What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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

WR Tyreek Hill, MIA (2 Viewers)

who cares really? WRs get paid more than TEs anyway. i'm not sure what you're talking about with kicking you while you're "down" because i'm just commenting on Kelce's production. he's every bit as important, which is why the offense is so potent. i'm a Hill owner (and Hunt too) since his rookie year and no hater.
No Kelce is not "every bit as important" if you think so you have no idea what you are talking about. This is why Tyreek will be paid more than Kelce on his next contract. 

 
Wait, he’s tied to what looks like will be one of the best QBs for the next 10+ years and is one of the most dangerous threats in the league but people are getting out just cause he sometimes only scores low double digits for you...man can’t wait till he still finishes the season as a top 5 WR

 
Overrated in fantasy. Good, but not consistent enough to be truly elite.
Agree at this point. KC's defense is better than anybody thought they would be so they don't use Tyreek at all. He just opens everything up for the rest of the offensive players. Unfortunately the KC D should be getting better the rest of the year so  downgrade Tyreek. Mahomes just doesn't need to force the ball down the field to him. He's a WR2 with the highest upside of any WR2 going forward but he is no longer a WR1. I hate it as much as anybody but it's true. They run him deep and dump it to Hunt and Kelce to much to value him that high going forward. 

 
No Kelce is not "every bit as important" if you think so you have no idea what you are talking about. This is why Tyreek will be paid more than Kelce on his next contract. 
I'll ask you to be more respectful and less dismissive of other people's opinions, guy.

Hill will get paid more than Kelce because WR's almost always do. Will Hill get more money, sure, but will he be paid like Kelce relative to their position? Kelce's $9 million makes him the #3 paid among TEs. Does Hill get paid like that? Not by KC. He's likely not going to make more than Sammy's $16 million even. 

Salary has little correlation to value in today's NFL.

 
I'll ask you to be more respectful and less dismissive of other people's opinions, guy.

Hill will get paid more than Kelce because WR's almost always do. Will Hill get more money, sure, but will he be paid like Kelce relative to their position? Kelce's $9 million makes him the #3 paid among TEs. Does Hill get paid like that? Not by KC. He's likely not going to make more than Sammy's $16 million even. 

Salary has little correlation to value in today's NFL.
Whatever bro. Players get paid based on their value. The offense like you stated is not run through Kelce. If you think it is you have no idea what you are talking about. 

 
I don't know what crawled up your ### and died today, @Milkman, but you should simmer down. It's a really bad look the way you're posting even if I think some of what you're saying is correct. I also think some of what you're saying is incorrect, but it has nothing to do with how valuable or good Tyreek is so not worth continuing to contaminate the thread. You're a good poster around here and getting worked up over nothing imo. 

 
Whatever bro. Players get paid based on their value. The offense like you stated is not run through Kelce. If you think it is you have no idea what you are talking about. 
Simple questions for you. Yes or no will suffice.

1) Is Hill going to get paid more than Watkins? $16 million is a big number. 

2) Is Hill going to get paid like Kelce is for the position? Kelce is the 3rd highest paid TE in the NFL. That would mean he paid more than $16 million, btw.

I didn't say the offense is run through Kelce. I said he's the number 1 option.  Kelce beat Hill on snap count last year and this year. Leads the team in targets this year as he did last year. 

These aren't hot takes, guy. I'm telling you a truth and you're letting your personal biases get in the way here. Make your case that Hill will get paid "more" or how he's more important than Kelce for the offense. As a Hill owner, I'm all ears here....

 
Simple questions for you. Yes or no will suffice.

1) Is Hill going to get paid more than Watkins? $16 million is a big number. 

2) Is Hill going to get paid like Kelce is for the position? Kelce is the 3rd highest paid TE in the NFL. That would mean he paid more than $16 million, btw.

I didn't say the offense is run through Kelce. I said he's the number 1 option.  Kelce beat Hill on snap count last year and this year. Leads the team in targets this year as he did last year. 

These aren't hot takes, guy. I'm telling you a truth and you're letting your personal biases get in the way here. Make your case that Hill will get paid "more" or how he's more important than Kelce for the offense. As a Hill owner, I'm all ears here....
Hill opens up the entire offense. If you watch the tape you will see this. Tyreek is the defenses #1 concern. Yes Tyreek will get paid more than Kelce and the he is the second most important player on offense behind Mahomes moving forward. 

 
I don't know what crawled up your ### and died today, @Milkman, but you should simmer down. It's a really bad look the way you're posting even if I think some of what you're saying is correct. I also think some of what you're saying is incorrect, but it has nothing to do with how valuable or good Tyreek is so not worth continuing to contaminate the thread. You're a good poster around here and getting worked up over nothing imo. 
I agree to a point. KC's D is better than I projected. I'm competitive so it's upsetting. When people come in here and say the offense is run through Kelce I'm going to speak up. Call it a bad look if you need too,

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree to a point. KC's D is better than I projected. I'm competitive so it's upsetting. When people come in here and say the offense is run through Kelce I'm going to speak up. Call it a bad look if you need too,


Nothing wrong with disagreeing if you think people are wrong. The bad look is how you're doing it, you read as taking it very personally when it is a perfectly fine conversation to be having. 

 
Nothing wrong with disagreeing if you think people are wrong. The bad look is how you're doing it, you read as taking it very personally when it is a perfectly fine conversation to be having. 
Conn the offense is not run through Kelce. Watch Tyreek miss a game and see what happens. 

 
Hill opens up the entire offense. If you watch the tape you will see this. Tyreek is the defenses #1 concern. Yes Tyreek will get paid more than Kelce and the he is the second most important player on offense behind Mahomes moving forward. 
You're not reading for comprehension here. I've told you that WRs are paid more than TEs as a position. As the #3 paid TE, Kelce is paid less than 15 other WRs in the NFL. Gronk is paid as the #1 TE in NFL but still wouldn't be in the top 10 WRs as salaries go.

If Hill is so valuable then tell me he's going to be paid more than Watkins' $16 million. Kelce is paid like an elite player for the position and the playmaker he is. He's every bit as important to the offense as Hill and the numbers back it up. You can see that from the tape too.

 
You're not reading for comprehension here. I've told you that WRs are paid more than TEs as a position. As the #3 paid TE, Kelce is paid less than 15 other WRs in the NFL. Gronk is paid as the #1 TE in NFL but still wouldn't be in the top 10 WRs as salaries go.

If Hill is so valuable then tell me he's going to be paid more than Watkins' $16 million. Kelce is paid like an elite player for the position and the playmaker he is. He's every bit as important to the offense as Hill and the numbers back it up. You can see that from the tape too.
no you can't and you have no idea what you are looking at. Like you aren't even looking at the tape. Defenses are terrified of Tyreek. Terrified. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
no you can't and you have no idea what you are looking at. Like you aren't even look at the tape. Defenses are terrified of Tyreek. Terrified. 
That's great but it doesn't speak to how Hill is outsnapped or targeted more than Kelce (which would suggest he's more important.) for another season. Or how you're willing to go out on a limb and tell me that Hill will be paid more than Watkins somehow. 

As a Hill owner, I'm a believer in his talent and opportunity. That said, there's more to the offense than just him. 

 
That's great but it doesn't speak to how Hill is outsnapped or targeted more than Kelce (which would suggest he's more important.) for another season. Or how you're willing to go out on a limb and tell me that Hill will be paid more than Watkins somehow. 

As a Hill owner, I'm a believer in his talent and opportunity. That said, there's more to the offense than just him. 
When Hill gets paid we'll see what you think. You are wrong about who the offense is ran through...... 

 
Simple questions for you. Yes or no will suffice.

1) Is Hill going to get paid more than Watkins? $16 million is a big number. 

2) Is Hill going to get paid like Kelce is for the position? Kelce is the 3rd highest paid TE in the NFL. That would mean he paid more than $16 million, btw.

I didn't say the offense is run through Kelce. I said he's the number 1 option.  Kelce beat Hill on snap count last year and this year. Leads the team in targets this year as he did last year. 

These aren't hot takes, guy. I'm telling you a truth and you're letting your personal biases get in the way here. Make your case that Hill will get paid "more" or how he's more important than Kelce for the offense. As a Hill owner, I'm all ears here....
Yes to both of those questions, the Chiefs aren’t gonna pay Watkins but not pay and reward their own guy that is better then Watkins. And it would not be surprised if he comes away with top 3 WR money

 
Does it matter Hill is a wr #1 Kelce is top 2 Manhones is 1 overall great offense Hill is going to have his huge games , his ok games , and some below average who cares . He's not as consistent as Michael Thomas but he's the most explosive wr 

 
I wish I had some of you Hill owners in my league so I could take him from you but, alas, I already have Hill in all three of my leagues.

 
Does it matter Hill is a wr #1 Kelce is top 2 Manhones is 1 overall great offense Hill is going to have his huge games , his ok games , and some below average who cares . He's not as consistent as Michael Thomas but he's the most explosive wr 
Which is funny because people in the Michael thomas thread were saying he’s not a WR1. People are so fast to jump ship. You can’t have 50 point weeks every week. 

 
Hill is essentially the most extreme version of a boom/bust Flex player I've ever had on my team (with a very high floor, mind you) and I absolutely love it. Granted, my WR1 and WR2 are Antonio Brown and OBJ respectively.

 
Last year Thomas and Hill we're top 10 and it will happen again this year .. Hill has this thing where he will get 12 , 16 , 18 and 55 then 12 , 22 , 48 , 8 , 15  that's how he does his scoring ..his big games are like 2 strong weeks for a wr 

 
Lol

Hill is a really good WR... in fantasy he will have his down weeks just like anybody else.....

players (FA).... will be lining up to join this offense.....

hopefully Hill and Kelce will stay with Mahomes for the foreseeable future.....why would you leave....$$$ ...maybe but they have something special going on

 
JackReacher said:
Did he have an 80 yard punt return called back? Saw something in the play by play
yes....very weak block in the back...and I'm not saying weak as a homer...it was weak....I realize there is a penalty on almost every kicking play these days but this one was super soft

 
yes....very weak block in the back...and I'm not saying weak as a homer...it was weak....I realize there is a penalty on almost every kicking play these days but this one was super soft
I had Hill and the Chiefs DST going so would have double-dipped... luckily didn’t need those points. 

 
Agree at this point. KC's defense is better than anybody thought they would be so they don't use Tyreek at all. He just opens everything up for the rest of the offensive players. Unfortunately the KC D should be getting better the rest of the year so  downgrade Tyreek. Mahomes just doesn't need to force the ball down the field to him. He's a WR2 with the highest upside of any WR2 going forward but he is no longer a WR1. I hate it as much as anybody but it's true. They run him deep and dump it to Hunt and Kelce to much to value him that high going forward. 


Premature call. Reminiscent of those on election night saying that Trump wasn't going to have such a bad night.  Then the floodgates open.

(Teasing ya Milkman, I know you are more in on Tyreek than anyone. Don't ever get down about him).

 
Premature call. Reminiscent of those on election night saying that Trump wasn't going to have such a bad night.  Then the floodgates open.

(Teasing ya Milkman, I know you are more in on Tyreek than anyone. Don't ever get down about him).
Hill is the best Flex guy in Fantasy Football. Too high variance for me to call him an WR1. But, I'm a statistics geek, so you'll have to forgive me.

 
Hill is the best Flex guy in Fantasy Football. Too high variance for me to call him an WR1. But, I'm a statistics geek, so you'll have to forgive me.
I don't understand this (and why others keep saying it).

He's had one game in single digits all year in PPR.   So has Michael Thomas. 

When you're scoring double digits essentially every week and have upside for 35-40, and you're currently WR3 overall, you can't really call that anything other than a WR1.

 
Game of the Year (KC vs. LA Rams) is on tap for Week 11.   That game could be a shoot-out of epic proportions.   

If the Rams are crazy enough to single up Marcus Peters on Hill, The Freek is going to put up massive numbers.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand this (and why others keep saying it).

He's had one game in single digits all year in PPR.   So has Michael Thomas. 

When you're scoring double digits essentially every week and have upside for 35-40, and you're currently WR3 overall, you can't really call that anything other than a WR1.
In my leauge, Hill has had 4 single digit point weeks (last season he had 6) and by comparison AB has had none.

Even Emmanuel Sanders has only had 3 single digit weeks.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Flex  guys top 5 wr ..yeah unless u have Antonio ,Thomas ,Hopkins ,thielen ,Julio , odel that's it as the only guys to start over him 
My WRs are Antonio Brown, OBJ, and Hill so yeah... he's my Flex. He's in my line-up every week, make no mistake. But, he's a high variance player, at least in half point ppr.

 
Wasn't it Harstad who helped dispel the notion that week-to-week consistency matters on it's own in fantasy? Largely, except in extreme cases, points are points at the end of the year and you'll win the same number of games.

But there's actually more value to guys who can also win you the week themselves imo, it's unlikely they'll lose you more games than they'll win you. A WR1 who can "disappoint" and score 12-14 on down weeks is perfectly normal...a guy who can also realistically score 40 any given week is not normal. 

 
Wasn't it Harstad who helped dispel the notion that week-to-week consistency matters on it's own in fantasy? Largely, except in extreme cases, points are points at the end of the year and you'll win the same number of games.

But there's actually more value to guys who can also win you the week themselves imo, it's unlikely they'll lose you more games than they'll win you. A WR1 who can "disappoint" and score 12-14 on down weeks is perfectly normal...a guy who can also realistically score 40 any given week is not normal. 
"points are points at the end of the year and you'll win the same number of games."

This is absolutely false.

"But there's actually more value to guys who can also win you the week themselves"

But, I do agree with this.

 
I'm in two .5 PPR.  He's only had two games in single digits, not four.  Week 3 and Week 8.
3, 4, 8, 9

Are you counting fractions? We only get a point if a player exceeds the lowest 10th. For instance, 16 rushing yards will only get you a point. In week 9, Tyreek had 9 points, 2 for catches, 6 for receiving, and 1 for rushing.

 
3, 4, 8, 9

Are you counting fractions? We only get a point if a player exceeds the lowest 10th. For instance, 16 rushing yards will only get you a point. In week 9, Tyreek had 9 points, 2 for catches, 6 for receiving, and 1 for rushing.
Yeah, that's the difference.  In mine Week 9 he had 10.5.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top