Unpopular Opinion: You will waste your premium 1st round pick on Kyle Pitts.

[Anteaters]

Agree on most points, just ribbing about the "wanting to win the 'I was right about this player' threads" comment.

Guilty as charged.

And agree on most everything else. Especially that I might say something if Pitts tanks out the rest of the season.

[jordanzs]

I didn't 'waste' a premium 1st round pick on him. Was only able to draft Pitts in 1 league, and it was in round 2 of a superflex TE premium best ball league startup draft. I don't regret that decision.

[Krypto_King]

I think anyone who spent a draft pick on Pitts is happy now. I think anyone who spent a draft pick on Najee is happy now. I think anyone who spent a draft pick on Chase is happy now. Those three rookies have delivered so far.

Which seems more sustainable
A) RB averaging 8! targets per game with production of 3.8ypc, 5.3YPT
B) WR with the most yards per target of all-time, highest catch pct for anyone over 20ypc of all-time, and most TD/game of all-time
C) TE4 in points per game with only 1 TD


I was skeptical of the hyperbole as well but I think it only gets better from here

[Anteaters]

I think anyone who spent a draft pick on Pitts is happy now. I think anyone who spent a draft pick on Najee is happy now. I think anyone who spent a draft pick on Chase is happy now. Those three rookies have delivered so far.

Which seems more sustainable
A) RB averaging 8! targets per game with production of 3.8ypc, 5.3YPT
B) WR with the most yards per target of all-time, highest catch pct for anyone over 20ypc of all-time, and most TD/game of all-time
C) TE4 in points per game with only 1 TD


I was skeptical of the hyperbole as well but I think it only gets better from here

Harris has the greatest probability of doing what his most optimistic fans think he's going to do. No one predicts Najee to be an all-time great. What I've seen is people thinking he'll be a top10RB for 4-5 years. The way he's started (with a supposedly bad OL) appears very sustainable. He's not on an ALL-TIME NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE streak. He's simply putting up very good, very sustainable RB1 stats.

So far, Chase and Pitts are putting up record statistics for their position. These are the guys I think are in line for regression, not Najee. It's unwise to ever think a 7week record pace is going to continue.

I'm not saying I am 100% certain neither Chase or Pitts will end the season with record-breaking stats. I'm just saying it's more likely Najee continue his current pace than either Chase or Pitts breaks Year 1 records for their position.

If the question is "Which seems more sustainable?" the answer has to be: the one that is not a record-setting pace.

[mild]

Which seems more sustainable
A) RB averaging 8! targets per game with production of 3.8ypc, 5.3YPT
B) WR with the most yards per target of all-time, highest catch pct for anyone over 20ypc of all-time, and most TD/game of all-time
C) TE4 in points per game with only 1 TD


I was skeptical of the hyperbole as well but I think it only gets better from here

If the question is "Which seems more sustainable?" the answer has to be: the one that is not a record-setting pace.

Why?

Being TE4 with only 1 TD is a pretty crazy stat man. Touchdowns are not sticky, but a player with 400+ yards through 6 games usually has more than 1. If that regresses to the mean he might not even need to keep averaging 15.2 yards per reception on 7 targets a game for 78 yards a game... y'know... to keep producing like one of the most generational rookie pass-catchers we've ever seen.

In his age 20-21 season.

As a rookie.
Tight.
End.

Bad players do not average 15.2 yards a catch in their rookie seasons. I don't know what about his talent strikes you as unsustainable, but record setting paces are actually -checks notes- "what we want to buy" in Dynasty.

Check Dynasty Delorean's Rookie bust rate per receiving yards /game thread. I'd say Pitts would fit right in there with the wide receivers, except... you know... "not a WR."

From the last 4 years:

67+ Rookie Reception Yards per Game
90% Stud
90% Good or better
Justin Jefferson [87]
Michael Thomas [75]
Ja'marr Chase [107]
Kyle Pitts [78]

I can keep going on about this, but the reality is - some of you still don't realise what you're looking at.

"You can lead a horse to water; but you cannot make it drink."

[Anteaters]

Mild, I agree we all want to find the record-setting talent in fantasy sports. But that wasn't the question.

The question was, "which is more sustainable." If I'm choosing between a RB attaining the kind of stats T6RBs routinely put up, versus a TE (or WR) sustaining an ALL-TIME RECORD pace, obviously the one that isn't a once-in-a-generation pace is more likely.

I'm not saying I don't want Pitts or Chase to continue. I'm not saying they aren't talented enough to set records. I'm just saying it is much more probable that both regress and do not set a record pace this season. That was the question. That's no insult to either of them.

I'd like to see all three set records. As a Chase owner, even now I wouldn't bet $ that he will break any rookie records. Even after 7 weeks that is a sucker's bet. And I won't shout from the mountaintop that he is the best ever WR in the history of the NFL. Right now I'll be happy if he solidifies a spot as one of the top 3 dynasty WR.

[mild]

Mild, I agree we all want to find the record-setting talent in fantasy sports. But that wasn't the question.

First time I've seen someone argue that the player in the trio -not- on pace to break their positional yardage records is the one you want, but to each their own.

"This player is playing more to the averages, therefore this is sustainable, therefore I must have him."

"These other two players are on pace to break their rookie records, and I do not believe it will continue, therefore I will have the other more average player."

Just out of interest, what would you want to reduce Ja'marr and Pitts per-game stats to, to make it more "sustainable" and therefore palatable to your extremely discerning tastes? Perhaps if Ja'marr simply averaged 95 yards a game instead of 107?

I'm just sayin'.

[Anteaters]

Either I'm not being clear or you're being intentionally confusing.

Either way, congratulations on your great picks! Live long and have a prosperous season!

[Jigga94]

Mild, I agree we all want to find the record-setting talent in fantasy sports. But that wasn't the question.

First time I've seen someone argue that the player in the trio -not- on pace to break their positional yardage records is the one you want, but to each their own.

"This player is playing more to the averages, therefore this is sustainable, therefore I must have him."

"These other two players are on pace to break their rookie records, and I do not believe it will continue, therefore I will have the other more average player."

Just out of interest, what would you want to reduce Ja'marr and Pitts per-game stats to, to make it more "sustainable" and therefore palatable to your extremely discerning tastes? Perhaps if Ja'marr simply averaged 95 yards a game instead of 107?

I'm just sayin'.

I think a clean 99 would suffice. Enough to leave you wanting 1 more yard and not enough not raise suspicion on continous 100 yard games

[dustyroads]

To try and find a middle ground here between both sides, I will say I had a convo with a friend of mine the other day who was on the "not taking Pitts unless it's a late 1st and after 'x' players are off the board" and he said what grinds him with the whole situation is basically he thinks history and trends dictate that taking Pitts where he was being taken top 5 if not top 3 is bad process. He also believes while Pitts looked great in college and performed well at the combine and had great draft capital; there's too much volatility in trying to scout and predict the TE transition to the NFL to spend that much draft capital on one regardless of perceived talent. So basically, he's now having arguments like we are having with people under the belief this was a situation where the positive results are being used to justify what is generally what he considers a bad process. "Just because it worked out this time, doesn't make it a good move."

I agree on some of that, but not all. I think a lot of fantasy is guess work, and sometimes it's more fun/rewarding/satisfying to go with our gut rather than analytics and trends. That was my feeling on Pitts (and Chase 1.01 over all RBs). I do see how historically it has usually burned people, but something about this felt different. But I also do understand where he's coming from where we can fall in traps if we also try to use the ends to justify the means with aberrations.

Really my biggest gripe for years is what I consider the "buy them later for cheaper" fallacy so many people always posit as though that's a normal thing in competitive leagues. I'm sure there are random $25 buy-in local leagues where people can pull off some really lopsided trades with owners who's draft prep starts a week prior to the draft and consists of buying a magazine and printing out CBS rankings. Many of the fantasy/dynasty podcasts perpetuate this myth as well. "Hey go out and buy Ridley because he's underperforming. You should be able to get him for 'insert ridiculous offer no owner will ever accept here'". Pitts seemed like one of the most extreme cases of this too. People who spent a top 5 pick on this guy would be clutching with diamond hands till at least year 3 regardless of his production. And if you're in a league where owners don't do this, congrats on your annual playoff appearances, and ask them when girl scout cookies go on sale. I need to stock up on Samoa's for winter

[ColdZealDonkeyStrike]

It's wild seeing how much the goal posts have moved in this thread. The original statement is already proven false. No one that took Pitts high regrets it.
The bad process was looking too much through the position lens, and less through the prospect lens, imo. If you made any sort of judgement about Pitts based on players like Hock, Ebron, or OJ Howard, I would encourage you to revisit your process. You may as well have made judgments about Jamarr Chase based on Tavon Austin.

[Cameron Giles]

It's wild seeing how much the goal posts have moved in this thread. The original statement is already proven false. No one that took Pitts high regrets it.
The bad process was looking too much through the position lens, and less through the prospect lens, imo. If you made any sort of judgement about Pitts based on players like Hock, Ebron, or OJ Howard, I would encourage you to revisit your process. You may as well have made judgments about Jamarr Chase based on Tavon Austin.

Apples to oranges though, because there is a stronger correlation with talent/draft profile to WR production than there is TE production.

My stance in this thread was always this: History shows us that elite TEs in dynasty are always available for less than their initial peak price before their breakout (Gronk, Kelce, Olsen, Ertz, Graham, Waller, Kittle, etc.)

We look back at the 2017 class and all of those headline TEs (Howard, Engram, Njoku) can be bought for cheap right now. Hell, even 2018 with Fant, you could get for less than draft price today.

So, it was about playing percentages and betting on Pitts going through a few rough patches learning the TE position (that everyone goes through) then buying lower than the rumored 1.01-1.02 people were talking about in non-premium leagues.

If this is the real breakout, then I'm wrong.

[Anteaters]

If this is the real breakout, then I'm wrong.

That should be good enough. It seems some people want you to fall on your sword, bow to the god of Pitts, and admit your sins.

[Cameron Giles]

If this is the real breakout, then I'm wrong.

That should be good enough. It seems some people want you to fall on your sword, bow to the god of Pitts, and admit your sins.

Yeah, if Pitts reels off a string of 3-4 consecutive seasons like this, then nobody is going to be buying low for a while.

But the logic is pretty sound.

[Anteaters]

I know a guy who saved nothing for his retirement and things were looking bleak. Then he hit a $200K lottery ticket and things are looking better. Now he tells everyone that the best retirement plan is to buy lottery tickets.