Mike Strachan...hype or real deal?

[FantasyFreak]

I tend to do things the BB way, but I also flip the script occasionally when a player doesn't pass the "eye" test. Sell on hype. For me, because I have been in contention for a long time (and most of my league is trade averse b/c they are afraid they will be on the "losing" side), the only young talent I can acquire is end of the round picks. However, I tend to trade my draft picks away in season to acquire assets at injury ridden positions, perpetually playing for this year. As such, it makes 0 sense for me to trade what might be an in season asset for a future pick, which contributes 0 to me winning this year. Plus, an asset in hand is always better than an unknown.

But if you flip future picks for in season assets, why would it not make sense to flip a guy like Strachan for a pick now? Sure he "might be an in season asset", but he also might be nothing. The pick will hold a more universal appeal for you to attempt to try and get that known productive asset at the time you require it, due to injury when you need it in season.

[murphysxm]

Strachan has looked fine; I just don't see some rare or abnormal set of circumstances, skills, or reception that is different from what we've seen in the past with hype late round prospects. If someone offers me a 3rd for him right now, I take it. If I miss out on some historical anomaly, then fine, but if I make that same decision every single offseason, the odds are in my favor to be right.

This may be 100% bias on my part, but I have seen him in person multiple times. He looks impressive on the field. Granted the Colts don't have a prototypical WR1 on their team to compare him to, but if you didn't know who was who and just watched the practices, he's the guy you would draft.

Big picture I don't like to get caught up in hype players, which is why I missed on Robinson and Gibson last year. I am firmly on the Strachan bandwagon this year though.

[Cameron Giles]

Strachan has looked fine; I just don't see some rare or abnormal set of circumstances, skills, or reception that is different from what we've seen in the past with hype late round prospects. If someone offers me a 3rd for him right now, I take it. If I miss out on some historical anomaly, then fine, but if I make that same decision every single offseason, the odds are in my favor to be right.

This may be 100% bias on my part, but I have seen him in person multiple times. He looks impressive on the field. Granted the Colts don't have a prototypical WR1 on their team to compare him to, but if you didn't know who was who and just watched the practices, he's the guy you would draft.

Big picture I don't like to get caught up in hype players, which is why I missed on Robinson and Gibson last year. I am firmly on the Strachan bandwagon this year though.

He looked fine in the preseason game I watched, but again... people take those few inches and go an entire mule with it. Looking like an NFL player ≠ perennial pro bowl potential

[Bronco Billy]

Like I said, if you are a 7th round or UDFA, teams have no incentive to care about your development unless you come out guns blazing and set the world on fire. Otherwise, they are going to bring in players who will push you down the depth chart.

You said this multiple times. I would like you to rationalize it for me.

My position is that coaches keep their jobs by winning. Part of winning is putting your best team on the field. The subset of that is to find your best performers at their respective job and then play them. If a coach is a good coach, why does he care where his best player was drafted, or if he is an UDFA? If his performance merits playing time, he gets on the field. If a player shows traits that appear to lead to good performance but that player needs experience to compete, then you roster him if they can play STs or put them on the practice squad if they can’t.

It’s not that complex. Once the pads go on, draft capital or lack of it means literally nothing in the face of performance. Draft capital might get a player more or less leash, as might be a known vet who has already proven their value, but ultimately it’s all about whether a player can or cannot perform at an NFL level and then how they perform in comparison to the guy standing next to them. This is a truth that you seem to want to deny for some reason.

[Bronco Billy]

He looked fine in the preseason game I watched, but again... people take those few inches and go an entire mule with it. Looking like an NFL player ≠ perennial pro bowl potential

This explains a lot, hyperbole aside. Do you only base your opinion on what you see in preseason games? I honestly don’t put much stock in them given how many starters sit and how dumbed down the Os and Ds are in many cases.

[jman3134]

I tend to do things the BB way, but I also flip the script occasionally when a player doesn't pass the "eye" test. Sell on hype. For me, because I have been in contention for a long time (and most of my league is trade averse b/c they are afraid they will be on the "losing" side), the only young talent I can acquire is end of the round picks. However, I tend to trade my draft picks away in season to acquire assets at injury ridden positions, perpetually playing for this year. As such, it makes 0 sense for me to trade what might be an in season asset for a future pick, which contributes 0 to me winning this year. Plus, an asset in hand is always better than an unknown.

But if you flip future picks for in season assets, why would it not make sense to flip a guy like Strachan for a pick now? Sure he "might be an in season asset", but he also might be nothing. The pick will hold a more universal appeal for you to attempt to try and get that known productive asset at the time you require it, due to injury when you need it in season.

If I could flip Strachan for a proven asset at a position of need, I would do it.

I believe that your approach is the rational perspective and something I did a lot of early on in my league (when most of all the leaguemates were acting as rational actors). The problem is the emotional/competitive aspect that has crept into my league with guys seeing my roster. Competitors in my league have looked at my roster and decided not to trade with me, or they seriously mis-value future picks. As a result, it has become impossible to flip my future picks for win-now players, as I have been trying to move my 2023 1st for quite a while. When this kind of a thing happens, the only type of deals I will be able to do are ones that capitalize on a hype building performance (like a Claypool 3 TD game). Or, I have to build a pipeline of future underhyped talent.

[jman3134]

He looked fine in the preseason game I watched, but again... people take those few inches and go an entire mule with it. Looking like an NFL player ≠ perennial pro bowl potential

This explains a lot, hyperbole aside. Do you only base your opinion on what you see in preseason games? I honestly don’t put much stock in them given how many starters sit and how dumbed down the Os and Ds are in many cases.

Sorry to jump in. I agree with your position in this, but I don't think he is saying all that. To your point, once the pads go on, this is the best way to evaluate players. The issue is that Strachan and similar guys have not yet played an NFL regular season snap. So, the point is, we have to offer a way by which we differentiate preseason hype warriors/the real deal. It is difficult, but not impossible imo.

Strachan, as you pointed out, possesses all the physical characteristics necessary to succeed at an NFL level and he is showing out against one of the NFL's top corners. I trust a top corner's assessment of a player on the field vs. coach and writer speak. This is what Strachan has that some of the others don't imo.

Many of the other preseason hype warriors possessed a fatal flaw, which prevented them from getting on the regular season field in the first place.

[straightcashhomie831]

I think this kid is just one of the ones that fell through the cracks due to his situation. One thing i keep hearing coaches talk about is how SMART he is. This kid knew he was going to be a wr at a young age and hes worked at it. I just learned his dad was also in the nfl. And you can see the natural ability he possess in his play. He doesn't look 6'5 running routes but he sure does when hes making a contested grab. I seen alot of hype and i was cautious about him but i really think this guy will be the best wr on indy. I wouldnt see for a 3rd but i would flip him for a 2nd. Heres a link about 4 months ago. Its an interview with him, darren mcfadden and patrick peterson. 16 min long but gives his background story.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... 5RtSYUS-3M

[dynastyninja]

I understand the hype. It should be tempered because 7th rounders who are 4th-5th on the depth chart are always a longshot, but he's got a lot of interesting things going for him (training camp/preseason hype, good size, family pedigree, competition ahead of him on the depth chart isn't "that" good).

[Bronco Billy]

He looked fine in the preseason game I watched, but again... people take those few inches and go an entire mule with it. Looking like an NFL player ≠ perennial pro bowl potential

This explains a lot, hyperbole aside. Do you only base your opinion on what you see in preseason games? I honestly don’t put much stock in them given how many starters sit and how dumbed down the Os and Ds are in many cases.

Sorry to jump in. I agree with your position in this, but I don't think he is saying all that. To your point, once the pads go on, this is the best way to evaluate players. The issue is that Strachan and similar guys have not yet played an NFL regular season snap. So, the point is, we have to offer a way by which we differentiate preseason hype warriors/the real deal. It is difficult, but not impossible imo.

Strachan, as you pointed out, possesses all the physical characteristics necessary to succeed at an NFL level and he is showing out against one of the NFL's top corners. I trust a top corner's assessment of a player on the field vs. coach and writer speak. This is what Strachan has that some of the others don't imo.

Many of the other preseason hype warriors possessed a fatal flaw, which prevented them from getting on the regular season field in the first place.

This wasn’t intended as an insult. It just helps me understand where his information comes from and how in depth it is. If his source of information is primarily or exclusively PS games then I understand his stance much better, and quite frankly in his position I’d probably think much more similarly.

Crap, I just reread my response here and see how it could be interpreted - it wasn’t meant to be condescending or insulting either.

[Needalife]

I just don't see him passing any of the top 4 WRs so his best outcome IMO is WR5 on the team. This is a long way from being inserted into your starting fantasy lineup. He'd have to earn the playing time (or more than 1 WR gets hurt) and then make enough plays to score fantasy points consistently. The Colts are also a team that loves to draft early WRs so I also don't see longevity in any way.

Personally, I'd cash in for a 4th or better in IDP or SF but I'd start by trying to get a 3rd if anyone was approaching me about him. Very few guys with his pedigree last and I'm just playing the odds. Even though I do like him, I'd rather have the roster spot plus some draft capital (essentially spending money) to play around with down the road.

[Cameron Giles]

Like I said, if you are a 7th round or UDFA, teams have no incentive to care about your development unless you come out guns blazing and set the world on fire. Otherwise, they are going to bring in players who will push you down the depth chart.

You said this multiple times. I would like you to rationalize it for me.

My position is that coaches keep their jobs by winning. Part of winning is putting your best team on the field. The subset of that is to find your best performers at their respective job and then play them. If a coach is a good coach, why does he care where his best player was drafted, or if he is an UDFA? If his performance merits playing time, he gets on the field. If a player shows traits that appear to lead to good performance but that player needs experience to compete, then you roster him if they can play STs or put them on the practice squad if they can’t.

It’s not that complex. Once the pads go on, draft capital or lack of it means literally nothing in the face of performance. Draft capital might get a player more or less leash, as might be a known vet who has already proven their value, but ultimately it’s all about whether a player can or cannot perform at an NFL level and then how they perform in comparison to the guy standing next to them. This is a truth that you seem to want to deny for some reason.

Because the NFL is a constant revolving door of talent, probably more so than any other league due to non-guaranteed contracts, injuries, and the amount of rookies who come into the league each season competing for a roster spot/already coming with a guaranteed spot.

Maybe "care" is the wrong word; that's my fault. I agree with you that coaches do care about every player.

I'll say that 7th round picks are so inconsequential, that their outcome is not prudent to a team's long-term success. So, if your 7th round CB doesn't make the team, or your 7th Round WR gets cut, it's no sweat. These players already have an overwhelmingly low chance of succeeding anyway. Year-to-year these players are in danger of losing their roster spot or being pushed further down the depth chart due to higher draft pedigree or a free agent signing.

[Cameron Giles]

He looked fine in the preseason game I watched, but again... people take those few inches and go an entire mule with it. Looking like an NFL player ≠ perennial pro bowl potential

This explains a lot, hyperbole aside. Do you only base your opinion on what you see in preseason games? I honestly don’t put much stock in them given how many starters sit and how dumbed down the Os and Ds are in many cases.

I think it's important for evaluating players depth players. Starters? Not really. Like you, there's more research that goes into evaluation than just watching a game on a FOX Broadcast. So, I think he looked fine, I just don't see his talent as some extraordinary case for a 7th round WR that we haven't seen before. I can think a lot of recent late round/UDFA athletic, tall WRs who had similar hype, if not more.

But like I said earlier. I can certainly see a scenario where he's a clear cut NFL WR for some years, but I get lost when his potential is automatically assumed to be the biggest of anomalies.

[Spitfire McGee]

Yeah that is why it is fine, imho, to do both. IE you use the majority of your roster spots for players whose odds you believer are most likely to succeed. But you leave a spot or 2 (depending on league size) for guys you believe in every year just in case (and determine when to cut bait). As we all know, you cannot hit a HR if you do not swing - but at the same time the majority of pitches you swing at should be in the strike zone.

But regardless you cannot own a Cruz or Thielen if you do not take the time to bet on the occasional long shot you have interest in - well at least not at the cheap cost - you can always buy them later for a lot more I suppose.

In any case there are always tiebreakers that can come into play. If Strachan was on say the Bengals or the Steelers would there be as much interest - doubtful. Talent can trump situation when pedigree is involved, but when dealing with players like Strachan situation is huge in terms of opportunity.

Again....I'm not saying to not roster long shots. We all do it. Strachan is clearly worth a roster spot at this time and I thought he looked fine in the game I saw.

I'm saying that trading hype like him off coachspeak for small returns is one of the easiest ways to add small wins to your team. Yes, every now and then, you will miss out on Cruz or Colston, or whoever. But, more times than not, you will get ahead, because those small assets can sweeten other deals and make your team better steadily each season.

There's no science to the hits, but there is a science to the misses...and those misses are overwhelming.

That’s right. There is no science to hits. There is only observation and gathering evidence.

This isn’t advocating picking up every late round and udfa player with the hope of having 1 or 2 break through. This is determining which guys have highly desirable characteristics but have dropped significantly for a reason.

Strachan is a great case in point. Tremendous physical attributes and athleticism, outstanding production at his level of play, and tape shows he has some developed receiving skills. He dropped because he was a Dll player and because he didn’t have a 2020 season when all Dll schools stopped playing football because of COVID, and because of his age. That’s reason for you to dismiss him completely. That reason for me to be intrigued.

So a little legwork in January and February put this guy on the radar over a whole bunch of other players likely to either go very late or be UDFAs. Then he does end up getting drafted to a team that has enough room in its WR corps that it’s more likely he’ll get some opportunity in OTAs and TC. That makes him a guy that I will burn a 6th-8th round pick on in our FF draft.

Now we get to see film of him competing against NFL level players as well as getting feedback from others observing him. It’s way more than just coachspeak that you allude to. We can see him matched up against players who will actually start in regular season NFL games and he’s consistently getting wins against them in multiple ways. He’s beating hard corners and gap coverage. He’s using his body to shield. He’s running by CBs. He’s sinking his hips and making tight cuts that give him 2 yds of separation - all against proven starters or 1st round picks. Feedback from beat writers with their TC film clips and feedback from teammates supports the coachspeak - he’s not just flashing, he’s making these plays regularly day in and day out. He’s developed consistency in his play. Then you get feedback from guys like Steve Smith, Reggie Wayne, and Chad Johnson and he’s caught their attention. Then he starts getting reps with the first string offense.

So a guy like me is at the point where there’s no way I’m trading out my 2021 7th round selection for a 2022 3rd round unknown. Not with that body of supporting evidence. You don’t sell off what is now a potential Colston or Rod Smith. Sure, he still might fail and could end up with no meaningful FF impact - just like that future 2nd rounder that you used Strachan and 2 or 3 other trades to get - but I’ve got a large body of evidence that indicates that he might be the real deal, unlike that 2022 2nd rounder that you made all those trades to finally acquire.

If I’m wrong, all it’s cost me is a past 7th round pick and the time used to investigate him - which I enjoy doing anyhow. Worst case it cost me that 2022 2nd rounder when I didn’t trade him away when I could have given up him and other unknown assets to acquire in hope I strike it rich on an unknown next year. But if you’re wrong, you’ve lost any chance of acquiring a meaningful FF asset that is now improving my team that I’m going to use against you in league play for the next few years, or you’re going to have to give me some other meaningful asset to get him that again I’ll use against you in league play.

It’s just a matter of choice how we acquire these assets. I like to do the research and try to mine the diamond in the piles of crap. You choose to try to acquire them later through trade after they’ve proven themselves and you’re forced to give up something else for them.

I’m fairly certain that your methodology of horse trading is just as enjoyable to you as my method of investigation and asset mining is to me. Obviously I like my way better, but it doesn’t make it superior to yours, nor does it make your methodology superior to mine.

I agree that the evidence is mounting. Players are going to fall through the cracks this year for obvious reasons. Scouting him would have been hard during a normal year, but it seems like he's answered the two biggest questions (how raw is he?, how will he fare against a much higher level of talent?) better than expected. There is no way the Colts could get away with putting him on the practice squad and the talent in front of him is ho-hum at best. I almost never swing on a player drafted this low or a UDFA, but when I do it's because extreme physical upside meets credible camp reports.

[Rondalebaby]

I’m pretty sure Chad Johnson and Steve Smith have anointed every rookie WR to lace a boot the last few years lol their praise means nothing.

I’m pretty sure that’s not the case, but if you can show me otherwise lol it would be appreciated.

He toasted Horn in a single random 1 v 1, a second for a player with his profile is daylight robbery.

You’re right right up to the point where you’re wrong. And his resume to date is a bit more extensive than that, not that I’d expect you to know that.

Some Chad Johnson quotes from last years class:

Henry Ruggs is going to own Vegas.

Jalen Reagor - watch the magician this season

KJ Hamler is a diamond, called him a WR1.

Not the greatest scout by the looks

Steve Smith works for NFL Network on their draft coverage, it’s literally his job to pump up rookies.

Explain his resume to me without the film grinder jargon. He caught a ball v Xavier Rhodes in practice? He got some reps with the ones like pretty much every wide receiver over the course of camp? He mossed a 6th round corner in a preseason game with the third string?