Devin Funchess

[ericanadian]

Every year people act like there is a definite target "pie" and that the targets to a player like Funchess will be hurt for by players like Olsen and Moore. I rail against this over and over and it comes up over and over. If they all don't have the same role a healthy offense benefits everyone. Better offense equals more first downs, longer time of possession, more pass attempts (targets), more yards, more receptions, more touchdowns. It benefits every WR to have a good WR on the other side and a good TE because then defenses won't concentrate on taking that one WR away.

I think situation is the best thing Funchess has going for him to be honest.

While I don't agree that this is always the case, Carolina had the sixth lowest number of pass attempts in the league last year.

[M-Dub]

Every year people act like there is a definite target "pie" and that the targets to a player like Funchess will be hurt for by players like Olsen and Moore. I rail against this over and over and it comes up over and over. If they all don't have the same role a healthy offense benefits everyone. Better offense equals more first downs, longer time of possession, more pass attempts (targets), more yards, more receptions, more touchdowns. It benefits every WR to have a good WR on the other side and a good TE because then defenses won't concentrate on taking that one WR away.

I think situation is the best thing Funchess has going for him to be honest.

There is absolutely a finite number of targets to go around in any given season. That “pie” can certainly get bigger or smaller from year to year, and even game to game, but it’s undeniably a thing. Math out front shoulda toldja.

Your points about a better offense are true, but a better offense also results in more positive game scripts and more running plays. I like Funchess a lot, but it’s crazy to think that the addition of Moore and the return of a healthy Olsen won’t cut into his targets, even if the overall pie gets bigger.

[_yeti]

Every year people act like there is a definite target "pie" and that the targets to a player like Funchess will be hurt for by players like Olsen and Moore. I rail against this over and over and it comes up over and over. If they all don't have the same role a healthy offense benefits everyone. Better offense equals more first downs, longer time of possession, more pass attempts (targets), more yards, more receptions, more touchdowns. It benefits every WR to have a good WR on the other side and a good TE because then defenses won't concentrate on taking that one WR away.

I think situation is the best thing Funchess has going for him to be honest.

There is absolutely a finite number of targets to go around in any given season. That “pie” can certainly get bigger or smaller from year to year, and even game to game, but it’s undeniably a thing. Math out front shoulda toldja.

Your points about a better offense are true, but a better offense also results in more positive game scripts and more running plays. I like Funchess a lot, but it’s crazy to think that the addition of Moore and the return of a healthy Olsen won’t cut into his targets, even if the overall pie gets bigger.

While I don't agree that this is always the case, Carolina had the sixth lowest number of pass attempts in the league last year.

It's not always the case because sometimes we project an offense to get better and then it actually doesn't. When a team is firing on all cylinders, then it helps everyone. Generally, my point is that I would rather have 3 good receiving options as opposed to 1 default option. There may be more targets forced to the way of that one default option if that is all there is, but the healthier offense gives more room for quality production on the same amount or even slightly less targets.

As for cutting into target share, I think analysis is also highly dependent on where that person falls on the pecking order. I am not expecting vintage Greg Olsen to return, and I see Funchess as being #1 in the pecking order and at worse #2.

Carolina may have been 6th in pass attempts last year. They also were 19th in total yards last year and 24th in passing first downs. They were 28th in passing yards and 29th in completion rate. So which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did they not have a lot of pass attempts because it isn't in their team strategy, or did they not have a lot of pass attempts because they didn't have any quality options to throw to? Their number one WR was McCaffrey (80 rec.), followed by Funchess (63 rec.), followed by ED DICKSON with 30 receptions, followed by Olsen and Russell Sheppard both with 17 only receptions!

You telling me that healthy WR options won't allow Funchess to average four catches a game (to match last year) or more? And that a healthier passing offense with more options won't increase the amount of attempts and receptions than that absolutely paltry pathetic showing above? Game, set, match

[ericanadian]

I think you misunderstood my point. The fact that they were the sixth worst suggest there is a lot of room for growth and I agree with you in the case of Carolina that additional options will lead to more overall offense, not so much a shift in distribution.

[joeya2001]

Every year people act like there is a definite target "pie" and that the targets to a player like Funchess will be hurt for by players like Olsen and Moore. I rail against this over and over and it comes up over and over. If they all don't have the same role a healthy offense benefits everyone. Better offense equals more first downs, longer time of possession, more pass attempts (targets), more yards, more receptions, more touchdowns. It benefits every WR to have a good WR on the other side and a good TE because then defenses won't concentrate on taking that one WR away.

I think situation is the best thing Funchess has going for him to be honest.

There is absolutely a finite number of targets to go around in any given season. That “pie” can certainly get bigger or smaller from year to year, and even game to game, but it’s undeniably a thing. Math out front shoulda toldja.

Your points about a better offense are true, but a better offense also results in more positive game scripts and more running plays. I like Funchess a lot, but it’s crazy to think that the addition of Moore and the return of a healthy Olsen won’t cut into his targets, even if the overall pie gets bigger.

While I don't agree that this is always the case, Carolina had the sixth lowest number of pass attempts in the league last year.

It's not always the case because sometimes we project an offense to get better and then it actually doesn't. When a team is firing on all cylinders, then it helps everyone. Generally, my point is that I would rather have 3 good receiving options as opposed to 1 default option. There may be more targets forced to the way of that one default option if that is all there is, but the healthier offense gives more room for quality production on the same amount or even slightly less targets.

As for cutting into target share, I think analysis is also highly dependent on where that person falls on the pecking order. I am not expecting vintage Greg Olsen to return, and I see Funchess as being #1 in the pecking order and at worse #2.

Carolina may have been 6th in pass attempts last year. They also were 19th in total yards last year and 24th in passing first downs. They were 28th in passing yards and 29th in completion rate. So which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did they not have a lot of pass attempts because it isn't in their team strategy, or did they not have a lot of pass attempts because they didn't have any quality options to throw to? Their number one WR was McCaffrey (80 rec.), followed by Funchess (63 rec.), followed by ED DICKSON with 30 receptions, followed by Olsen and Russell Sheppard both with 17 only receptions!

You telling me that healthy WR options won't allow Funchess to average four catches a game (to match last year) or more? And that a healthier passing offense with more options won't increase the amount of attempts and receptions than that absolutely paltry pathetic showing above? Game, set, match

I don't have the passion for Devin Funchess as you do, however I do not think he will have to room to grow for more than 4 catches a game, guy doesn't strike me as possession receiver. His 4 is about where I see him staying, hes not going to become a 80+ catch guy, 10 TD's sure due to his height. To many other mouths to fees via the pass. What you seen last year I believe will be his thing with only room to decline. only person who will do better is Olson. Maybe more runs with CJ.

[_yeti]

I don't have the passion for Devin Funchess as you do, however I do not think he will have to room to grow for more than 4 catches a game, guy doesn't strike me as possession receiver. His 4 is about where I see him staying, hes not going to become a 80+ catch guy, 10 TD's sure due to his height. To many other mouths to fees via the pass. What you seen last year I believe will be his thing with only room to decline. only person who will do better is Olson. Maybe more runs with CJ.

You misunderstand me, I don't have passion for Devin Funchess - I have passion for proving myself right
No, I said earlier, I made a mistake and dropped him outright when I definitely had room to hold if I believed. I didn't believe, thought he was too small for TE but too slow for WR. I have been brought to the otherside by his production after that and the organization showing faith in him. He is definitely on my 'most boring WRs to own list' but like I said before I think situation is the best thing he has going for him.

Considering they had the 3rd highest rush attempts in the league last year, I can't see that number rising bc CJ is in town. With an increase in pass attempts his production will increase or at the worst, stay the same.

[Bo Jackson]

I've never been big Funchess since his TE 40 time at the combine. He did well last year, but I think Moore takes a big share the receptions, and Mcaf should get a lot more as well. Olsen will take his share including RZ targets as well.

Think I might go after Cam now lol

[FantasyFreak]

I've never been big Funchess since his TE 40 time at the combine. He did well last year, but I think Moore takes a big share the receptions, and Mcaf should get a lot more as well. Olsen will take his share including RZ targets as well.

Think I might go after Cam now lol

More than 80? I doubt that. Also, I really like DJ as a prospect, but he's raw AF. I don't see him doing a ton year. Your argument seems to be, Funchess ran a 4.6 as a "TE" 3 and a half years ago, so he can't be good after shedding a bit of weight and moving outside. Not sure that's the best argument. At Michigan he was lined up all over the place, but he was a huge mismatch and their best receiver for RB's disguised as QB's who couldn't throw outside the hash marks, so it made more sense to have him inside.

[sloth8u]

im higher on him than most and i'll echo what ive said in the past....this dude has huge upside. i believe he had somewhere around 110 targets....there is no reason to think that he cant up that to 125-130 at minimum. cam is likely to throw 475-500 times. there is no reason to think funch wont get his share. imo, no reason to think 1000 and 10 is out of the question, and potentially more if he continues to emerge.

i understand that some owners want to "see it" before paying the price....but imo, funch is likely to be one of biggest risers over the next year. the question for me (as someone who's been high on him since day 1) is how he will handle going across the middle. he's shown the ability to go up and get it, shown the ability to take the wr screen for good yardage....but can he go across the middle and make the plays on a consistent basis? if we find out that he can....there is potential for perennial top 10 numbers.

in terms of value, ive found that most owners are higher on him than adp and rankings would suggest. hes a tough buy right now because owners arent letting him go for the prices that rankings would suggest. a tough sell because everyone can look at the rankings and adp.

in short, there are big things to come for this guy imo. id easily take him over moore today, yet moore is carrying value around 50 and funch 75.

[FantasyFreak]

im higher on him than most and i'll echo what ive said in the past....this dude has huge upside. i believe he had somewhere around 110 targets....there is no reason to think that he cant up that to 125-130 at minimum. cam is likely to throw 475-500 times. there is no reason to think funch wont get his share. imo, no reason to think 1000 and 10 is out of the question, and potentially more if he continues to emerge.

i understand that some owners want to "see it" before paying the price....but imo, funch is likely to be one of biggest risers over the next year. the question for me (as someone who's been high on him since day 1) is how he will handle going across the middle. he's shown the ability to go up and get it, shown the ability to take the wr screen for good yardage....but can he go across the middle and make the plays on a consistent basis? if we find out that he can....there is potential for perennial top 10 numbers.

in terms of value, ive found that most owners are higher on him than adp and rankings would suggest. hes a tough buy right now because owners arent letting him go for the prices that rankings would suggest. a tough sell because everyone can look at the rankings and adp.

in short, there are big things to come for this guy imo. id easily take him over moore today, yet moore is carrying value around 50 and funch 75.

Agreed.

[playa_hata]

im higher on him than most and i'll echo what ive said in the past....this dude has huge upside. i believe he had somewhere around 110 targets....there is no reason to think that he cant up that to 125-130 at minimum. cam is likely to throw 475-500 times. there is no reason to think funch wont get his share. imo, no reason to think 1000 and 10 is out of the question, and potentially more if he continues to emerge.

i understand that some owners want to "see it" before paying the price....but imo, funch is likely to be one of biggest risers over the next year. the question for me (as someone who's been high on him since day 1) is how he will handle going across the middle. he's shown the ability to go up and get it, shown the ability to take the wr screen for good yardage....but can he go across the middle and make the plays on a consistent basis? if we find out that he can....there is potential for perennial top 10 numbers.

in terms of value, ive found that most owners are higher on him than adp and rankings would suggest. hes a tough buy right now because owners arent letting him go for the prices that rankings would suggest. a tough sell because everyone can look at the rankings and adp.

in short, there are big things to come for this guy imo. id easily take him over moore today, yet moore is carrying value around 50 and funch 75.

Agreed.

Ill deff rather pay funchess price of adp 75 than pay moores price of adp 50