Foreman or Engram? LEAVE A LINK TO YOURS!

[spider321]

D'Onta Foreman or Evan Engram?

Dynasty Non-ppr, I don't even have to start a TE (WR and TE are the same).

Edit to add: If you've watched him, you know Engram isn't really a TE. Physically, he's wayyyy more Mike Evans than he is Greg Olsen. (not saying he's that good. Lol)

I'm loaded at both positions so they'll both be bench fodder, but who will be the better NFL player and why?

Leave a link and I'll answer yours!

[onetwothree]

Makes sense to take the 1st round TE with unique athleticism for his position.

[jwint7910]

Makes sense to take the 1st round TE with unique athleticism for his position.

I don't know about that, TE are a funny thing with regard to development and top end value. Really I think you want to take the guy who could end up being worth the most. If the positional value goes away since you don't have to start a TE, does Engram ever get more valuable than a WR2 at the top end. For me Forman could easily become a top 10 RB at some point early in his career if things fall right.

Foreman for me pretty easily here.

[saw061600]

TE not it's own position makes this an easy Foreman pick.

[spider321]

Thanks for the feedback so far, guys!

I'm not saying you're wrong, but Engram is really a WR who is listed as a TE.

In other words. I don't see him lining up beside the tackle often, if ever.

[Slackalacker]

In a non TE premium league there aren't many TEs that are even worth owning really. Foreman on the other hand could be a starting RB. I'd go Foreman.

He'd basically have to turn into Kelce/gronk/Olsen/Graham to be worth starting in a non TE league. And for obvious reason, there aren't many TEs that are elite like that.

[spider321]

In a non TE premium league there aren't many TEs that are even worth owning really. Foreman on the other hand could be a starting RB. I'd go Foreman.

He'd basically have to turn into Kelce/gronk/Olsen/Graham to be worth starting in a non TE league. And for obvious reason, there aren't many TEs that are elite like that.

Even given the fact that Engram isn't really a TE, and he will almost never line up beside the tackle?

[saw061600]

He can line up as a receiver every game it won't change that only 4 TEs cracked top 36 in points and all of them were TEs that were very established as a top targeted player in team. The odds just are not good.

[Goddard]

I'd rather have Engram.

[hockeyBjj]

He can line up as a receiver every game it won't change that only 4 TEs cracked top 36 in points and all of them were TEs that were very established as a top targeted player in team. The odds just are not good.

This. Unless you are certain Engram will be the next Kelce/Gronk he's not worth it on a no need to start a TE league. Forman has a better chance of being a top 24 rb than Engram does of being a top 36 receiver that's reliable weekly

[Shcritters]

TE not it's own position makes this an easy Foreman pick.

This. My league is like this - you can start 0-2 TE's, and when you lump them in with WR's they really aren't valuable unless they are a top 5 TE. I think Foreman had a much better chance to be a top 20 non-PPR RB than engram has of becoming a top 5 TE in non-PPR.

[lukkynumber13]

In a non TE premium league there aren't many TEs that are even worth owning really. Foreman on the other hand could be a starting RB. I'd go Foreman.

He'd basically have to turn into Kelce/gronk/Olsen/Graham to be worth starting in a non TE league. And for obvious reason, there aren't many TEs that are elite like that.

X2

Even Jimmy Graham would be no more than bench depth in a league like this.

[Shoreline Steamers]

I don't think this is as lopsided as most want to make it. Agreed that while lumping WR/TE together devalues the TE position, Engram is a talented "pass catcher" as is. What happened to "WR's are better investments than RB's due to longevity,"? Engram could be catching passes at a high level for years to come regardless of what you want to label him.

Personally, I'd have him in the top 4-6 WR's from the 2017 class if that was his actual "position". So I don't think the value is off at all. Personal preference. And who's to say that Engram eventually isn't listed as a WR? He's similar to a Marcus Colston big-bodied WR (who started as a TE) and could end up being the #2 option behind OBJ in the Giants offense as soon as 2018 as it appears Marshall is done. I suppose that depends on your point of view about Sterling Shepard, but that's a different discussion.

Non-ppr also plays a factor, and certainly increases the value of RB's. Foreman looks to be coming on, and it's quite possible the Texans move on from Miller after the 2017 season. They've at least got an out. If team need isn't a concern with regard to the pair it's a tough choice for me. I'd love to advise to try and grab both, but that's a cop-out. Based on current situation with an eye toward 2018 I'd have to lean slightly toward Foreman.

But that's mostly because I really don't believe in Eli moving forward, and the Giants don't have a suitable backup waiting to take over. Watson looks to be serviceable, and I anticipate the Texans near-term prospects to be superior to those of the Giants. The player value is close for me, so I'll go with the one I believe is in the better situation.

[Plank]

If I am scraping for RBs I'd certainly target Foreman ... There's a chance by mid-season he takes over the role entirely.

I like Engram and his role in the Giants offense .. but Eli really looks like he is falling off the cliff .. while I like the player, I am not very happy with that offense in general. But I also see that he really could turn out what they were hoping to get from Brandon Marshall .. In Week 1 it was Lewis, Engram, and Shepard ... so if anything Engram will at least get a decent floor early in his career ..

[spider321]

Yes, I don't have to start a TE, but...

ENGRAM IS REALLY A WR, NOT A TE!!!!

Lol.

I guess my subconscious wanted more "take Engram" replies.