He was the #6 TE in my league in 2014, and was tied for the most receiving TDs on the team who led the league in passing TDs that season.  Isn't that "decent"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, matttyl said:

He was the #6 TE in my league in 2014, and was tied for the most receiving TDs on the team who led the league in passing TDs that season.  Isn't that "decent"?

You know what?

That is decent.  It is mildly concerning that it took a league leading passing game for him to be decent. 

He had,  I think,  one useful game last year.  

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

You know what?

That is decent.  It is mildly concerning that it took a league leading passing game for him to be decent. 

He had,  I think,  one useful game last year.  

Why?  He just got moved to the "league leading passing game" from last year. 

And last year he had 3 "useful games", on what was the 22nd best passing game in terms of yards, 24th in terms of points per game, and 31st in terms of yards per attempt.  I mean the top receiving threat on the Colts last year was bested in my league by Ted Ginn, Jr. and Travis Benjamin in my league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, matttyl said:

Why?  He just got moved to the "league leading passing game" from last year. 

And last year he had 3 "useful games", on what was the 22nd best passing game in terms of yards, 24th in terms of points per game, and 31st in terms of yards per attempt.  I mean the top receiving threat on the Colts last year was bested in my league by Ted Ginn, Jr. and Travis Benjamin in my league.

It's interesting to me that he is considered a lock for top 5 TE, when he couldn't do it in Indy, on a team that was #1 in TDs.

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

It's interesting to me that he is considered a lock for top 5 TE, when he couldn't do it in Indy, on a team that was #1 in TDs.

meh, i dont think he was in on very many RZ or goal line plays, curious how many looks he got inside the 20 or 10 vs allen and bradshaw

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

meh, i dont think he was in on very many RZ or goal line plays, curious how many looks he got inside the 20 or 10 vs allen and bradshaw

Allen was the blocker of the two,  Fleener is a one trick pony.  If he wasn't in on RZ or goal line passing, we should be wondering why that was. 

A good TE? He would be out there,  being the 6'5" target and all. 

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

Allen was the blocker of the two,  Fleener is a one trick pony.  If he wasn't in on RZ or goal line passing, we should be wondering why that was. 

A good TE? He would be out there,  being the 6'5" target and all. 

Ya its possible he isn't very good. It's also possible he wasn't being utilized well either. Allen isnt that good imo. Personally, idc if Fleener can block from a purely fantasy driven perspective, outside of the fact that it cost him snaps in Indy. He wont be asked to block a ton in NO. If they let him run routes, and try and put him in situations where he can use his size and find mis matches, I trust in the brees effect. Whether he is truly talented or not, he is now fantasy relevant and its hard to argue that

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

You know what?

That is decent.  It is mildly concerning that it took a league leading passing game for him to be decent. 

He had,  I think,  one useful game last year.  

 

 

Indy was a complete #### show last year with hasselback in there. I dont hold that against fleener one bit. 2014 he was solid as hell and had ovrr 15 yards per catch. Pretty darn good. 

 

Dont draft him if you dont like him. But the opportunity for fantasy points is there. All that matters imo

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people forget that TEs take a good 4-6 years to start playing to their potential.  Also, Fleener's first 4 years in the league look eerily similar to Greg Olsen's first 4 years.  Olsen went to CAR in year 5 and Fleener is also switching teams in year 5.  I personally think Fleener is going to be in that top 7 TE range for years to come.  He's just getting started in his career.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, massraider said:

It's interesting to me that he is considered a lock for top 5 TE, when he couldn't do it in Indy, on a team that was #1 in TDs.

Like I said, he was #6 in my league in 2014 - less than half a point per game from being #5.  He was also the #1 TE in weeks 11 and 13 - for teams in their playoff push might have sent them over the top. 

I don't think he's a "lock" for top 5.  Top 10 (unless injured), sure.  Of course, the difference between the #5 and #10 TE most years is maybe a point or two a game.  After the top 2 or 3, it kinda plateaus off. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bicycle_seat_sniffer said:

 

 

Indy was a complete #### show last year with hasselback in there. I dont hold that against fleener one bit. 2014 he was solid as hell and had ovrr 15 yards per catch. Pretty darn good. 

 

Dont draft him if you dont like him. But the opportunity for fantasy points is there. All that matters imo

I'm a dissenting voice regarding Fleener. 

The only one.  Should his thread just be a circle jerk till September? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, massraider said:

He's getting drafted that way,  so he better.

Still trying to understand why going from Luck to Brees is such a massive leap.

I understand. Brees used Watson and Graham.   But what if the new guy's not any good? Would Brees still use him?

I'm all about someone playing devil's advocate to tone down a circle jerk (it is a thankless job), but I feel like you are trolling because you are asking questions that have pretty obvious answers. The answer is quite simply targets.

The other part that feels very trolly is that you are holding last year against him. The entire team was a s*** show. They finished 27th last year in passing fantasy points as a team. New Orleans finished 2nd.

Not sure if this link will work, but this is the data dominator for passing points last year:

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/datadom.php?pt=o&groupyears=0&prr=p&pos=all&team=all&opp=all&minyr=2015&maxyr=2015&minwk=1&maxwk=17&homeroad=all&mindown=1&maxdown=4&mindist=1&maxdist=99&minfp=0&maxfp=100&mintime=0&maxtime=75&minmargin=-99&maxmargin=99&sortby=fpt&sortorder=desc&mintoqual=0&mincat=att%2Brsh%2Brec

38 minutes ago, massraider said:

It's interesting to me that he is considered a lock for top 5 TE, when he couldn't do it in Indy, on a team that was #1 in TDs.

When Fleener finished TE6, he ranked 9th in targets with 92. Hard to crack the top 5 when you're 9th in targets. FF is a volume game. That same year, Jimmy Graham finished 3rd in targets (125) and 3rd in TE scoring. Last season Ben Watson, who turned 35 during the season, finished 7th in targets (110) and 7th in TE scoring. Given Fleener's contract, it is reasonable to assume they plan to utilize him more than they utilized Ben Watson. Even if they only give him 110 targets, he's still got a good chance to squeak into the top 5. His ADP right now is TE7. Seems like he's being drafted at his floor (as always... assuming health).

I actually agree with you about his talent - I don't think Fleener is special. I mean, he's got good size and athleticism but he never distinguished himself in Indy. He did well with his 92 targets in 2014, but he likely wouldn't have received that share of target volume had Dwayne Allen not suffered (IIRC) a high ankle sprain - he missed 3 games and was hobbled in a few others (again based on memory - I think I rostered Allen in a few leagues that year). But you don't have to be special to flourish in New Orleans. His contract indicates he'll be given the volume to succeed. For that reason alone, I'm high on Fleener this year. I'm buying the situation, not the player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, massraider said:

I'm a dissenting voice regarding Fleener. 

The only one.  Should his thread just be a circle jerk till September? 

having a different opinion is fine, but i feel like youre pretty emotionally invested in the hope he fails

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not trolling.  

The obvious response to the target argument is that I don't think he's good enough to receive more passes.  If he had been given more targets, then he would have put up better numbers, I get that.  

I happen to think that Fleener is an average talent at TE, and that he's not going to get any more special as a receiver.  He'll have some good games, any Brees receiver does.  But I believe he'll disappoint, because I don't think he's ever proven that his size is particularly a matchup problem in the red zone, and once he gets the ball, he doesn't do much with it.  I think the intermediate area he works is an area that the Saints have no problem with, Cooks and Snead will both get their targets in this area.  Michael Thomas is an unknown.  Colston is gone, as well as Watson, so there are targets to be had.  

It's a good looking situation.  I don't think Fleener is good enough to take full advantage of it.  So I think he'll be a top 12 TE for sure, but will not be worthy of his ADP.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, massraider said:

I'm not trolling.  

The obvious response to the target argument is that I don't think he's good enough to receive more passes.  If he had been given more targets, then he would have put up better numbers, I get that.  

I happen to think that Fleener is an average talent at TE, and that he's not going to get any more special as a receiver.  He'll have some good games, any Brees receiver does.  But I believe he'll disappoint, because I don't think he's ever proven that his size is particularly a matchup problem in the red zone, and once he gets the ball, he doesn't do much with it.  I think the intermediate area he works is an area that the Saints have no problem with, Cooks and Snead will both get their targets in this area.  Michael Thomas is an unknown.  Colston is gone, as well as Watson, so there are targets to be had.  

It's a good looking situation.  I don't think Fleener is good enough to take full advantage of it.  So I think he'll be a top 12 TE for sure, but will not be worthy of his ADP.  

fair enough.

Id bet you didnt think Watson was very good at the start of last season. If you thought that, id agree with you. I still dont think he is good. Brees made him matter, and thats what i assume will happen here. I think fleeners ceiling is much higher than watsons is or ever was. If fleener turns in 80% of what watson did last year, i would consider it a success.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pwingles said:

fair enough.

Id bet you didnt think Watson was very good at the start of last season. If you thought that, id agree with you. I still dont think he is good. Brees made him matter, and thats what i assume will happen here. I think fleeners ceiling is much higher than watsons is or ever was. If fleener turns in 80% of what watson did last year, i would consider it a success.

Did Watson cost what Fleener costs this year?

Or was Watson essentially free?  A true sleeper, that really helped his owners, because he was a late round pick, or FA pick up, who outscored his ADP.   

There is a big difference between Watson last year, and Fleener this year, and it's price.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at his ADP, seems like he's TE7?  Nothing wrong with that.

Every draft I've personally been involved in, he went a lot higher.  I haven't seen him go behind Delanie anywhere.  Perhaps I am simply acquainted with a bunch of Fleener fanboys.  That would be weird.

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

Allen was the blocker of the two,  Fleener is a one trick pony.  If he wasn't in on RZ or goal line passing, we should be wondering why that was. 

A good TE? He would be out there,  being the 6'5" target and all. 

Well, he may not be Graham, but Graham was a one trick pony as well.

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

I'm not trolling.  

The obvious response to the target argument is that I don't think he's good enough to receive more passes.  If he had been given more targets, then he would have put up better numbers, I get that.  

I happen to think that Fleener is an average talent at TE, and that he's not going to get any more special as a receiver.  He'll have some good games, any Brees receiver does.  But I believe he'll disappoint, because I don't think he's ever proven that his size is particularly a matchup problem in the red zone, and once he gets the ball, he doesn't do much with it.  I think the intermediate area he works is an area that the Saints have no problem with, Cooks and Snead will both get their targets in this area.  Michael Thomas is an unknown.  Colston is gone, as well as Watson, so there are targets to be had.  

It's a good looking situation.  I don't think Fleener is good enough to take full advantage of it.  So I think he'll be a top 12 TE for sure, but will not be worthy of his ADP.  

Saying top 12 is a bit of a cop out. Are you implying he'll be near the bottom of that? If so, you're basically saying he'll either (1) get less targets than Watson and/or (2) be less productive/target than Watson. And to make that assertion, you're essentially saying the Saints paid him all that money for nothing. I'm not impressed with the Saints' free agency moves, but I do firmly believe that if they are going to pay him like a top TE, they're going to continue to feed the TE position. Therefore, I see no possible way that Fleener gets fewer than 110 targets and thus no way for him to finish less than TE7.

His ADP is currently TE7, but let's say he slides up to TE5. That's acceptable to me. I'll gladly draft a guy at TE5 if he's got a TE2 upside and TE7 floor.

As Walker (TE5) and Barnidge (TE3) proved last year, you don't have to be special to put up top 5 numbers if you get 125 targets or more. Prior to last year's 110, the last time the NO TE1 had less than 125 targets was 2010.

7 minutes ago, massraider said:

The only similarity between these two is they are both TE.  But you knew that already.  

I disagree. Much like Fleener, Graham was athletic but never actually special. That won't be a popular opinion because people on fantasy boards think fantasy points = talent, but in reality Graham had volume and volume = fantasy points. He wasn't particularly good at anything other than getting lots of targets (he had plenty of drops and was a terrible blocker). Trading him for OL was one of the best moves the Saints front office has made since signing Brees.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FF Ninja said:

Saying top 12 is a bit of a cop out. Are you implying he'll be near the bottom of that? If so, you're basically saying he'll either (1) get less targets than Watson and/or (2) be less productive/target than Watson. And to make that assertion, you're essentially saying the Saints paid him all that money for nothing. I'm not impressed with the Saints' free agency moves, but I do firmly believe that if they are going to pay him like a top TE, they're going to continue to feed the TE position. Therefore, I see no possible way that Fleener gets fewer than 110 targets and thus no way for him to finish less than TE7.

His ADP is currently TE7, but let's say he slides up to TE5. That's acceptable to me. I'll gladly draft a guy at TE5 if he's got a TE2 upside and TE7 floor.

Less productive on targets than Watson?  Sure, I can see that.  Or maybe he won't get the TDs.  

As far as Saints paying him for nothing, you answered the question.  Saints front office is terrible, from a cap management standpoint, I believe they are worst in the league.  Saints throwing money at him doesn't sway my opinion one way or another.  Fleener isn't a better player because he drives a nicer car.  

I think that he'll get his targets, sure.  Then I think the Saints will realize that they are getting more production from targets that go to players who can actually move with the ball in their hands, and his prduction will be spotty.  

I don't mean to cop out, I think he'll be a lower tier #1 TE, so somewhere below the top 5.  I don't think he has TE2 upside, any more than Ladarius Green has TE2 upside.  

Like I said tho, if he's going TE7, I can't really get pissy about that.   

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

 I don't mean to cop out, I think he'll be a lower tier #1 TE, so somewhere below the top 5. 

So the shark move would have been to get him last year (or this offseason prior to signing with the Saints), then (in dynasty I mean).  Some did that.  Buying him now, at his current price, as you've pointed out, isn't quite as nice.  I was able to get him last year for a a 2nd round rookie pick, which ended up being the #17, which the guy used to draft Kenyan Drake.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...