Your Safest Bet Remains a 1st Round TE

[wickerkat1212]

LOL. Yeah, I'm not sure what I'm taking away from this thread aside from the fact that I'd like to own an elite TE.

[Bronco Billy]

Alright, just to clarify a bit at least how I calculate value using Worst-starter method as far as the values between TE and WR.

First, the assumptions. These are different for all leagues and value is league dependent. If our league was a 12 team league, we start 2 WRs required and 1 TE required with 2 flex spots, 1 of which can be a TE. Our scoring is graduated ppr (to enhance TE value as well as diminish RB receiving points) so WRs get 1 ppr and TEs get 1.5 ppr.

I also use the top 3 at each position as well as bottom 3 at each position and average to reduce the effects of an outlier. I also use 3 years data so have more robust data sets as well as looking for trends. So with WRs I’m looking the average of WRs 1-3 vs WRs 22-24 (start 2 WRs in a 12 team league meaning WR24 is the worst starter) against the average of TEs 1-3 vs TEs 10-12 (start 1 TE meaning TE12 is the worst starter). For those of you wondering about flex, that would be WR25 and lower thrown into a pool with TE13 and lower as well as RBs.

Now, FWIW this is very simplistic and I actually get more into the weeds but for our purposes here this will do to understand and assess value.

3 year data WRs 1-3 averaged 24.19 ppg. WRs 22-24 averaged 14.59 ppg. That means top WR value is 24.19-14.59 = 9.6 ppg

3 year data TEs 1-3 averaged 18.73 ppg. TEs 10-12 averaged 12.23 ppg. That means top TE value is 18.73-12.23 = 6.5 ppg

So WRs absolutely outscore equivalent number TE. The question though is when do my top TEs values become equivalent to WRs? So I look at WR scoring where they hit that 6.5 ppg value, which is going to the the lower end WR scores (14.59 ppw) plus the 6.5 ppw top TE value, or in other words the WRs that are averaging around 21.1 ppw.

That means when I’m looking at equivalent value, that is when my top 3 TE has as much scoring difference over the TE10-12 group as my WR5 has over my WR22-24. So when I’m looking for equivalent value I should be willing to trade my WR5 for an opponents’ TE2. That’s a fair trade.

However, when I get to come up against someone who doesn’t understand value like OS doesn’t, I may offer up my guy who is WR12 for his TE2 and he’ll trade that thinking he’s going to score more points than me when I’m actually coming out ahead because I’m getting better value and I’ll outscore my opponents H2H by more with my TE differential.

That’s how value works. It allows you to compare different starting positions by how much each will outscore your opponents at each position vs their players at that position.

[Orenthal Shames]

Alright, just to clarify a bit at least how I calculate value using Worst-starter method as far as the values between TE and WR.

First, the assumptions. These are different for all leagues and value is league dependent. If our league was a 12 team league, we start 2 WRs required and 1 TE required with 2 flex spots, 1 of which can be a TE. Our scoring is graduated ppr (to enhance TE value as well as diminish RB receiving points) so WRs get 1 ppr and TEs get 1.5 ppr.

I also use the top 3 at each position as well as bottom 3 at each position and average to reduce the effects of an outlier. I also use 3 years data so have more robust data sets as well as looking for trends. So with WRs I’m looking the average of WRs 1-3 vs WRs 22-24 (start 2 WRs in a 12 team league meaning WR24 is the worst starter) against the average of TEs 1-3 vs TEs 10-12 (start 1 TE meaning TE12 is the worst starter). For those of you wondering about flex, that would be WR25 and lower thrown into a pool with TE13 and lower as well as RBs.

Now, FWIW this is very simplistic and I actually get more into the weeds but for our purposes here this will do to understand and assess value.

3 year data WRs 1-3 averaged 24.19 ppg. WRs 22-24 averaged 14.59 ppg. That means top WR value is 24.19-14.59 = 9.6 ppg

3 year data TEs 1-3 averaged 18.73 ppg. TEs 10-12 averaged 12.23 ppg. That means top TE value is 18.73-12.23 = 6.5 ppg

So WRs absolutely outscore equivalent number TE. The question though is when do my top TEs values become equivalent to WRs? So I look at WR scoring where they hit that 6.5 ppg value, which is going to the the lower end WR scores (14.59 ppw) plus the 6.5 ppw top TE value, or in other words the WRs that are averaging around 21.1 ppw.

That means when I’m looking at equivalent value, that is when my top 3 TE has as much scoring difference over the TE10-12 group as my WR5 has over my WR22-24. So when I’m looking for equivalent value I should be willing to trade my WR5 for an opponents’ TE2. That’s a fair trade.

However, when I get to come up against someone who doesn’t understand value like OS doesn’t, I may offer up my guy who is WR12 for his TE2 and he’ll trade that thinking he’s going to score more points than me when I’m actually coming out ahead because I’m getting better value and I’ll outscore my opponents H2H by more with my TE differential.

That’s how value works. It allows you to compare different starting positions by how much each will outscore your opponents at each position vs their players at that position.

Wait, so a scoring system tailored to increase TE scoring (1.5 TE ppr) bolsters their value?!? Groundbreaking work BB. Thank you for your service.

[Bronco Billy]

Alright, just to clarify a bit at least how I calculate value using Worst-starter method as far as the values between TE and WR.

First, the assumptions. These are different for all leagues and value is league dependent. If our league was a 12 team league, we start 2 WRs required and 1 TE required with 2 flex spots, 1 of which can be a TE. Our scoring is graduated ppr (to enhance TE value as well as diminish RB receiving points) so WRs get 1 ppr and TEs get 1.5 ppr.

I also use the top 3 at each position as well as bottom 3 at each position and average to reduce the effects of an outlier. I also use 3 years data so have more robust data sets as well as looking for trends. So with WRs I’m looking the average of WRs 1-3 vs WRs 22-24 (start 2 WRs in a 12 team league meaning WR24 is the worst starter) against the average of TEs 1-3 vs TEs 10-12 (start 1 TE meaning TE12 is the worst starter). For those of you wondering about flex, that would be WR25 and lower thrown into a pool with TE13 and lower as well as RBs.

Now, FWIW this is very simplistic and I actually get more into the weeds but for our purposes here this will do to understand and assess value.

3 year data WRs 1-3 averaged 24.19 ppg. WRs 22-24 averaged 14.59 ppg. That means top WR value is 24.19-14.59 = 9.6 ppg

3 year data TEs 1-3 averaged 18.73 ppg. TEs 10-12 averaged 12.23 ppg. That means top TE value is 18.73-12.23 = 6.5 ppg

So WRs absolutely outscore equivalent number TE. The question though is when do my top TEs values become equivalent to WRs? So I look at WR scoring where they hit that 6.5 ppg value, which is going to the the lower end WR scores (14.59 ppw) plus the 6.5 ppw top TE value, or in other words the WRs that are averaging around 21.1 ppw.

That means when I’m looking at equivalent value, that is when my top 3 TE has as much scoring difference over the TE10-12 group as my WR5 has over my WR22-24. So when I’m looking for equivalent value I should be willing to trade my WR5 for an opponents’ TE2. That’s a fair trade.

However, when I get to come up against someone who doesn’t understand value like OS doesn’t, I may offer up my guy who is WR12 for his TE2 and he’ll trade that thinking he’s going to score more points than me when I’m actually coming out ahead because I’m getting better value and I’ll outscore my opponents H2H by more with my TE differential.

That’s how value works. It allows you to compare different starting positions by how much each will outscore your opponents at each position vs their players at that position.

Wait, so a scoring system tailored to increase TE scoring (1.5 TE ppr) bolsters their value?!? Groundbreaking work BB. Thank you for your service.

I am completely unsurprised that that is what you took away from that explanation.

[Orenthal Shames]

Do people need an explanation of value? Production over replacement at acquisition cost is fantasy 101.

The original statement was safety and value are not synonymous. We are looking for predictive, actionable advantages. Simply drafting first round TEs at cost hasn't show to be that.

[Bronco Billy]

Do people need an explanation of value? Production over replacement at acquisition cost is fantasy 101.

The original statement was safety and value are not synonymous. We are looking for predictive, actionable advantages. Simply drafting first round TEs at cost hasn't show to be that.

You clearly needed an understanding of value because your repeated statements made it clear that you did not.

My intent was not to use my league as the determinant of value. If you read in the first part, I made it clear that value is different from league to league. I provided a go-by so that people - like you - could go into their league database and in about 5 minutes figure out what the value of TEs are in their league. Then they can make their own judgment about how they want to deal with the position on their team.

You could have done that instead of posting your snarky comment and then come back with your information and added constructively to the conversation but chose not to. Personally I don’t care about how you deal with the position on your team, but I do care when someone posts such egregious misinformation as you did and then continue to rebut others who have done some thorough research and have some solid conclusions, as your misperception not only throws shade on those who do the good work but can also potentially affect readers who are trying to learn how to improve their FF experience.

With that, I’ll step aside and let others move this thread forward. I was enjoying reading the work done by some and had no intention of posting until you repeatedly posted your incorrect position in an effort to diminish their work - to what end I can’t begin to guess.

[smbkrypt24]

Alright, just to clarify a bit at least how I calculate value using Worst-starter method as far as the values between TE and WR.

First, the assumptions. These are different for all leagues and value is league dependent. If our league was a 12 team league, we start 2 WRs required and 1 TE required with 2 flex spots, 1 of which can be a TE. Our scoring is graduated ppr (to enhance TE value as well as diminish RB receiving points) so WRs get 1 ppr and TEs get 1.5 ppr.

I also use the top 3 at each position as well as bottom 3 at each position and average to reduce the effects of an outlier. I also use 3 years data so have more robust data sets as well as looking for trends. So with WRs I’m looking the average of WRs 1-3 vs WRs 22-24 (start 2 WRs in a 12 team league meaning WR24 is the worst starter) against the average of TEs 1-3 vs TEs 10-12 (start 1 TE meaning TE12 is the worst starter). For those of you wondering about flex, that would be WR25 and lower thrown into a pool with TE13 and lower as well as RBs.

Now, FWIW this is very simplistic and I actually get more into the weeds but for our purposes here this will do to understand and assess value.

3 year data WRs 1-3 averaged 24.19 ppg. WRs 22-24 averaged 14.59 ppg. That means top WR value is 24.19-14.59 = 9.6 ppg

3 year data TEs 1-3 averaged 18.73 ppg. TEs 10-12 averaged 12.23 ppg. That means top TE value is 18.73-12.23 = 6.5 ppg

So WRs absolutely outscore equivalent number TE. The question though is when do my top TEs values become equivalent to WRs? So I look at WR scoring where they hit that 6.5 ppg value, which is going to the the lower end WR scores (14.59 ppw) plus the 6.5 ppw top TE value, or in other words the WRs that are averaging around 21.1 ppw.

That means when I’m looking at equivalent value, that is when my top 3 TE has as much scoring difference over the TE10-12 group as my WR5 has over my WR22-24. So when I’m looking for equivalent value I should be willing to trade my WR5 for an opponents’ TE2. That’s a fair trade.

However, when I get to come up against someone who doesn’t understand value like OS doesn’t, I may offer up my guy who is WR12 for his TE2 and he’ll trade that thinking he’s going to score more points than me when I’m actually coming out ahead because I’m getting better value and I’ll outscore my opponents H2H by more with my TE differential.

That’s how value works. It allows you to compare different starting positions by how much each will outscore your opponents at each position vs their players at that position.

Wait, so a scoring system tailored to increase TE scoring (1.5 TE ppr) bolsters their value?!? Groundbreaking work BB. Thank you for your service.

You are coming off as immature and not conducive to the discussion. If you disagree show it with statistics or counter points and not just tear someone down for showing the work they have put into the discussion.

[Mike11]

Bowers will be the TE __ overall as a rookie and I would only rather have the following TE’s over him in dynasty. Fill in the blanks.

[Jigga94]

Bowers will be the TE __ overall as a rookie and I would only rather have the following TE’s over him in dynasty. Fill in the blanks.

Everyone's favorite crowdsource rankings have TE as

Laporta
McBride/Kincaid/Hock/Andrews
Pitts
Njoku/Kelce/Kittle/Engram/etc

Personally, I'd put him with Pitts to start, but we know he's going to be ranked somewhere between Laporta and Andrews/Hock

[wickerkat1212]

Bowers will be the TE __ overall as a rookie and I would only rather have the following TE’s over him in dynasty. Fill in the blanks.

Everyone's favorite crowdsource rankings have TE as

Laporta
McBride/Kincaid/Hock/Andrews
Pitts
Njoku/Kelce/Kittle/Engram/etc

Personally, I'd put him with Pitts to start, but we know he's going to be ranked somewhere between Laporta and Andrews/Hock

This. It's going to come down to situation. We all see what ATL did to Pitts (and Bijan).

[Orenthal Shames]

These are the first round picks since 2000

1 Jeremy Shockey
2 Kyle Pitts **
3 Kellen Winslow
4 Noah Fant **
5 Brandon Pettigrew
6 Jermaine Gresham
7 Evan Engram
8 Dustin Keller
9 T.J. Hockenson **
10 Greg Olsen
11 Eric Ebron **
12 O.J. Howard **
13 Heath Miller
14 Dallas Clark
15 Vernon Davis
16 Ben Watson
17 Tyler Eifert **
18 Hayden Hurst **
19 David Njoku **
20 Marcedes Lewis
21 Daniel Graham
22 Dalton Kincaid **
23 Jerramy Stevens
24 Bubba Franks
25 Todd Heap
26 Anthony Becht

**Drafted in the last 10 years

4 of them hit 1000 yards receiving: Olsen, Winslow, Pitts, Clark

3 of them hit double digit TDs: Ebron, Davis, Clark

Looking at the past decade, of the ten drafted: Pitts, Ebron and Eifert hit elite ceilings (either 1000 or 10+ TDs). Aside from those singular strong years they were barely above replacement level for their careers. Much like Njoku in 2023. Hock has been solid. Engram has been better than average. The rest were replacement level or worse.

My point from the beginning was that drafting a first round rookie TE doesn't improve your chances of getting a true difference maker at the position, so when you factor in the cost being an early second or better in our drafts and the value over replacement being the least of any position, it's a floor play.

[Jigga94]

4 of them hit 1000 yards receiving: Olsen, Winslow, Pitts, Clark

3 of them hit double digit TDs: Ebron, Davis, Clark

Looking at the past decade, of the ten drafted: Pitts, Ebron and Eifert hit elite ceilings (either 1000 or 10+ TDs). Aside from those singular strong years they were barely above replacement level for their careers. Much like Njoku in 2023. Engram has been better than average. The rest were replacement level or worse.

My point from the beginning was that drafting a first round rookie TE doesn't improve your chances of getting a true difference maker at the position, so when you factor in the cost being an early second or better in our drafts and the value over replacement being the least of any position, it's a floor play.

To expand on this...

Clark's breakout: Year 5 (Year 6 & 7 were also good, fell off after)

Ebron: Year 5 (far and away his best year. Only time he hit top 12)

Vernon: Year 4 (5 & 6 were also good, fell off after)

Olsen: Year 3 (4 & 5 were down years, but had 5 excellent seasons after)

Winslow: Year 2

Pitts: Year 1 (but these past 2 have been rough)

So aside from Pitts, were people actually holding these guys that long? Their value had to be in the dumps. I wasn't playing dynasty in the Clark/Winslow era, but I distinctly remember taking Olsen very, very late in a start up right before that 5 year run.

[wickerkat1212]

I heard the rule with TEs is to hold them for three years, always. That it's the hardest position to adjust to in the NFL.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I heard the rule with TEs is to hold them for three years, always. That it's the hardest position to adjust to in the NFL.

Most elite TEs break out in year 2 or 3, so that could make sense

[Two Cents]

Why do we keep disrespecting Cole Kmet? The last 3 years he has been averaging about 60-600 and 4.....