why cant i draft jimmy g at #3?

[TKOSpikes]

Actually. Yes. It hurts me right now. I need a Goldy replacement and I am praying he gets some time at 1st this week in StL and Cin.

 

[tlance]

Does playing David Ortiz at DH when he is only elligible at DH hurt you in fantasy baseball?? no, because he would be starting no matter what... Same here... if you are always going to start someone, then it doesnt matter where you start them....

I don't think the David Ortiz comp is quite the same, but there is no doubt that the lack of position flexibility hurts his value. If you take Graham and Gronk, you are essentially turning Gronk into a DH type, flex only play.

Gronk and Graham are so ridiculously valuable because of the weekly advantage they offer over the low end TEs, who typically score less than an average flex option. While it is true that Gronk makes a fine flex play, you are failing to consider the cost to acquire him. Gronk's value is derived from his supreme domination of the TE position. You are paying a premium to acquire him, and then not using him where he is most valuable. This is a poor allocation of resources and it is not a winning strategy.

If Gronk were a WR, where would he get drafted? It is easy to lump him in with the Brandon Marshal types based on his scoring ability, but doing so completely ignores the injury risk which absolutely hurts his value. I would rank him outside the top 10 WRs even though he is capable of scoring as a top 5 option.

Now, take this one step further. You are talking about Gronk, not as a WR, but as a flex only guy. That significantly hurts his value again, because of what you will be left with at other positions. Sure, your flex will be outstanding, but the advantage you own there will not be nearly as great as it would be measuring Gronk against other TEs. Teams with 3 stud RBs may even have a flex guy who outscores your Gronk.

If Gronk was the football version of the DH, and only eligible at FLEX, where would he be drafted? In baseball drafts Ortiz has generally been drafted in rounds 5 and 6 despite having been a top 10 hitter in each of the last 2 seasons. My guess is that Gronk, as a Flex only play would be worth a pick in the mid to late 4th.

Filling your flex spot with 2 early TE positions leaves you way behind in the race to acquire WRs and RBs. I think you are making a uphill battle for yourself if you choose this strategy.

 

[averagejoe]

I think nj_cup hit on an age-old argument regarding depth. Graham is definitely a difference maker. But by taking him 3rd, your team is weak at the RB position.

Many fantasy owners make the RB position their sacrificial lamb because they reason that the NFL is pass oriented. (Even though the NFL average of all 32 teams of plays called is 57% pass plays and 43% rushing plays.) Most leagues make it mandatory to start two RB - so they're still a vital part of your fantasy team.

But even more to the point, many RB are heavily involved in the passing game as receivers. Here's some numbers for you: Jamaal Charles was involved in 21.7% of KC's passes. McCoy was involved in 17.6% of Philly's passes. And Forte got 16.8% from da Bears. To put this in perspective, Jimmy Graham led the Saints in targets which boils down to 28.9% of the Saints pass plays.

Don't get me wrong - those are real good numbers for Jimmy - especially with what he does with the receptions. But the other thing to consider is how many Jimmy Graham owners won their league last season? Of the 6 leagues I'm a part of, no champ was a Graham owner.

You need to have a well balanced team to win - not just Graham.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don't think the David Ortiz comp is quite the same, but there is no doubt that the lack of position flexibility hurts his value. If you take Graham and Gronk, you are essentially turning Gronk into a DH type, flex only play.

Gronk and Graham are so ridiculously valuable because of the weekly advantage they offer over the low end TEs, who typically score less than an average flex option. While it is true that Gronk makes a fine flex play, you are failing to consider the cost to acquire him. Gronk's value is derived from his supreme domination of the TE position. You are paying a premium to acquire him, and then not using him where he is most valuable. This is a poor allocation of resources and it is not a winning strategy.

If Gronk were a WR, where would he get drafted? It is easy to lump him in with the Brandon Marshal types based on his scoring ability, but doing so completely ignores the injury risk which absolutely hurts his value. I would rank him outside the top 10 WRs even though he is capable of scoring as a top 5 option.

Now, take this one step further. You are talking about Gronk, not as a WR, but as a flex only guy. That significantly hurts his value again, because of what you will be left with at other positions. Sure, your flex will be outstanding, but the advantage you own there will not be nearly as great as it would be measuring Gronk against other TEs. Teams with 3 stud RBs may even have a flex guy who outscores your Gronk.

If Gronk was the football version of the DH, and only eligible at FLEX, where would he be drafted? In baseball drafts Ortiz has generally been drafted in rounds 5 and 6 despite having been a top 10 hitter in each of the last 2 seasons. My guess is that Gronk, as a Flex only play would be worth a pick in the mid to late 4th.

Filling your flex spot with 2 early TE positions leaves you way behind in the race to acquire WRs and RBs. I think you are making a uphill battle for yourself if you choose this strategy.

I agree that you cant pay for the 2nd TE as a TE, but if you think he will be the 30th best WR/TE/RB then draft him like that... It wont hurt... Just dont give him the extra value due to position...

Going early on flex is not the problem, it is if you keep that player at his positional value that would be the problem!!! I dont believe it weakens the overall team, especially because rounds 3-7 are prodominantly all RB/WR anyway...

 

[tlance]

I agree that you cant pay for the 2nd TE as a TE, but if you think he will be the 30th best WR/TE/RB then draft him like that... It wont hurt... Just dont give him the extra value due to position...

Going early on flex is not the problem, it is if you keep that player at his positional value that would be the problem!!! I dont believe it weakens the overall team, especially because rounds 3-7 are prodominantly all RB/WR anyway...

That is fine to say, but every other owner in the league will be valuing Gronk as a TE. If you are not paying the TE price, then you are not getting him. 22 overall, or even 27 is too early for a Gronk flex, IMO.

Now, if you take Forte or another RB in the first, then Gronk in the 2nd could make a lot of sense. It is risky, but I could get behind that 100%, so long as you don't go and draft Thomas in the 3rd.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

That is fine to say, but every other owner in the league will be valuing Gronk as a TE. If you are not paying the TE price, then you are not getting him. 22 overall, or even 27 is too early for a Gronk flex, IMO.

Now, if you take Forte or another RB in the first, then Gronk in the 2nd could make a lot of sense. It is risky, but I could get behind that 100%, so long as you don't go and draft Thomas in the 3rd.

and thats the thing... you cant pay the price... if he falls to you then good... Otherwise you should look past him... If you pay the TE price then you have paid too much...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

if Gronk falls to 33 he has the value for you even at flex...

 

[nj_cup]

I don't think the David Ortiz comp is quite the same, but there is no doubt that the lack of position flexibility hurts his value. If you take Graham and Gronk, you are essentially turning Gronk into a DH type, flex only play.

Gronk and Graham are so ridiculously valuable because of the weekly advantage they offer over the low end TEs, who typically score less than an average flex option. While it is true that Gronk makes a fine flex play, you are failing to consider the cost to acquire him. Gronk's value is derived from his supreme domination of the TE position. You are paying a premium to acquire him, and then not using him where he is most valuable. This is a poor allocation of resources and it is not a winning strategy.

If Gronk were a WR, where would he get drafted? It is easy to lump him in with the Brandon Marshal types based on his scoring ability, but doing so completely ignores the injury risk which absolutely hurts his value. I would rank him outside the top 10 WRs even though he is capable of scoring as a top 5 option.

Now, take this one step further. You are talking about Gronk, not as a WR, but as a flex only guy. That significantly hurts his value again, because of what you will be left with at other positions. Sure, your flex will be outstanding, but the advantage you own there will not be nearly as great as it would be measuring Gronk against other TEs. Teams with 3 stud RBs may even have a flex guy who outscores your Gronk.

If Gronk was the football version of the DH, and only eligible at FLEX, where would he be drafted? In baseball drafts Ortiz has generally been drafted in rounds 5 and 6 despite having been a top 10 hitter in each of the last 2 seasons. My guess is that Gronk, as a Flex only play would be worth a pick in the mid to late 4th.

Filling your flex spot with 2 early TE positions leaves you way behind in the race to acquire WRs and RBs. I think you are making a uphill battle for yourself if you choose this strategy.

Your saying him only playing flex hurts his value? How is that? You have to start a player in his spot. I'm not taking a wr away and plugging him in there instead where he matches up against a wr2 taken in round 3. Gronk as a flex will beat out any other flex starter you plug in against him.

Draft regular and say I get Eric decker as my flex wr3. It's a toss up any given week if I get more points then the other guys flex

 

[SmokingMonkey]

TE-TE strategy seems like something for someone at the END of round 1 to tinker with.
3rd overall?
Hell no I'm not just gonna roll the dice and gamble with my starting RB and WR options. It's not a bad strategy, but it is at #3 in a 12 team league.

Give me Forte, rocking and rolling in Trestman's offense all day every day at #3 in a PPR league.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Your saying him only playing flex hurts his value? How is that? You have to start a player in his spot. I'm not taking a wr away and plugging him in there instead where he matches up against a wr2 taken in round 3. Gronk as a flex will beat out any other flex starter you plug in against him.

Draft regular and say I get Eric decker as my flex wr3. It's a toss up any given week if I get more points then the other guys flex

WHy are you competing with the other teams flex?? thats not the purpose of fantasy... its the overal team, not which QB is better or who has better RBs!!! If you pay for the early Flex, you will have a better flex, but you will likely be worse somewhere else... But that really doesnt matter...

 

[SmokingMonkey]

Your saying him only playing flex hurts his value? How is that? You have to start a player in his spot. I'm not taking a wr away and plugging him in there instead where he matches up against a wr2 taken in round 3. Gronk as a flex will beat out any other flex starter you plug in against him.

Draft regular and say I get Eric decker as my flex wr3. It's a toss up any given week if I get more points then the other guys flex

I don't think people are arguing that, but the real question is, how much better will he be than a flex?
Personally, I'd rather plug in Andre Ellington as my RB3 in the flex. Instead of going TE-TE, I'd rather roll out a team that starts like this:
Forte
Stacy/Murray
Ellington
Jordan Cameron

In a PPR league, I think Cameron puts up close enough numbers as Gronk that the benefit of getting him in the 4th or 5th round will far out weight the benefit of having Gronk as your flex.

Also - keep this in mind - let's say you go Graham/Gronk to start.
How big of an advantage now do the owners of Julius Thomas and Jordan Cameron have over the rest of the league, since they landed top RBs or WRs or even top QBs with their first 2 picks?
Just seems to me that you would be creating a bigger advantage for at least 2 other owners in your league than the one you are creating for yourself.

 

[tlance]

Your saying him only playing flex hurts his value? How is that? You have to start a player in his spot. I'm not taking a wr away and plugging him in there instead where he matches up against a wr2 taken in round 3. Gronk as a flex will beat out any other flex starter you plug in against him.

Draft regular and say I get Eric decker as my flex wr3. It's a toss up any given week if I get more points then the other guys flex

Not true.

Last year, I had Knowshown Moreno as my flex in 2 leagues. The point is, you lose roster flexibility and you pay a premium price to acquire Gronk because he is a TE. Since you are not using him as a TE, you are not getting a good value.

Will he still beat your opponent's FLEX? Yeah, he better. Will he beat their WR1 though? Not as consistently as you will need him to given your disadvantages at WR and RB.

 

[nj_cup]

I don't think people are arguing that, but the real question is, how much better will he be than a flex?
Personally, I'd rather plug in Andre Ellington as my RB3 in the flex. Instead of going TE-TE, I'd rather roll out a team that starts like this:
Forte
Stacy/Murray
Ellington
Jordan Cameron

In a PPR league, I think Cameron puts up close enough numbers as Gronk that the benefit of getting him in the 4th or 5th round will far out weight the benefit of having Gronk as your flex.

Also - keep this in mind - let's say you go Graham/Gronk to start.
How big of an advantage now do the owners of Julius Thomas and Jordan Cameron have over the rest of the league, since they landed top RBs or WRs or even top QBs with their first 2 picks?
Just seems to me that you would be creating a bigger advantage for at least 2 other owners in your league than the one you are creating for yourself.

But do that draft and your chasing wr. Your also putting Cameron against graham Ellington as your flex against gronk. Guess the way I look at it is I want the most top players I can get in my lineup daily.

To answer the other guys point (don't know how to multi quote) I wouldn't expect gronk to beat out your wr1 (Calvin) I would be banking on growls point difference against your flex to outweigh the difference your wr1 going up against my wr1. Who I've been watching and has been Antonio brown or Jordan melson.

What round did you draft Moreno in last yeAr? My guess past the 6th?

 

[TKOSpikes]

That's the point. Am I reading the same stuff? Gronk is not a top flex!!!! And even if he was you are still behind in FIVE other slots. Five is greater than two.

 

[nj_cup]

How am I behind in 5 other spots? Am I not drafting in rounds 3-6? The only disadvantage would be in rb1 and wr1. I still fail to see how a tight end scoring 275-290 points isn't going to be the top flex. I guess yes if you find another Moreno this year after round 6. But what do you think is more likely?

Guy at 1 goes Charles Bernard Allen.

I go jimmy brown gronk so I'm behind him in rb1 and 2. Ahead of him in wr1 te flex

 

[SmokingMonkey]

But do that draft and your chasing wr. Your also putting Cameron against graham Ellington as your flex against gronk. Guess the way I look at it is I want the most top players I can get in my lineup daily.

To answer the other guys point (don't know how to multi quote) I wouldn't expect gronk to beat out your wr1 (Calvin) I would be banking on growls point difference against your flex to outweigh the difference your wr1 going up against my wr1. Who I've been watching and has been Antonio brown or Jordan melson.

What round did you draft Moreno in last yeAr? My guess past the 6th?

ummmm, what do you think you will be doing if you draft 2 TEs in the first 3 rounds?
You will be chasing WRs and RBs for at least 6 of the next 7 rounds.

And I would love to put Cameron against Graham and Ellington against Gronk, when both of my other RBs will dominate whatever 2 the Graham/Gronk owner has, that's a slam dunk brother.

 

[tlance]

But do that draft and your chasing wr. Your also putting Cameron against graham Ellington as your flex against gronk. Guess the way I look at it is I want the most top players I can get in my lineup daily.

To answer the other guys point (don't know how to multi quote) I wouldn't expect gronk to beat out your wr1 (Calvin) I would be banking on growls point difference against your flex to outweigh the difference your wr1 going up against my wr1. Who I've been watching and has been Antonio brown or Jordan melson.

What round did you draft Moreno in last yeAr? My guess past the 6th?

I did draft him late.

Which team will give you more points though?

1. Graham
2. Gronk
3. Brown
4. insert choice RB
5. D Jackson

Or

1. Forte
2. Nelson
3. Brown
4. insert choice RB
5. Cameron

The total points here are close, but this is what I mean with the flexibility thing. With the 2nd team build, you have 2 RBs, 2 WRs and a TE. You are free to draft the best player available the rest of the way. In the first version, you will be way behind either at WR or RB, and will therefor be forced to chase that position the rest of the draft.

If you are going to go through your first 2 picks without taking an RB or a WR, you better have an Graham or Gronk along with an elite QB. Otherwise, you are digging a hole you might not be able to climb out of.

At the end of the day, it is your team, but you asked the question and not a single response I have seen has told you this is a good strategy. You might be able to make it work anyway, but again, it is an uphill battle.

 

[SmokingMonkey]

How am I behind in 5 other spots? Am I not drafting in rounds 3-6? The only disadvantage would be in rb1 and wr1. I still fail to see how a tight end scoring 275-290 points isn't going to be the top flex. I guess yes if you find another Moreno this year after round 6. But what do you think is more likely?

guess what happens to your RB2 and WR2 when you are behind at RB1 and WR1?
they are both behind as well.

 

[nj_cup]

ummmm, what do you think you will be doing if you draft 2 TEs in the first 3 rounds?
You will be chasing WRs and RBs for at least 6 of the next 7 rounds.

And I would love to put Cameron against Graham and Ellington against Gronk, when both of my other RBs will dominate whatever 2 the Graham/Gronk owner has, that's a slam dunk brother.

Going by that logic then the wr on your team would be pretty weak. No? Going by that draft you mentioned above you wouldn't take a wr til what round 5? Meanwhile I would've taken one in round 2 followed by gronk in 3


I didn't expect anyone to agree with me that's why I was asking the question

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Gronk is projected as the 28th best WR/TE/RB on CBS... taking him before 31st is terrible value for your flex(since position is irrelevant). Even if you like him more than what he is projected, you cant like him for the 2nd round... that is just terrible value.... You can take him in the 3rd, if you really want him....