Gadget/Hybrid WRs/RBs

[ascherb]

Corderrelle Patterson, Percy Harvin, Tavon Austin. 3 of the most explosive players in the league over the past half-decade. But 3 players who have never really developed into the full-time wide receivers people hoped they would.

All are tremendously dangerous with the ball in their hands, but Patterson and Austin (we will get to Harvin later) have sort of been miscast over the past few seasons as their teams try to justify their first round selections by trying to use them as "traditional" WRs.

Patterson and Harvin especially proved with the Vikings that if you could manufacture plays to get the ball in their hands, they were going to produce.

Patterson ended his rookie season by scoring 6 TDs in his final 5 games and was a big play machine down the stretch.

Harvin was an early season MVP candidate in 2012 with 50 catches through 6 weeks of the season before getting hurt as the Vikings really peppered him with screens and quick throws just to give him a chance to run with the ball in space.

Since then, Harvin is out of the league. Patterson was let go by the Vikings, and Tavon has really been hit or miss as all three sort of failed to live up to the expectation that they would develop into more than just explosive runners with the football.

My question is do you think we are going to see any teams out there in 2017 and beyond that will be bold enough to really go back to what the Vikings did with Harvin and Patterson, which is really make the gadget play a big part of the offense?

Is it a sustainable option if you have a player that is really dangerous with the ball? How much could you get away with doing it?

I'm only asking because of the hype Christian McCaffrey is getting, and I tend to see him in that same mold, although he's probably a better, more-sturdy runner who can take consistent handoffs.

What do you think?

[Valhalla]

Tyreek hill just happened. He also was on full display against division rival raiders. Maybe Patterson is the raider's attempt at having their own tyreek?

[bruiser]

Great mention of McCaffrey here because of the 2nd round addition of Curtis Samuel. I profile Samuel to be a very similar 'utility' player to CMac. That offense is going to be very dynamic in that division. I didn't have any chances at drafting CMac in deep PPR leagues, but I did take a swing at Samuel. His stats don't wow you at Ohio St., but he shows up on tape. See Ted Ginn's replacement.

I also noted on my big board that Samuel comps to TY Montgomery. That's a plus in utility and ability to get on the field however needed. Also a bonus in the return yardage department.

[clarion contrarion]

the crux of the matter is cost . what does it cost to acquire guys like that ? harvin had multi year value although he was always a game time decision is seems or an injury concern more so than many guys in his draft range . Hill was terrific last year but until he stacks years I will exercise caution in counting on him . My thought is most guys drafted early will not validate the draft capital but if you can get a guy like that dirt cheap tarik cohen tj logan I wouldn't mind , samuel however has been top 15 in a couple drafts I am in and that is too rich for a guy without a defined position /duties . I would rather draft a wr or rb with a shot at consistent weekly production rather than a gimmick/slash role.

[MEuRaH]

Maybe nobody remembers, but Walker was a gadget player in the 49ers offense. He played FB, WR, and mostly TE, . He even used to be the kick returner for a stretch of games. He was more valuable to the 49ers offense but because he wasn't the primary TE, they stupidly let him go.

Fantasy-wise, none of these gadget players will ever produce the kinds of reliable numbers you need to confidently start them in your lineup.... unless special team return yards count. Otherwise, trade them for the hype value alone.

[onetwothree]

Depends on the coach. Hard to know if Tavon was more limited by his size or by Fisher. McVay seems to be a bit more creative but at this point it might just be too late.

[Friction]

I just wont grab those types of players for fantasy as i have zero luck with them. Even in DFS i always strike out when i grab a Sproles/Woodhead/Riddick for cheap and hope they habe one of their games. Never fails; 4 carries for -3 yards, 2 rec for 10.

[ImaRounder]

Depends on the coach. Hard to know if Tavon was more limited by his size or by Fisher. McVay seems to be a bit more creative but at this point it might just be too late.

Pretty safe to say every coach in all of football besides Les Miles, is more creative than Jeff Fischer.

[theone]

Harvin is really the prototype for how to use the "gadget" player and really the only one with any sustained success recently. Averaged over 100 targets his four years in MIN despite missing time his fourth season. Unfortunately injuries derailed his career. Overall I tend to avoid these types of players as they are so dependent on scheme.

I do not see McCaffrey as a gadget type of player with CAR manufacturing touches with end around runs and buttle screens. McCaffrey is a far more developed route runner and better running back than Harvin was. I see him being used in more standard running and receiving roles though he will likely be more weighted toward plays as a receiver than a regular back due to his advanced route running skills.

[skip]

If we're going to talk about gadget players I think the discussion needs to center around John Ross. McCaffrey isn't going to be used like a Sproles or Montgomery with only a handful of carries a game. Ross profiles much closer to a Patterson type, imo.

[alewilliam789]

If we're going to talk about gadget players I think the discussion needs to center around John Ross. McCaffrey isn't going to be used like a Sproles or Montgomery with only a handful of carries a game. Ross profiles much closer to a Patterson type, imo.

How is that? His Reception Perception profile shows he ran literally every short route (slant, screen, and other) at a below average rate meaning he spent very little time around the LOS in the Washington offense. Plus he scored a top success rate vs press coverage which shows he'll be able to use his quickness to get a solid release at the next level. Of course despite running those short routes at a below average rate, he got open successfully in all of them besides the slant. So I'm not sure what makes you think he will just be a gadget player

[Vcize]

I think there is a big difference between WRs asked to do RB stuff versus RBs asked to do WR stuff. There aren't many examples of the former that have maintained fantasy relevance for sustained periods. There are a lot of examples of the latter. Marshall Faulk, Steven Jackson, Reggie Bush, Ladainian Tomlinson.

[maxhyde]

Problem is the team has to commit to using them or they are very risky fantasy plays. It isn't common to see a team commit to gadget players as an integral part of the offense. If they do/can it makes alot of sense to own them...touches/targets are required for production

[Phaded]

My problem with this post is this - you labeled it "Gadget/Hybrid WRs/RBs"..

Yet; you go on to list 3 wide receivers and express concern about McCaffrey (a running back) because of it.

I do not understand, if you are concerned about McCaffrey fine - but those 3 wide receivers are not a relevant precursor.

If there is a closer NFL comparison to McCaffrey; it might be Reggie Bush if anything.

With the McCaffrey comparison aside - I think gadget players are great for a real life perspective but not reliable enough for a fantasy perspective.

[Nanananananana]

I don't usually like gadget types in fantasy but I grabbed tyreek everywhere I could this offseason. He was very consistent last season once he got going and that was as a rookie. I think he keeps balling. Just traded the 1.11 for him in a superflex