Josh Gordon Thread: Reinstatement (Deja Vu)

[Water Buffalo]

LOL...nice...It's starting to appear that way.

Actually, he's just been the only one in this thread to make any logical arguments rather than a stupid (and completely useless) blanket statement such as "Gordon has WR1 potential because he's big".

It's been driving me nuts to see people completely ignore or not comprehend logical thought and well laid out arguments and come back with "anything can happen, we're hoping and praying looooooooooooooooooong term".

The reasoning was his play in college before he left/got kicked off the team. The fact that he was being held up as a better prospect than Kendal Wright before his off-the-field problems. His size is also a plus, but was never stated as THE ONLY reason...Again, try to keep up. Seems like reading comprehension is not your strong point. Maybe you should focus on adding substance to the discussion instead of calling people who disagree with you "stupid." If you're looking to get people worked up by name calling, then fine...I'll jab back once, but I won't participate in that kind of crap.

News flash...this is DYNASTY football, not redraft. Looking for LONG-TERM is what this is all about. It's easy to point at the guys already at the WR1 level. Anybody can look up the DLF rankings and see that. What makes a successful GM is digging deep and finding the guy with POTENTIAL to be a WR1 some day. I don't recall anyone saying they are "hoping and praying" about anything.

The "logical thought and well laid out arguments" laid out by you, and your alternate name TheOracle, are just confirming the same point everyone else is saying.

You're going to throw the first insult people by telling them to "keep up", then say that you'll only jab BACK once but not participate in that crap? Dear god you're a hypocrite.

Maybe I should add substance to the discussion, you're right. Here, I'll add the same awesome level of substance that you have: Gordon does not have WR1 potential.

[WZA]

I guess DLF should just shut down this site since apparently speculating on a given player's potential based on past college performance, current performance, measurables, situation, etc. is frowned upon and you can only talk about players who have clearly established themselves.

[Water Buffalo]

I guess DLF should just shut down this site since apparently speculating on a given player's potential based on past college performance, current performance, measurables, situation, etc. is frowned upon and you can only talk about players who have clearly established themselves.

Or maybe they should shut down because apparently presenting a logical dissenting argument as to why a guy is unlikely to be this mythical future uber-stud is frowned upon and we should only talk about ALL players as though they have infinite upside and will all be WR1s.

[WZA]

I guess DLF should just shut down this site since apparently speculating on a given player's potential based on past college performance, current performance, measurables, situation, etc. is frowned upon and you can only talk about players who have clearly established themselves.

Or maybe they should shut down because apparently presenting a logical dissenting argument as to why a guy is unlikely to be this mythical future uber-stud is frowned upon and we should only talk about ALL players as though they have infinite upside and will all be WR1s.

I've noticed your use of italics is very similar to TheOracle's use of italics...hmmmm

Anyway...in general, I usually like your posts about various topics on here, but I guess we just disagree on this one.

[lukeb]

This is how I see Gordon playing out:
Year 1: Gordon, in his first year back, has a very up and down rookie season, but you can his progression. Cleveland bottoms out and finishes 2-14, earning the no.1 pick. New ownership cleans house.
Year 2: With polished Matt Barkley under center and a full year under his belt, Gordon improves, but only to WR3 type numbers.
Year 3: Still only 23 years old, in his 3rd year, and with an improved Barkley, Gordon breaks out in a big way, becoming a top 15 dynasty WR.

He might take more time than normal, but in leagues where I have a practice squad, I'm definitely stashing him.

[WZA]

This is how I see Gordon playing out:
Year 1: Gordon, in his first year back, has a very up and down rookie season, but you can his progression. Cleveland bottoms out and finishes 2-14, earning the no.1 pick. New ownership cleans house.
Year 2: With polished Matt Barkley under center and a full year under his belt, Gordon improves, but only to WR3 type numbers.
Year 3: Still only 23 years old, in his 3rd year, and with an improved Barkley, Gordon breaks out in a big way, becoming a top 15 dynasty WR.

He might take more time than normal, but in leagues where I have a practice squad, I'm definitely stashing him.

I can see that scenario playing out, but I'm not sure that's going to fly with Buffalo...

[WZA]

BTW Buffalo..

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17604

I thought I recognized your argumentative nature from another thread. Seems like this is a recurring issue and I'm not the only one who views your tone in a negative light. Maybe I should copy and paste the picture of beating a dead horse onto this thread as well.

[Water Buffalo]

I guess DLF should just shut down this site since apparently speculating on a given player's potential based on past college performance, current performance, measurables, situation, etc. is frowned upon and you can only talk about players who have clearly established themselves.

Or maybe they should shut down because apparently presenting a logical dissenting argument as to why a guy is unlikely to be this mythical future uber-stud is frowned upon and we should only talk about ALL players as though they have infinite upside and will all be WR1s.

I've noticed your use of italics is very similar to TheOracle's use of italics...hmmmm

Anyway...in general, I usually like your posts about various topics on here, but I guess we just disagree on this one.

Heh, well, I can assure you we are different people. I trademarked the italics usage long before he even existed here!

For the record though, I don't really even have a strong opinion on Gordon one way or the other so I don't even know how much we actually disagree. I think he's a fine prospect with potential that I certainly wouldn't mind owning, but for right now he's just that to me - a prospect.

I was just simply enjoying reading the thread, and I thought TheOracle made a good point when he mentioned the QB situation of the WR1s out there. That's exactly the sort of thing I like to read on here - insight that digs a little deeper and provides more than just "I like this guy". It was a little irritating to me to see his point basically poo-poo'd or not understood when it was well thought out and made sense. That's really the entire reason I said anything in the first place.

[Chris_R]

Now, if you want to say WR1 upside includes Josh Gordon, fine, but in doing so I'd suggest that you're broadening that definition to the point that it's not even useful. If that works for you though, obviously that's fine.

At a certain point, what's the point in even saying that a guy has WR1 upside? Should I just list off 50 WRs in the NFL that have "WR1 upside" because they have good size, speed or were productive college players? It just seems like a futile endeavor to me. Hooray, all of our prospects have WR1 upside!!!

No, it's not impossible for Gordon to some day become an elite WR. But doesn't it make more sense to be a bit more realistic?

See, this is where I disagree with you on this comment, and The Oracle's comment in regards to it.


No you shouldn't just list off 50 WR's in the NFL because of those reasons, what people seem to forget is Gordon was evaluated by NFL scouts and GM's as a future #1 WR(again I'm using a different term and for me when I say #1 WR I'm not talking fantasy, I'm talking about a guy who can be that #1 guy for his team and beat double teams consistently). This wasn't just some drum up conclusion by fantasy owners who were wanting to hype their players just because he's big and fast. This is what a large number of people felt about Gordon in real life, and it translates the same in terms of him having ability to be a WR1 in fantasy.


A good comparison is Mohammed Sanu. A bunch of people were excited and high on him coming out, but largely what were the projections you heard on him? A future #2 NFL WR, consistent, high floor, ready to play right away etc. Nobody was calling him a future #1 WR, or a WR1 in fantasy, at any point. I know those are two different things, talking about a WR1(fantasy) and a #1 WR(real life), but not every prospect possesses that type of upside. I am excited about Keyshawn Martin and Lavon Brazill, neither are projected to be #1 WR's and it's highly unlikely they will be a WR1. Guys like Blackmon, Floyd, Wright, Randle, and Gordon from this class all have that ability where they can achieve that at some point. I'm not basing any of this on QB play, immediate production, or really anything.


Some guys are more system fits, some you just hope can be solid starters, but certain guys are thought to have that type of ability, that they may or may not reach, more often then not they won't(because for a WR1 you can only have 12 typically) but in the case of Gordon numerous NFL evaluators thought this about him. That doesn't mean he comes with no risk, or that everyone has to feel the same way, just that in this case it's at the very least justified and backed.


I don't think it has anything to do with being realistic, being unrealistic means you expect him to be a WR1 this year, it's not unrealistic to expect him to develop into that after 3 years. I get what you guys are saying, and it would make more sense to me if this was a guy who didn't project to that level well at all, Gordon has everything you look for in those top WR's except previous experience.


I don't think it's just "well he's big he'll be a WR!!!" going on. Last I check guys like Limas Sweed, James Hardy, or Ramses Barden were NEVER perceived to be a future WR1 the years they were coming out and the NFL evaluators didn't even see these guys on the same planet as Gordon. Again it could all be wrong, but if you were calling one of those guys a future WR1 it was your own wishful thinking, calling Gordon that at least has substance to it whether or not you agree with it.

[Water Buffalo]

This is how I see Gordon playing out:
Year 1: Gordon, in his first year back, has a very up and down rookie season, but you can his progression. Cleveland bottoms out and finishes 2-14, earning the no.1 pick. New ownership cleans house.
Year 2: With polished Matt Barkley under center and a full year under his belt, Gordon improves, but only to WR3 type numbers.
Year 3: Still only 23 years old, in his 3rd year, and with an improved Barkley, Gordon breaks out in a big way, becoming a top 15 dynasty WR.

He might take more time than normal, but in leagues where I have a practice squad, I'm definitely stashing him.

Predicting things is fun and all, but this is even a bit more of a stretch than just claiming him to have WR1 upside. We're now in the territory of predicting a) How a team performs for an entire season b) That new ownership is going to make changes c) They are going to "earn" the #1 pick d) They decide to already move on from Weeden after just 1 season e) Barkley is even decent at the NFL level f) And most importantly that Gordon even has the ability and skills to be that top 15 WR if everything else falls into place.

I mean, I understand that you were probably just suggesting a possible scenario that could happen for fun, but I'd have a hard time gauging a prospect's future fantasy value off of a scenario such as that with more questions than a math book.

[Water Buffalo]

Now, if you want to say WR1 upside includes Josh Gordon, fine, but in doing so I'd suggest that you're broadening that definition to the point that it's not even useful. If that works for you though, obviously that's fine.

At a certain point, what's the point in even saying that a guy has WR1 upside? Should I just list off 50 WRs in the NFL that have "WR1 upside" because they have good size, speed or were productive college players? It just seems like a futile endeavor to me. Hooray, all of our prospects have WR1 upside!!!

No, it's not impossible for Gordon to some day become an elite WR. But doesn't it make more sense to be a bit more realistic?

See, this is where I disagree with you on this comment, and The Oracle's comment in regards to it.


No you shouldn't just list off 50 WR's in the NFL because of those reasons, what people seem to forget is Gordon was evaluated by NFL scouts and GM's as a future #1 WR(again I'm using a different term and for me when I say #1 WR I'm not talking fantasy, I'm talking about a guy who can be that #1 guy for his team and beat double teams consistently). This wasn't just some drum up conclusion by fantasy owners who were wanting to hype their players just because he's big and fast. This is what a large number of people felt about Gordon in real life, and it translates the same in terms of him having ability to be a WR1 in fantasy.


A good comparison is Mohammed Sanu. A bunch of people were excited and high on him coming out, but largely what were the projections you heard on him? A future #2 NFL WR, consistent, high floor, ready to play right away etc. Nobody was calling him a future #1 WR, or a WR1 in fantasy, at any point. I know those are two different things, talking about a WR1(fantasy) and a #1 WR(real life), but not every prospect possesses that type of upside. I am excited about Keyshawn Martin and Lavon Brazill, neither are projected to be #1 WR's and it's highly unlikely they will be a WR1. Guys like Blackmon, Floyd, Wright, Randle, and Gordon from this class all have that ability where they can achieve that at some point. I'm not basing any of this on QB play, immediate production, or really anything.


Some guys are more system fits, some you just hope can be solid starters, but certain guys are thought to have that type of ability, that they may or may not reach, more often then not they won't(because for a WR1 you can only have 12 typically) but in the case of Gordon numerous NFL evaluators thought this about him. That doesn't mean he comes with no risk, or that everyone has to feel the same way, just that in this case it's at the very least justified and backed.


I don't think it has anything to do with being realistic, being unrealistic means you expect him to be a WR1 this year, it's not unrealistic to expect him to develop into that after 3 years. I get what you guys are saying, and it would make more sense to me if this was a guy who didn't project to that level well at all, Gordon has everything you look for in those top WR's except previous experience.


I don't think it's just "well he's big he'll be a WR!!!" going on. Last I check guys like Limas Sweed, James Hardy, or Ramses Barden were NEVER perceived to be a future WR1 the years they were coming out and the NFL evaluators didn't even see these guys on the same planet as Gordon. Again it could all be wrong, but if you were calling one of those guys a future WR1 it was your own wishful thinking, calling Gordon that at least has substance to it whether or not you agree with it.

I hate to reply with something so short after you clearly took a lot of time to write what you did, but I'm pretty sure all of the rest of us are referring to a "WR1" in terms of fantasy value - ie, a guy who ends up in the top 10-12 of WR scoring on a consistent yearly basis. Given his skills and situation (competition) I don't think it's a stretch in the least to suggest he could or will be the #1 WR on the Browns - but again, that's not really what's being discussed here.

[Chris_R]

I figured so, just wanted to be sure since I was using WR1 and #1 WR in the same post. I also don't want to come off like I'm some huge Gordon fan who fully expects him to meet his max potential. He's got a ton of risk and honestly he's in a pretty bad situation to blossom to his full potential, I guess my underlying point was I could see how it was justied to project Gordon as a WR1 at some point. I don't expect that to happen until year 3-4 so we are a ways away, but I didn't think in saying that it was lessening the term any.

[WZA]

At a certain point, what's the point in even saying that a guy has WR1 upside? Should I just list off 50 WRs in the NFL that have "WR1 upside" because they have good size, speed or were productive college players? It just seems like a futile endeavor to me. Hooray, all of our prospects have WR1 upside!!!

No, it's not impossible for Gordon to some day become an elite WR. But doesn't it make more sense to be a bit more realistic?

See, this is where I disagree with you on this comment, and The Oracle's comment in regards to it.


No you shouldn't just list off 50 WR's in the NFL because of those reasons, what people seem to forget is Gordon was evaluated by NFL scouts and GM's as a future #1 WR(again I'm using a different term and for me when I say #1 WR I'm not talking fantasy, I'm talking about a guy who can be that #1 guy for his team and beat double teams consistently). This wasn't just some drum up conclusion by fantasy owners who were wanting to hype their players just because he's big and fast. This is what a large number of people felt about Gordon in real life, and it translates the same in terms of him having ability to be a WR1 in fantasy.

A good comparison is Mohammed Sanu. A bunch of people were excited and high on him coming out, but largely what were the projections you heard on him? A future #2 NFL WR, consistent, high floor, ready to play right away etc. Nobody was calling him a future #1 WR, or a WR1 in fantasy, at any point. I know those are two different things, talking about a WR1(fantasy) and a #1 WR(real life), but not every prospect possesses that type of upside. I am excited about Keyshawn Martin and Lavon Brazill, neither are projected to be #1 WR's and it's highly unlikely they will be a WR1. Guys like Blackmon, Floyd, Wright, Randle, and Gordon from this class all have that ability where they can achieve that at some point. I'm not basing any of this on QB play, immediate production, or really anything.


Some guys are more system fits, some you just hope can be solid starters, but certain guys are thought to have that type of ability, that they may or may not reach, more often then not they won't(because for a WR1 you can only have 12 typically) but in the case of Gordon numerous NFL evaluators thought this about him. That doesn't mean he comes with no risk, or that everyone has to feel the same way, just that in this case it's at the very least justified and backed.


I don't think it has anything to do with being realistic, being unrealistic means you expect him to be a WR1 this year, it's not unrealistic to expect him to develop into that after 3 years. I get what you guys are saying, and it would make more sense to me if this was a guy who didn't project to that level well at all, Gordon has everything you look for in those top WR's except previous experience.


I don't think it's just "well he's big he'll be a WR!!!" going on. Last I check guys like Limas Sweed, James Hardy, or Ramses Barden were NEVER perceived to be a future WR1 the years they were coming out and the NFL evaluators didn't even see these guys on the same planet as Gordon. Again it could all be wrong, but if you were calling one of those guys a future WR1 it was your own wishful thinking, calling Gordon that at least has substance to it whether or not you agree with it.

I hate to reply with something so short after you clearly took a lot of time to write what you did, but I'm pretty sure all of the rest of us are referring to a "WR1" in terms of fantasy value - ie, a guy who ends up in the top 10-12 of WR scoring on a consistent yearly basis. Given his skills and situation (competition) I don't think it's a stretch in the least to suggest he could or will be the #1 WR on the Browns - but again, that's not really what's being discussed here.

Seems to me you really didn't read his post and comprehend what was actually said...re-read the first paragraph

If we all just see our players in black or white term and not project potential, then we'll always miss an opportunity to buy low on a guy. A successful dynasty GM looks for players like Gordon to replace aging stars on their rosters like Roddy White or Reggie Wayne. If we wait until Gordon breaks out in year 3, then the price is way too high and not worth it anymore.

[Water Buffalo]

BTW Buffalo..

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17604

I thought I recognized your argumentative nature from another thread. Seems like this is a recurring issue and I'm not the only one who views your tone in a negative light. Maybe I should copy and paste the picture of beating a dead horse onto this thread as well.

I just re-read that entire thread for $***s and giggles. Good times. A year and a half later, I still don't see where I was out of line there one bit, or where my tone was overly negative. Argumentative perhaps, but isn't that the point of debating and discussing stuff on a message board?

Also, not only was my point at the time correct, but a year and a half later now I'm proven even more correct by saying Fitz and Calvin aren't even close to a wash. Thanks for linking a past topic that makes me look smart

[Water Buffalo]

See, this is where I disagree with you on this comment, and The Oracle's comment in regards to it.


No you shouldn't just list off 50 WR's in the NFL because of those reasons, what people seem to forget is Gordon was evaluated by NFL scouts and GM's as a future #1 WR(again I'm using a different term and for me when I say #1 WR I'm not talking fantasy, I'm talking about a guy who can be that #1 guy for his team and beat double teams consistently). This wasn't just some drum up conclusion by fantasy owners who were wanting to hype their players just because he's big and fast. This is what a large number of people felt about Gordon in real life, and it translates the same in terms of him having ability to be a WR1 in fantasy.

A good comparison is Mohammed Sanu. A bunch of people were excited and high on him coming out, but largely what were the projections you heard on him? A future #2 NFL WR, consistent, high floor, ready to play right away etc. Nobody was calling him a future #1 WR, or a WR1 in fantasy, at any point. I know those are two different things, talking about a WR1(fantasy) and a #1 WR(real life), but not every prospect possesses that type of upside. I am excited about Keyshawn Martin and Lavon Brazill, neither are projected to be #1 WR's and it's highly unlikely they will be a WR1. Guys like Blackmon, Floyd, Wright, Randle, and Gordon from this class all have that ability where they can achieve that at some point. I'm not basing any of this on QB play, immediate production, or really anything.


Some guys are more system fits, some you just hope can be solid starters, but certain guys are thought to have that type of ability, that they may or may not reach, more often then not they won't(because for a WR1 you can only have 12 typically) but in the case of Gordon numerous NFL evaluators thought this about him. That doesn't mean he comes with no risk, or that everyone has to feel the same way, just that in this case it's at the very least justified and backed.


I don't think it has anything to do with being realistic, being unrealistic means you expect him to be a WR1 this year, it's not unrealistic to expect him to develop into that after 3 years. I get what you guys are saying, and it would make more sense to me if this was a guy who didn't project to that level well at all, Gordon has everything you look for in those top WR's except previous experience.


I don't think it's just "well he's big he'll be a WR!!!" going on. Last I check guys like Limas Sweed, James Hardy, or Ramses Barden were NEVER perceived to be a future WR1 the years they were coming out and the NFL evaluators didn't even see these guys on the same planet as Gordon. Again it could all be wrong, but if you were calling one of those guys a future WR1 it was your own wishful thinking, calling Gordon that at least has substance to it whether or not you agree with it.

I hate to reply with something so short after you clearly took a lot of time to write what you did, but I'm pretty sure all of the rest of us are referring to a "WR1" in terms of fantasy value - ie, a guy who ends up in the top 10-12 of WR scoring on a consistent yearly basis. Given his skills and situation (competition) I don't think it's a stretch in the least to suggest he could or will be the #1 WR on the Browns - but again, that's not really what's being discussed here.

Seems to me you really didn't read his post and comprehend what was actually said...re-read the first paragraph

If we all just see our players in black or white term and not project potential, then we'll always miss an opportunity to buy low on a guy. A successful dynasty GM looks for players like Gordon to replace aging stars on their rosters like Roddy White or Reggie Wayne. If we wait until Gordon breaks out in year 3, then the price is way too high and not worth it anymore.

Still stooping to the level of insulting me by attacking my reading comprehension or that I can't "keep up"? I thought you were only going to jab back, and that you weren't going to participate in "that crap"? I'm done with you here, hypocrite.