Brutal helmet to knee hit on Gronk, likely severe injury

[stapel0]

So…where would we be taking Gronk in a startup right now?

Would any owner trade him for the 1.01 rookie pick?

Where would you have taken him last year? Would you have traded him for that last year?

I'd say his value is down a bit from last year's nebulous injury, but not a huge amount. Depends on how risk averse you are and what you think his injury history means going forward.

I think the position is so shallow, I'll be holding onto him, but trying to get more depth at the position (which I already knew I needed).

[waynesworld1234]

So…where would we be taking Gronk in a startup right now?

Would any owner trade him for the 1.01 rookie pick?

I would trade him for the 1.01 rookie pick, but I have unusual depth at the position and am in need of youth infusion.

[auggiedoggies]

So…where would we be taking Gronk in a startup right now?

Would any owner trade him for the 1.01 rookie pick?

Depends on the league I guess. I'm going to be in a 16 team TE Premium startup soon. I'm picking at 1.11. I won't touch him in the 1st round, but depending on who's there in the 2nd, I'll have to look at him. If he falls to the 3rd, I'm all over him I think.

I would still rather have Gronk then the 1.01. Personally, I think his value is similar to last offseason. I think a serious knee injury is actually less troublesome then a back injury or infection, simply due to the advances in modern science. It's not as big of a deal as it used to be, plus Gronk is still so young

[ccj]

So…where would we be taking Gronk in a startup right now?

Would any owner trade him for the 1.01 rookie pick?

Depends on the league I guess. I'm going to be in a 16 team TE Premium startup soon. I'm picking at 1.11. I won't touch him in the 1st round, but depending on who's there in the 2nd, I'll have to look at him. If he falls to the 3rd, I'm all over him I think.

I would still rather have Gronk then the 1.01. Personally, I think his value is similar to last offseason. I think a serious knee injury is actually less troublesome then a back injury or infection, simply due to the advances in modern science. It's not as big of a deal as it used to be, plus Gronk is still so young

I agree with this. The knee injury doesn't really bother me at all. Gronk's never been the fastest or most nimble. I see him coming back from this just fine. His ongoing back issues are more concerning to me.

[Cy23]

I'm late to this thread, but I have several thoughts:

1- On the tackle
Every time that I see it, I feel like it could have been prevented by Ward not hitting him directly in the knee. However, I've read plenty of people saying basically that he can't tackle Gronk any other way-- if he goes high, he won't take him down, and if he goes lower, he might not wrap him up or Gronk can hurdle him.

I personally hate all of these tackles (Cobb, Keller, etc.) and wish that they would relax some of the hits to the head penalties (clarify that neck/shoulders is legitimate) but add a penalty for aiming for the knee. I feel like if they had to tackle him above the knee at thigh level, these injuries would never happen. [Opponents to this idea will say that Ward won't be able to tackle Gronk at the thigh level]

2- On Gronk's injuries
Gronk isn't injury prone so much as he is just a big dude running very fast, and he doesn't give up. When you are that big, your joints can struggle to stay healthy (can't work out your joints like muscles), but this hasn't been his problem. Instead, his problem is that he is so much bigger than the DB's that they have to go low or tackle him awkwardly to bring him down. He hurt his knee on this play and everyone defends Ward by saying that he wouldn't be able to tackle him higher than the knee. In the playoffs against BAL, Pollard hurt his ankle because he couldn't take him down neatly and ended up rolling his ankle in the process. The forearm injury was a fluky injury caused by the sheer size of Gronk falling.

To avoid future injury, I think Gronk COULD lose some weight and be less of a beast. Defenders would be able to bring him down easier and it might not be so awkward for his body (or require hits to the knee). I think more importantly, Gronk needs to not fight for every extra yard every play and instead know when to take a hit and fall safely. If he can see he has the first down and is going to be tackled, try to go down gracefully. Save the heroics for when he needs them.


3- Gronk's future
I have no idea and don't own him in any dynasty leagues. I feel like he is the clear #2 TE when healthy, and the knee injury doesn't change that for me. However, his consistent injuries would scare me and I would value him as #4-6 or so because you also need to have a solid backup TE for when he is injured.

I wish him the best, I would like the rules to change to emphasize avoiding shots to the knee, and I worry as a Patriots fan that the Pats aren't Super Bowl contenders without Gronk.

[kiddragonsoft]

So you would knock gronk down a couple of spots for his injury-prone-ness, who would you place above him?
Julius? He's got injuries problems of his own, so does reed and his concussions. Cameron is too unpredictable because of his qb situation. I'm thinking gronk is still #2 te next year. With his youth I like him more than graham.

[seahawks506]

After Graham you could make an argument for any of Gronk, Thomas, Cameron, Reed, and VD. I'd have them ranked Graham, Cameron, Gronk, Thomas, Davis, Reed.

[Cy23]

So you would knock gronk down a couple of spots for his injury-prone-ness, who would you place above him?
Julius? He's got injuries problems of his own, so does reed and his concussions. Cameron is too unpredictable because of his qb situation. I'm thinking gronk is still #2 te next year. With his youth I like him more than graham.

I avoid the question by just valuing him as a quantity based on "#4-6 TE." To me, that means a mid to late first at minimum, but not the hefty surcharge that Gronk used to demand. [Used to be Graham/Gronk as top 2, Hernandez as #3, and then whichever TE you liked as #4. I traded Vernon Davis for the 1.08 last year and Finley for two firsts back when he had a lot of hype]

I've been trading Vernon Davis based on this premise for years, as he is clearly talented enough to be a top 6 TE but people continually get fed up with his inconsistency and trade him back in parts of larger deals. (I've traded him to the same owner at least twice, if not more, and I've had him on my team about 4 separate times. For example, in one league I traded for him from Team A, traded him to Team B, traded for him from Team B, traded him back to Team B, traded for him from Team B, traded him back to Team A. It is a cyclical thing)

Someone else wrote: I'd have them ranked Graham, Cameron, Gronk, Thomas, Davis, Reed.
I'd agree with this, with the idea that Cameron's inconsistency might be fixed by a QB and he doesn't have the health problems that Gronk has, whereas Thomas has the QB but is inconsistent due to the other mouths to feed. I might bump Rudolph up above Reed, as well, but that is based purely on potential and the belief that MIN will eventually get a QB.

[SpaderDude]

So, is the going rate for Gronk at this time a high 1st, 1st/player, multiple 1sts??? What are we looking at here?

[auggiedoggies]

So, is the going rate for Gronk at this time a high 1st, 1st/player, multiple 1sts??? What are we looking at here?

Honestly, if I could get Gronk for a high 1st, I would be buying him everywhere. Worth the risk in my opinion.

[preeti222]

the type of hit that if not illegal, should be made illegal...

[stapel0]

I've got Gronk in one league. I've debated what to do, but I think unless I can package him for Graham, I'm just going to sit on him. Even if he only plays half the games, he's a difference maker when he does. If you have a deep enough bench, as in a typical dynasty, you can manage around half-time players.