Just going off that injurypredictor site saying 60% of injury. I suppose there is a chance of suspension, being kindnapped or abducted by alientsGoddard wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 8:01 amAgree, it's all arbitrary which is why I wanted to follow it up with my own arbitrary numbers and point out that none of this means anything. And you keep bringing up the 40% chance that he stays healthy. Sure, let's say that's the actual percentage, but it's still not guaranteed that if he stays healthy he becomes a WR1. Me saying it was misleading was because you made it sound like that there's a 40% chance he stays healthy, meaning there's a 40% chance that he's a WR1. That's not the case. Either way, I think everyone will agree to disagree with Sammy and I don't expect anyone to change their minds on his value based on this thread.ArrylT wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 5:41 pmMeh all the numbers are arbitrary. I personally do not believe that there is a locked in 60% chance of Watkins getting injured versus say only a 20% chance for a different WR. Nor do I believe there is an locked 25% chance a late 1st rookie pick is a hit. It could be lower it could be higher. I just chose what I feel most people think is the perceived hit rate.Goddard wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 4:25 pm
These numbers seem very arbitrary. I don't know what the percentage is of late 1st panning out, but it's got to be higher than Sammy staying healthy AND putting up WR1 numbers. 40% of a full season of "potential" WR1 is also misleading. What's the percentage that he will be a WR1 if he's healthy? Maybe 50%? So that's 50% chance that he's a WR1 with a 40% chance of staying healthy all season? That probably puts his odds of staying healthy AND being a WR1 at something like 20%? That's less than the 25% you give for late 1sts panning out.
The point being made is that you're taking a risk either way. If you believe this 60% injury chance, then there is still a 40% chance the opposite occurs. If you believe most late 1sts have high bust rates, you still have a chance at a hit. Of course that all depends on what one calls a hit. To me Jordan Matthews was a hit based on where he was drafted & the WR2 & the WR3 seasons you got out of him. But for many he is an out and out bust.
It all depends on your expectations of production - be it stud / starter / depth or what.
After all for Watkins we're only talking about his 2019 season - and depending on ones definition of a fantasy hit, he has already hit (and the odds a player who has hit can hit again are I believe higher than the odds of someone who has not hit can hit at all).
Whereas for the rookie we're talking about a chance he hits 1x over the course of X # of years. That hit could be this year, or next, or 2021 or never.
Also since when is potential misleading? potential means possible - it doesnt mean guaranteed. If you or anyone else wishes to read into that that its guaranteed that is up to you. But for me it means exactly that. A chance at a potential WR1 season. So like I said each owenr has to do their own rationalizing. Do I gamble on the 40% chance he is healthy and can have a potential WR1 season this year, or do I gamble on the late 1st and the "25%" he pans out over the course of his career.
- I simply chose to assume that 60% injury chance meant 40% of no injury. So if someone believes that this 60% is legit, then the 40% should be legit as well. *shrugs*(not responding specifically to Goddard now)
And we wont know until 2020 (or beyond) which call is the right one. And it might not even be the one that has the best odds. I would assume the majority of owners polled at this exact time last year that the odds Lindsay would have 1000 yards after going UDFA would be like 5% or less.
Sometimes the right call is the safe call, but some times it is the risky path. The whole point of the boom/bust profile is that if you gamble the right amount and you get the boom you win big time. Drafting SB at 1.01 is not rocket science, but you're basically counting on Barkley to produce that top 5 RB season as a given. Late 1st selections historically are not always safe bets. Neither is Watkins perhaps but which one is going to have more potential impact on your roster?
Last year (17-18 season) in a fantasy hockey draft I took McKinnon in the 9th round of a draft (like selection 130). McKinnon at that point was basically like a Sammy Watkins - someone who had flashed plenty of potential, but for whatever reason (health or otherwise) had not had that elite season. There were plenty of safer floor guys I could have taken but you dont win without having some boom/bust guys.
That year he exploded. Was the 8th most productive player in the league. And I got him for a song. Needless to say in the 18-19 draft, he went in the 1st round.
Yes that was re-draft, and yes this is dynasty, but the same principle applies - decide what your risk tolerance is, and when/where to add those guys whose potential suggest boom.
In the end it is all up to every owner to decide their own risk assessment. Where each owner decides that cost is up to them. For some the shot of Damien Williams > than late 1st. For others it will be late 1st > Watkins. All I know is that there is a good chance he is going to be healthy, and there is a potential at a WR1 season. And you want these guys on your team when they blow up.
https://www.hockey-reference.com/player ... ina01.html
for those interested.
