Marquise Brown is the best value in the draft

[FantasyFreak]

Guys, go buy Duvernay for 90% of the production of Brown/Bateman at 10% of the price.

Classic box score analysis

Don't be salty. Bateman coming in as a rookie and getting more targets than a WR1 according to this thread, is a statement. Bateman has all the analytics and fits Lamar's play style perfectly. Like I said, hope you sold Brown shares, his value about to drop.

LOL. I can't take you seriously, man. Your ownership bias dictates pretty much every opinion I see from you. Taking results from 1 game to fit your narrative.

[Sriracha]

Guys, go buy Duvernay for 90% of the production of Brown/Bateman at 10% of the price.

Classic box score analysis

Don't be salty. Bateman coming in as a rookie and getting more targets than a WR1 according to this thread, is a statement. Bateman has all the analytics and fits Lamar's play style perfectly. Like I said, hope you sold Brown shares, his value about to drop.

What's encouraging was his usage, not the box score.

They threw to him in crucial situations (3rd down) and getting him touches was clearly a part of the gameplan.

He still has some things to work on -- which is to be expected from a rookie who missed a lot of practice time.. but for those that were high on Bateman this was pretty close to the best case scenario for his debut.

LAC's defense has smothered WRs so far this season (2nd fewest points surrendered to WRs) and the shootout between two high powered offenses never materialized.. so Marquise having a down game was somewhat expected. Still too early to tell which of these guys is going to emerge but at this point I'd probably lean Bateman.

[FantasyFreak]

Guys, go buy Duvernay for 90% of the production of Brown/Bateman at 10% of the price.

Classic box score analysis

Don't be salty. Bateman coming in as a rookie and getting more targets than a WR1 according to this thread, is a statement. Bateman has all the analytics and fits Lamar's play style perfectly. Like I said, hope you sold Brown shares, his value about to drop.

What's encouraging was his usage, not the box score.

They threw to him in crucial situations (3rd down) and getting him touches was clearly a part of the gameplan.

He obviously has just scratched the surface of his potential in this offense (Lamar's 1st INT also came on a target to him) and that's to be expected from a rookie who missed a lot of practice time.. but for those that were high on Bateman this was pretty close to the best case scenario for his debut.

LAC's defense has smothered WRs so far this season (2nd fewest points surrendered to WRs) and the shootout between two high powered offenses never materialized.. still too early to tell which of these guys is going to emerge but at this point I'd probably lean Bateman.

They both will get their share. Watkins and Bateman play the same role. Hollywood plays a different position. Nothing is going to change, IMO. Watkins is the one who will most likely lose out. Hollywood was fingertips away from a 20 plus yard TD today. I don't see any negative for either player being on the other side of each other. I see Watkins as the eventual loser.

[gogobradyarm]

Guys, go buy Duvernay for 90% of the production of Brown/Bateman at 10% of the price.

Classic box score analysis

Don't be salty. Bateman coming in as a rookie and getting more targets than a WR1 according to this thread, is a statement. Bateman has all the analytics and fits Lamar's play style perfectly. Like I said, hope you sold Brown shares, his value about to drop.

What's encouraging was his usage, not the box score.

They threw to him in crucial situations (3rd down) and getting him touches was clearly a part of the gameplan.

He obviously has just scratched the surface of his potential in this offense (Lamar's 1st INT also came on a target to him) and that's to be expected from a rookie who missed a lot of practice time.. but for those that were high on Bateman this was pretty close to the best case scenario for his debut.

LAC's defense has smothered WRs so far this season (2nd fewest points surrendered to WRs) and the shootout between two high powered offenses never materialized.. so Marquise having a down game was somewhat expected. Still too early to tell which of these guys is going to emerge but at this point I'd probably lean Bateman.

Agree on all your points. Cheers!

[FantasyFreak]

Out targeted by the rookie in his debut. Hope you sold high on Brown.

5 to 5 now.

On a day where the Ravens are up 28 and Lamar has 167 passing yards.

I don't see how anyone can take analysis of one game, and 6 targets from a WR as proof on anything on the effect of another player. Talk about a small sample size trap. It's funny to me, that people want to read so much into a game where Hollywood had 5 targets, and just missed a TD. He had 5 target games before Bateman played. If people want to devalue Hollywood for some reason, sign me up for being a buyer.

[gogobradyarm]

Guys, go buy Duvernay for 90% of the production of Brown/Bateman at 10% of the price.

Classic box score analysis

Don't be salty. Bateman coming in as a rookie and getting more targets than a WR1 according to this thread, is a statement. Bateman has all the analytics and fits Lamar's play style perfectly. Like I said, hope you sold Brown shares, his value about to drop.

LOL. I can't take you seriously, man. Your ownership bias dictates pretty much every opinion I see from you. Taking results from 1 game to fit your narrative.

Your ownership bias barb would make sense if I didn't watch football or blindly rooted for players, but the only stake I had in the game is scouting the guy and believing in him (which is why I acquired him). If you think I have blind owner bias, then you're mistaken.

I've been banging the drum for Bateman for a long time. I also started the Jefferson parade extremely early last year, when people were saying they would rather have Michael Thomas because he was a proven asset.

Bateman is the next big thing, and while Brown isn't bad, he is being outclassed the first game by a rookie. But hey, if you feel otherwise, it probably is ownership bias

[gogobradyarm]

Out targeted by the rookie in his debut. Hope you sold high on Brown.

5 to 5 now.

On a day where the Ravens are up 28 and Lamar has 167 passing yards.

I don't see how anyone can take analysis of one game, and 6 targets from a WR as proof on anything on the effect of another player. Talk about a small sample size trap. It's funny to me, that people want to read so much into a game where Hollywood had 5 targets, and just missed a TD. He had 5 target games before Bateman played. If people want to devalue Hollywood for some reason, sign me up for being a buyer.

It is far more than just the targets, that is simply a poke. The fact that a rookie came in, first game and did it, carries far more weight.

[FantasyFreak]

5 to 5 now.

On a day where the Ravens are up 28 and Lamar has 167 passing yards.

I don't see how anyone can take analysis of one game, and 6 targets from a WR as proof on anything on the effect of another player. Talk about a small sample size trap. It's funny to me, that people want to read so much into a game where Hollywood had 5 targets, and just missed a TD. He had 5 target games before Bateman played. If people want to devalue Hollywood for some reason, sign me up for being a buyer.

It is far more than just the targets, that is simply a poke. The fact that a rookie came in, first game and did it, carries far more weight.

It really doesn't carry any weight IMO. He is not getting any more targets than Watkins. Hollywood's target share won't change. With his role, he's going to have games of 5 targets. It's about the roles they both play. Hollywood's targets went 6, 10, 7, 5, 10 without Bateman. There is literally nothing to take away about Hollywood's role in the offense because a rookie got 6 targets, playing the role Watkins previously held. Watkins had 8,7,7,7,3 targets. Nothing has changed for Hollywood. The idea his role on the team has changed today is patently absurd.

[gogobradyarm]

I don't see how anyone can take analysis of one game, and 6 targets from a WR as proof on anything on the effect of another player. Talk about a small sample size trap. It's funny to me, that people want to read so much into a game where Hollywood had 5 targets, and just missed a TD. He had 5 target games before Bateman played. If people want to devalue Hollywood for some reason, sign me up for being a buyer.

It is far more than just the targets, that is simply a poke. The fact that a rookie came in, first game and did it, carries far more weight.

It really doesn't carry any weight IMO. He is not getting any more targets than Watkins. Hollywood's target share won't change. With his role, he's going to have games of 5 targets. It's about the roles they both play. Hollywood's targets went 6, 10, 7, 5, 10 without Bateman. There is literally nothing to take away about Hollywood's role in the offense because a rookie got 6 targets, playing the role Watkins previously held. Watkins had 8,7,7,7,3 targets. Nothing has changed for Hollywood. The idea his role on the team has changed today is patently absurd.

You're in denial my friend.

[gogobradyarm]

I don't see how anyone can take analysis of one game, and 6 targets from a WR as proof on anything on the effect of another player. Talk about a small sample size trap. It's funny to me, that people want to read so much into a game where Hollywood had 5 targets, and just missed a TD. He had 5 target games before Bateman played. If people want to devalue Hollywood for some reason, sign me up for being a buyer.

It is far more than just the targets, that is simply a poke. The fact that a rookie came in, first game and did it, carries far more weight.

It really doesn't carry any weight IMO. He is not getting any more targets than Watkins. Hollywood's target share won't change. With his role, he's going to have games of 5 targets. It's about the roles they both play. Hollywood's targets went 6, 10, 7, 5, 10 without Bateman. There is literally nothing to take away about Hollywood's role in the offense because a rookie got 6 targets, playing the role Watkins previously held. Watkins had 8,7,7,7,3 targets. Nothing has changed for Hollywood. The idea his role on the team has changed today is patently absurd.

Brown with lowest target count and yards on the season. We're going to brush that off as a coincidence and not because Bateman is playing? Sure, if you want to chalk it up as one week, i'm fine with that. That said, if you stand with my beliefs, you'll sell Brown while you can.

[Pac_Eddy]

It is far more than just the targets, that is simply a poke. The fact that a rookie came in, first game and did it, carries far more weight.

It really doesn't carry any weight IMO. He is not getting any more targets than Watkins. Hollywood's target share won't change. With his role, he's going to have games of 5 targets. It's about the roles they both play. Hollywood's targets went 6, 10, 7, 5, 10 without Bateman. There is literally nothing to take away about Hollywood's role in the offense because a rookie got 6 targets, playing the role Watkins previously held. Watkins had 8,7,7,7,3 targets. Nothing has changed for Hollywood. The idea his role on the team has changed today is patently absurd.

Brown with lowest target count and yards on the season. We're going to brush that off as a coincidence and not because Bateman is playing? Sure, if you want to chalk it up as one week, i'm fine with that. That said, if you stand with my beliefs, you'll sell Brown while you can.

The Ravens were up big and running a lot. That's got to be a factor.

[Anteaters]

The idea his role on the team has changed today is patently absurd.

A greater truth has never been told.

[gogobradyarm]

It really doesn't carry any weight IMO. He is not getting any more targets than Watkins. Hollywood's target share won't change. With his role, he's going to have games of 5 targets. It's about the roles they both play. Hollywood's targets went 6, 10, 7, 5, 10 without Bateman. There is literally nothing to take away about Hollywood's role in the offense because a rookie got 6 targets, playing the role Watkins previously held. Watkins had 8,7,7,7,3 targets. Nothing has changed for Hollywood. The idea his role on the team has changed today is patently absurd.

Brown with lowest target count and yards on the season. We're going to brush that off as a coincidence and not because Bateman is playing? Sure, if you want to chalk it up as one week, i'm fine with that. That said, if you stand with my beliefs, you'll sell Brown while you can.

The Ravens were up big and running a lot. That's for to be a factor.

Can agree there. Bateman had 4 catches, all of which went for first downs. We may see this offense evolve with him. While Brown still has a role, he isn't going to be a ball control target, he is a field spreader and that carries less weight in PPR.

[Cameron Giles]

Brown with lowest target count and yards on the season. We're going to brush that off as a coincidence and not because Bateman is playing? Sure, if you want to chalk it up as one week, i'm fine with that. That said, if you stand with my beliefs, you'll sell Brown while you can.

The Ravens were up big and running a lot. That's for to be a factor.

Can agree there. Bateman had 4 catches, all of which went for first downs. We may see this offense evolve with him. While Brown still has a role, he isn't going to be a ball control target, he is a field spreader and that carries less weight in PPR.

Brown gets open at will, which obviously has a lot of value in the NFL. He is not just a deep threat. Bateman and Brown do different things and can co-exist. I'm confused as to why this has to be a one or the other thing.

Like I'll keep saying, the person most affected by Bateman getting into the mix...is Watkins.

[Pac_Eddy]

Brown gets open, but it takes him a second to get up to speed, so his best area is the mid to deep range. He's not like Adam Thielen or Julian Edelman, both of whom create space in the first half second and can thrive in the short range. I think this pushes the "deep threat" mindset when some think of Brown.