Brandin Cooks - What's Not To Love?

[jaruss02]

For the record the avg receptions for a 1st round rookie WR is 41 (per rotoworld). Cooks would have to more than double the average as the third receiving option (at best) on the Saints team. Seriously...too much koolaid man!! Boldin's situation was entirely different. He came to a team that resembled a pile of bleep - there was nobody on that Cardinals team in 2002. This is a much different situation for Cooks. A bold prediction might be 75 receptions, a 100 is complete nuts! But if you end up being right, then my hats off to you.

Long term I do like him to regulary catch 90 balls a season though.

[Jimmy Jones]

For the record the avg receptions for a 1st round rookie WR is 41 (per rotoworld). Cooks would have to more than double the average as the third receiving option (at best) on the Saints team. Seriously...too much koolaid man!! Boldin's situation was entirely different. He came to a team that resembled a pile of bleep - there was nobody on that Cardinals team in 2002. This is a much different situation for Cooks. A bold prediction might be 75 receptions, a 100 is complete nuts! But if you end up being right, then my hats off to you.

Long term I do like him to regulary catch 90 balls a season though.

I completely agree, anyone who is drafting him and expecting him to start year one is going to be disappointed. There's a chance he puts up WR3 numbers but it's not likely. I'm not sure why we're even discussing the year 1 value of a WR on a dynasty site though anyways. There's a lot more valuable things to discuss about Brandin Cooks than the projection of rookie year statistics.

[guyatwork37]

For the record the avg receptions for a 1st round rookie WR is 41 (per rotoworld). Cooks would have to more than double the average as the third receiving option (at best) on the Saints team. Seriously...too much koolaid man!! Boldin's situation was entirely different. He came to a team that resembled a pile of bleep - there was nobody on that Cardinals team in 2002. This is a much different situation for Cooks. A bold prediction might be 75 receptions, a 100 is complete nuts! But if you end up being right, then my hats off to you.

Long term I do like him to regulary catch 90 balls a season though.

I completely agree, anyone who is drafting him and expecting him to start year one is going to be disappointed. There's a chance he puts up WR3 numbers but it's not likely. I'm not sure why we're even discussing the year 1 value of a WR on a dynasty site though anyways. There's a lot more valuable things to discuss about Brandin Cooks than the projection of rookie year statistics.

Because you started a thread about a specific player and inevitebly the discussion would lead to year one production in addition to dynasty value?

[Jfever]

I honestly don't think 60-80 receptions is that crazy. Admittedly, I do own him in one league but I won't be depending on anything. The situation Cooks got drafted into is like no other in the NFL. Simply put there are 150 targets that will have to be accounted for and unless you think the Saints are going to go away from what they are known for; he is the quickest/fastest, most sure handed, hardest working, most talented wr competing for those unspoken for targets - albeit he is a rookie. I'm quite sure long term the owners that drafted Cooks will be happy to have made that decision.

[Water Buffalo]

...average as the third receiving option (at best) on the Saints team.

I have to ask - other than Graham, who is this other receiving option that is automatically making Cooks the 3rd option? Old man Colston and his bum knees? And even if someone was willing to concede that he was going to automatically be the 3rd option behind Colston, something I certainly disagree with, who else is even in the picture that concerns you enough to say "at best"?

The Saints have already flat out said that they're going to be using Cooks in a Sproles like fashion in addition to lining him up out wide. Sproles has just as many receptions over the last 3 years as Colston does. I don't like the Saints and I don't like Sean Payton, but I'm certainly willing to admit that they've been an offensive juggernaut for quite some time now, and a large part of that is Payton's ability to get the ball to his playmakers in creative ways. I have zero doubt that Payton and the Saints are going to properly utilize Cooks and get him the ball.

[jaruss02]

I have to ask - other than Graham, who is this other receiving option that is automatically making Cooks the 3rd option? Old man Colston and his bum knees? And even if someone was willing to concede that he was going to automatically be the 3rd option behind Colston, something I certainly disagree with, who else is even in the picture that concerns you enough to say "at best"?

Yes, Colston. So what if he is old, he is still a veteran big bodied WR who understands the offense. He is clearly the next option in the passing game - that is not really a debate. I would even consider Stills to get a fair number of targets - but as an earlier poster noted, Stills is a lo-life no talent hack in comparison to Cooks...right...

[clarion contrarion]

he is being massively overrated ... of the last 10 years of PAC10 / PAC 12 pass catchers for guys that finished in the top 20 in rec yards .... 3 guys have had any real fantasy football impact for more than a brief spurt and only 1 is a wr
the jury is still out on keenan allen marqise lee and perhaps robert woods ..... USC steve smith was terrific for about 1 year

the 3 guys gronkenstein , reggie bush and the wr desean jackson .... he is superior to cooks and hasn't approached the kind of numbers people seem to think cooks will put up - delusional is what I see , what I know about brees is he is a star maker and he throws to the open guys mostly w/o discrimination , add to the soup the fact that OSU is on the ignorant system whereby he is already missing time which will only retard his development . People projecting big production may be overlooking the fact that at his size he may not stand up to the punishment that comes along with that workload.
I see likely 55ish catches for 700 yards and maybe a 5 td ceiling this year anyone counting on more than that is playing with fire.

[DynastyDog]

Cooks fell to the 2.1 in our PPR/IDP Draft. I could not click the Pick fast enough.

[Pac_Eddy]

Am I the only one getting tired of seeing the phrase "manufacture touches"? WTF is that even supposed to mean? They design plays for you? They try to get your the ball?

It means they design plays for you where it's real easy to get the ball into your hands. Handoffs, pitches, bubble screens. Usually done when the player isn't getting routes done right downfield and can't be relied upon for a lot of targets deeper. See: Patterson, Harvin, Austin.

I understand all the positives for Cooks, but every year there are over-hyped rookie WRs that vastly under perform. I'm just saying temper your expectations for years 1 & 2. Few rookies put up enough consistent points to be startable in fantasy football. Colston, Graham, Stills, Morgan & Pierre Thomas will handle targets until Cooks is ready. Maybe that's this year, but I wouldn't be on it.

[Loss Prevention]

This looks eerily familiar to the Tavon Austin threads of last year. He was to be "heavily" involved in the offense. Then something happened to the top 10 selection. He played like a rookie. Coaches say lots of things during the offseason. Like...we are going to feed Spiller until he vomits or Trent Richardson is our guy and Norv can't wait to work with him. We can't be selective in what we deem coachspeak. I'll believe it when I see it. Personally, I don't see him putting up WR2 numbers. Not yet. He will likely go through the same growing pains every other rookie has gone through in the history of the NFL. There is a reason the average is only 45 receptions for rookies. It's not an easy thing to do. There have been plenty of receivers in pass happy offenses with less traffic (Graham, Colston, Stills, Thomas). If he exceeds that, great. But I wouldn't go expecting it. That is rookie over-excitement at its finest. Just because he is playing a Sproles-like role doesnt mean he is Sproles. We're talking about a seasoned veteran who understood the nuances of the pro game and offense versus a rookie who has never faced an NFL DB. Let's be realistic and temper expectations. For all rookies.

[Krang]

Am I the only one getting tired of seeing the phrase "manufacture touches"? WTF is that even supposed to mean? They design plays for you? They try to get your the ball? Well that's everyone worth drafting, innit? Unless someone can make this seemingly asinine phrase make a little more sense to me then I am officially disregarding everyone who uses it... same as people who start or finish a rant by saying "real talk".

Woo-hoo, someone else who feels the same about that phrase as I do!

I really do not understand how "manufactured touches" = fantasy dud, it makes no sense.

[Pac_Eddy]

Am I the only one getting tired of seeing the phrase "manufacture touches"? WTF is that even supposed to mean? They design plays for you? They try to get your the ball? Well that's everyone worth drafting, innit? Unless someone can make this seemingly asinine phrase make a little more sense to me then I am officially disregarding everyone who uses it... same as people who start or finish a rant by saying "real talk".

Woo-hoo, someone else who feels the same about that phrase as I do!

I really do not understand how "manufactured touches" = fantasy dud, it makes no sense.

Manufactured touches do not necessarily equal fantasy dud. It is evidence that a WR is not experienced enough in the offense to be trusted to run the full route tree as a starting WR. They start using run plays & other touches real close to the line of scrimmage because they want to get the ball into his hands, though.

[Water Buffalo]

Am I the only one getting tired of seeing the phrase "manufacture touches"? WTF is that even supposed to mean? They design plays for you? They try to get your the ball? Well that's everyone worth drafting, innit? Unless someone can make this seemingly asinine phrase make a little more sense to me then I am officially disregarding everyone who uses it... same as people who start or finish a rant by saying "real talk".

Woo-hoo, someone else who feels the same about that phrase as I do!

I really do not understand how "manufactured touches" = fantasy dud, it makes no sense.

I feel the same way about it as both of you do. I understand what people are trying to say by using it, but I just don't see how getting the ball into the hands of your best players is a bad thing - especially if they are productive with those touches.

Were the touches that Sproles got "manufactured"? The way that people use the phrase, I'd say they were. If Cooks gets used as a WR and also has his touches "manufactured" in a Sproles like manner, I'd be perfectly happy with that if I owned Cooks.

[Jimmy Jones]

By "manufactured touches" are you guys referring to screen passes?

[mercykiller]

Getting pretty hard to ignore the daily reports of absolute domination from this guy. Rookie wrs rarely ever dominate. Can cooks buck the trend? Discuss