Milk's under-rated/Over rated players on draft day

[MilkSpiller22]

The thing is...I don't see him getting heavily used. You got Luck and all those receiving options, you only need to keep the Defense honest and on their toes by running the ball here and there, the main weapon is always going to be Luck.

I agree that Luck is the offense, and will always be the number one weapon... I just see this to be more of a way to keep him and the passing game fresh... again they never had an actual RB before... i know my vision seems backwards... Again, i just can't imagine the colts signing an OLD back and saying lets use him a little here and a little there and keep him healthy for the playoffs... if he doesn't average 20+ carries per game i will be shocked... and he should get some catches too...

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Here's my take on Gore: there is a magic age where every player declines. For most RB it seems to be age 30.
1) But most RB don't even make it to 30 before they decline. Lifespan of a RB is what, 4-5 years? Most are gone or replaced by the time they're 26.
2) There are exceptions to every "age" rule at every position - Gore is clearly an exception for the RB position. Of this list: Gore, AP, Le'Veon Bell, DeMarco Murray, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy, Jamaal Charles, Arian Foster, Marshawn Lynch (most are top 10 backs, mind you), Gore is the only one that has not missed a game in the last 4 years! That takes a special kind of conditioned athlete.

Gore is a real warrior and he out performed Hyde last year, but for sure he's lost a bit. Been watching and cursing this guy for a while. His time is about up, one more hurrah .......maybe.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don't understand the Gronkowski ranking.

Drafting any player is a vote of confidence in him out scoring the others available at his position. And no player is in a position to out score his peers more than Gronkowski.

I agree with Luck being up there. But not for the reasons you stated.

And I'm not a fan of Yeldon either.

the Gronk being over-rated is only based on his injury past... First round is about safety, and taking risks can kill...

 

[broncosmitty]

the Gronk being over-rated is only based on his injury past... First round is about safety, and taking risks can kill...

Guess I don't see him as any riskier than a RB in that regard.

But he has been hurt in the past.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Guess I don't see him as any riskier than a RB in that regard.

But he has been hurt in the past.

True, but you can absorb a RB injury easier than a TE injury... But he is one of those overs that i personally always go for...

 

[broncosmitty]

True, but you can absorb a RB injury easier than a TE injury... But he is one of those overs that i personally always go for...

Which is why I find it better to target a player who is in position to out score his peers.

Like QB, there are oodles of RBs that will produce weekly. Even more so with WR. Really only one position with a clear cut #1 guy.

 

[averagejoe]

again they never had an actual RB before...

Indy didn't have a RB that could move the chains so to speak. But that still didn't stop the Colts from averaging 358.3 rush attempts during the last 3 Luck seasons. Most of those carries have to be ear-marked for Gore.

 

[Stomp]

He is the only FAST offensive weapon the Jets have, and is likely already the teams BEST playmaker.

If healthy Brandon Marshall

 

[The Foot]

Gronk is s sure thing in a huge sea of maybes and ut ohs.

 

[SmokingMonkey]

I've owned Gronk in a keeper league, and every year, I try to get a backup TE that I like, that falls a couple rounds in the draft.
They are always out there.
2yrs ago I nailed it with Jordan Cameron. Will be looking his way again now that he's in MIA with the short-intermediate maestro that is Tannehill.

 

[TKOSpikes]

True, but you can absorb a RB injury easier than a TE injury... But he is one of those overs that i personally always go for...

Guess I disagree again. If you own Gronk and he gets hurt, you can easily add a TE

True, but you can absorb a RB injury easier than a TE injury... But he is one of those overs that i personally always go for...

I guess I disagree again. If you own Gronk and he gets injured, you can easily add a TE. RB? Not so much. Maybe you get lucky with the actual backup, but it's not like there are usable guys on waivers.

And you wanna talk safety? Gronk has like 48 TD in 63 games or something like that! CRAZY!

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Guess I disagree again. If you own Gronk and he gets hurt, you can easily add a TE


I guess I disagree again. If you own Gronk and he gets injured, you can easily add a TE. RB? Not so much. Maybe you get lucky with the actual backup, but it's not like there are usable guys on waivers.

And you wanna talk safety? Gronk has like 48 TD in 63 games or something like that! CRAZY!

its not about easily adding a TE, its about finding the first round value elsewhere... If you lose your first round TE, you are already weak elsewhere, and your substitute TE will be nowhere near that first round value... If you lose your first round RB, you can pick a RB up and still get close value since RB has more to do with system and opportunity than actual talent...

Plus you are more likely going to have RB depth on your bench to throw in than TE depth... and even if you have a backup TE, he will be an average TE at best...

Paying heavy at TE is scary... But again this is a risk I love to make for the reasons you guys gave... But that doesn't mean he is a safe first round pick...

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Guess I disagree again. If you own Gronk and he gets hurt, you can easily add a TE


I guess I disagree again. If you own Gronk and he gets injured, you can easily add a TE. RB? Not so much. Maybe you get lucky with the actual backup, but it's not like there are usable guys on waivers.

And you wanna talk safety? Gronk has like 48 TD in 63 games or something like that! CRAZY!

IDK I'm with Milk here. You won't likely find a RB you want on waivers, because everyone has backup RBs on their roster already. As for finding a TE on waivers, low quality to pick from IMO.

 

[TKOSpikes]

True, but you can make that reasoning for anyone. I don't think "safety" is the word. Gronk is at no more risk than any RB and his top value is the highest of any position. It's simply high risk, high reward.

I don't care who is on your bench at RB/WR. They aren't giving you first round value. Yeah, maybe more than a waiver TE, but if you lose your first rounder, you lose your first rounder. Doesn't matter what position (save QB)

 

[MilkSpiller22]

True, but you can make that reasoning for anyone. I don't think "safety" is the word. Gronk is at no more risk than any RB and his top value is the highest of any position. It's simply high risk, high reward.

I don't care who is on your bench at RB/WR. They aren't giving you first round value. Yeah, maybe more than a waiver TE, but if you lose your first rounder, you lose your first rounder. Doesn't matter what position (save QB)

but comparing RB to TE, it is more likely to get near your first round value with a RB(bench or waivers) than a TE...

 

[TKOSpikes]

That's the point though Harold. A waiver TE can outscore most TE any week. So getting a replacement is easier than finding a new RB to start unless you drafted well and your third guy is a starter.

 

[TKOSpikes]

but comparing RB to TE, it is more likely to get near your first round value with a RB(bench or waivers) than a TE...

But there is only one first round TE. So of course you can't get a replacement at that level.

I get what you're saying, but it ONLY counts for injury. A RB you pick first can just not be a top 10 option, it happens (McCoy). That is not happening with Gronk. If he plays, you own the best TE bar none.

So your safety is injury safety....which is nearly impossible to predict.
My safety is production projections and Gronk is the absolute safest in that scenario.

And there are WAY, WAY more late rounders at RB/WR that can jump into the top 10 (non-QB) out of nowhere. Not a chance at TE.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But there is only one first round TE. So of course you can't get a replacement at that level.

I get what you're saying, but it ONLY counts for injury. A RB you pick first can just not be a top 10 option, it happens (McCoy). That is not happening with Gronk. If he plays, you own the best TE bar none.

So your safety is injury safety....which is nearly impossible to predict.
My safety is production projections and Gronk is the absolute safest in that scenario.

And there are WAY, WAY more late rounders at RB/WR that can jump into the top 10 (non-QB) out of nowhere. Not a chance at TE.

It might be difficult to predict but we are also talking about Gronk who has history of injury...

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I've seen waiver TE that had one big week, but not so the other weeks. Looking at suicide rosters, you have a point about losing a first round RB, there is a big drop off if you have to go with your backup.

 

[TKOSpikes]

It might be difficult to predict but we are also talking about Gronk who has history of injury...

I'll give you that. His back was a problem before. ...Doesn't seem to be the case now, but I'll give it to ya. The others? A fully forearm break and a gross knee hit he took. Those can happen to anyone.

And again...that's his ONLY drawback. I'll take those odds.

Better than your first rounder being a bust or just steady third round value. Then your sunk.