|
They didn't pay Jimmy Graham 30M to half-assedly block players. They're going to use him in the offense, he's the main weapon behind Adams imo.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:25 |
|
|
I hope you’re right but I doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Zauper posted:This stat feels a bit off. The player to whom Aaron Rodgers has thrown the most TDs for each of those two years is no longer on the Packers. Why are we doing mental gymnastics to strip Davante Adams of his rightful statistic? Why are we assuming Jimmy Graham is getting 50% of that volume? Why aren't they punching it in with Jamaal Adams? (Edit: Who is Jamaal Adams? I meant Jamaal Williams) What about the five WRs they've taken in the last two years? What about Randall Cobb, TyMont and Geronimo Allison?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
I mean, do I trust JG? No, not really. But I also don't think they paid him that much to not be a RZ target considering that's the only thing he's decent at. I don't know if I'd draft him at his ADP, but I'd draft him as a top 6 TE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
I'm hoping tymo is the one who benefits most this season.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Zauper posted:I mean, do I trust JG? No, not really. Thank you. He's a top 6/7/8 TE because the backend of the position gets really ugly really fast. What he isn't is a fifth-round pick. If you want his skillset so bad go get Kyle Rudolph two rounds later, who has a QB who actually throws to the TE and a system that uses the TE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:Why are we doing mental gymnastics to strip Davante Adams of his rightful statistic? Why are we assuming Jimmy Graham is getting 50% of that volume? Why aren't they punching it in with Jamaal Adams? What about the five WRs they've taken in the last two years? What about Randall Cobb, TyMont and Geronimo Allison? Who's Jamaal Adams? Probably because he doesn't exist; Williams is IMO not very good. Additionally, because Rodgers is the best QB in the game and GBP is the 2nd highest RZ passing offense in the game. Why wouldn't you put the ball in the hands of your best player to score a touchdown? Mental gymnastics? Why does it matter who a quarterback other than Aaron Rodgers threw the ball to when considering who Aaron Rodgers throws the ball to? Aaron Rodgers loved throwing the ball to Jordy in the RZ. He was Rodgers' favorite (or at least most successful; I haven't looked at targets) target, not Adams. They didn't sign Cobb/TyMont/Allison to JG's deal. e: yes, 5th round is way too high. He's near the top of the pile of largely interchangeable TEs to me, because I think he has way more TD upside. But I'd rather bet on guys with a floor in the 5th round.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Zauper posted:Why wouldn't you put the ball in the hands of your best player to score a touchdown? Good question.  Edit: Jimmy Graham had 16 ten zone targets last season, two more than Nelson and Adams combined (since passing to JG was Seattle's de facto goal line back). All he can do these days is be taller than other people and he doesn't get any real yardage to speak of. I'm not sure where all these extra touchdown opportunities are supposed to be coming from. Spoeank fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Jul 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:Edit: Jimmy Graham had 16 ten zone targets last season, two more than Nelson and Adams combined (since passing to JG was Seattle's de facto goal line back). All he can do these days is be taller than other people and he doesn't get any real yardage to speak of. I'm not sure where all these extra touchdown opportunities are supposed to be coming from.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
First and ninth according to PFR, and neither had as many as Jimmy Graham had last year. Jimmy Graham also scored from more than 4 yards out just thrice last season. One was six yards. He had 2 scores from between 11 and 18 yards. With him, you're looking solely at ten zone stats, which are undoubtedly going to decrease given the number of weapons in GB compared to Seattle. Take him in the fifth round to get a piece of that offense or gamble on a target increase for Geronimo Allison (ADP 211) if you want a piece of those targets.  Edit: FWIW only 4 experts in the top 25 in fantasy pros accuracy for 2017 have him ranked as TE4 or better, which is where he is going. 5 of the top 15 have him as TE7 or worse. Spoeank fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
Oops, you're right. I had my sorting wrong. That's not as impressive as it looked at first glance. edit: have you watched Allison's tape? Tiptoes fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
hey guys, you should totally draft whatever TE the packers signed. - burnt to a crisp person who says that every year
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
I would take Jimmy Graham in the fifth but I'm already targeting a Patriots RB there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
Tiptoes posted:I would take Jimmy Graham in the fifth but I'm already targeting a Patriots RB for that spot. nah man you gotta get the player on the career decline who beat reporters say "still has it" in non-padded practices
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 05:18
|
|
|
So with five picks made I am the only person out of 900 who drafted three TEs for the Scott Fish Bowl. I feel special.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
The real truth is that there only two tight ends in 2018 actually worth drafting: Gronk and Eric Ebron.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
Tiptoes posted:Oops, you're right. I had my sorting wrong. That's not as impressive as it looked at first glance. I just went back and watched all of his targets in 2017 and a few things stood out to me watching all his stuff in a row - very good hands. A lot of times he was plucking things at the apex - not particularly fast nor a route technician (though he doesn't run a lot of routes, it was mostly curls/flats/screens with a sluggo and an out route thrown in for good measure) - they really tried to get the ball in his hands. I stopped counting at 7 screen passes or quick flat routes - he also was able to get himself open on a handful of plays when things broke down for A A Ron - only had one pass in the open field but he made a man miss twice and got a ton of YAC off of it The two things that mainly stood out to me were his hands and his mind meld with Rodgers on those scrambles
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 06:09
|
|
|
Tiptoes posted:The real truth is that there only two tight ends in 2018 actually worth drafting: Gronk and Eric Ebron. Close. It’s Kelce and Ebron.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 12:05
|
|
|
Alfalfa posted:Close. It’s Kelce and Engram.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
It's ASJ and RSJ
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 14:21
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:It's ASJ and RSJ My man!
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 14:35
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:It's ASJ and RSJ Austin Safari Jenkins, and Rasta Safari Jenkins?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
Spermy Smurf posted:Austin Safari Jenkins, and Rasta Safari Jenkins? Dude, if you're not already on the Ricky Seals-Jones train, there may not be room anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
Spermy Smurf posted:Austin Safari Jenkins, and Rasta Safari Jenkins? Ricky Seals-Jones, the new tight end hotness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:18
|
|
|
I was trying to make a Rastafarian joke. It was not a good one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
If one wanted to do variable PPR settings by position, what's a good set up?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Zero is a variable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:If one wanted to do variable PPR settings by position, what's a good set up? My dynasty league uses: .5 wr .75 rb 1 te/qb
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:My dynasty league uses: This does it (partly) backwards: 0.5 RB 1.0 WR 1.5 TE Is pretty solid. RB having higher PPR than WR is undesirable. Part of the goal of PPR is to balance WR/RB scoring. Additionally, higher PPR for RB make the few bellcows better relative to the rest of them, while 0.5 PPR makes the catching backs viable without making the bellcows insane. You may also want to look at PP1D scoring in addition or instead of PPR.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 17:29
|
|
|
If you were in a superflex league and wanted to balance things a bit so QB, at least beyond the top dozen guys, wasn't always the immediate choice for flex, are there any reasonable adjustments you might make?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:If you were in a superflex league and wanted to balance things a bit so QB, at least beyond the top dozen guys, wasn't always the immediate choice for flex, are there any reasonable adjustments you might make? QBs are hard to balance down. You can add +completion / -incomplete points to balance QBs a bit, but that doesn't really push total scoring down. +6/-4 is pretty common and helps to balance rushing QBs vs passing. Increase yards required per point? Zauper fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:If you were in a superflex league and wanted to balance things a bit so QB, at least beyond the top dozen guys, wasn't always the immediate choice for flex, are there any reasonable adjustments you might make? Negative points per sack, 30 passing yards per point, -3 for int, etc, are all reasonable things to do. You just don't want to devalue it too much or you end up back in 1 QB land, when the whole point of superflex is to increase the value of them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:If you were in a superflex league and wanted to balance things a bit so QB, at least beyond the top dozen guys, wasn't always the immediate choice for flex, are there any reasonable adjustments you might make? Just reverse all their numbers so everyone is desperate to find the worst QBs in the league
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:If you were in a superflex league and wanted to balance things a bit so QB, at least beyond the top dozen guys, wasn't always the immediate choice for flex, are there any reasonable adjustments you might make? I think the thing to do is increase the value of RB/WR/TEs compared to the QB, rather than trying to reduce QB scoring. But be careful not to make it super swingy or hand out a bunch of dumb bonuses like a lot of people do. PPR is common, but you can add points per first down (esp. adding that to TEs helps them be more useful); give RBs a points per carry score (maybe a quarter point?) which rewards inefficient RBs and power backs over efficient guys who get more yards per carry; maybe assign extra points for yards-after-catch? I would not do all of these, but if you picked one or two it would help.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
Zauper posted:QBs are hard to balance down. You can add +completion / -incomplete points to balance QBs a bit, but that doesn't really push total scoring down. +6/-4 is pretty common and helps to balance rushing QBs vs passing. A SFlex Dynasty league I'm in did more yards per point as well as 4 point passing TDs and -2 on INTs. It ended up with the top 7 PPG for last year was in order: Watson, Gurly, Wentz, Wilson, Brown, Bell, Elliott. This league also has "big game" bonuses and weird yardage totals, though. EDIT: Another league I'm in increased the yards per point BUT they split the TD scoring so <50 yard TDs are 4 points, >=50 yard "bombs" are 6 points. That's on MFL though. Amergin fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Zauper posted:This does it (partly) backwards: My league really likes our setup. Starting rosters are 1 of each and 3 wr/rb/te flex spots and since making the change we have seen people try out more unique lineups, one guy was playing 3 tes every week for awhile and winning which was funny.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:My league really likes our setup. Starting rosters are 1 of each and 3 wr/rb/te flex spots and since making the change we have seen people try out more unique lineups, one guy was playing 3 tes every week for awhile and winning which was funny. Assuming the rest of the scoring is the same as 'normal', the optimal lineup in that league is as many bellcows or high volume RB as you can fit. Ignoring return yards and QBs, your top 20 scorers are 10 RB, 7 WR, and 3 TE, leading off with 6 RB and having 7 RB in the top 10 (with the top TE as #10) In the method I pointed to, it's 7 RB, 3 TE, 10 WR; with 4 RB, 5 WR, and 1 TE in the top 10, and the top TE at #5 -- which contains 2 RB and 2 WR. This is a more realistic scoring model in terms of how it reflects success in the NFL (which is to say, rushing games don't tend to correlate to success), and doesn't make RBs significantly better than every other position as they are in your system. People intentionally starting suboptimal lineups is them being bad, but something you see a lot of in leagues that are branded as TE premium -- even in those TE premium leagues, most TEs are bad. All it does is increase the value of the top few significantly and add a ton of variability.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
Azhais posted:Just reverse all their numbers so everyone is desperate to find the worst QBs in the league Calvinball time! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
Zauper posted:Assuming the rest of the scoring is the same as 'normal', the optimal lineup in that league is as many bellcows or high volume RB as you can fit. This is all good stuff. My league mates specifically wanted to devalue wr and increase rb value when we made the change.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 22:25 |
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:This is all good stuff. My league mates specifically wanted to devalue wr and increase rb value when we made the change. Why not just not do PPR or Half-PPR since it does the same thing? Standard Scoring is basically RB++ I am so confused. Can you explain the thought process behind it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 21:31
|
|