Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
MichaelWeston

Thoughts: Trading Back, Burkhead, Drafting a TE

54 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

"Sometimes good TEs get injured so it's illogical to take a TE with a high draft pick" is probably the most illogical thing I've read in a long time.

Well no one wrote that. Sooooo. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MichaelWeston said:

Jimmy Graham is literally on another team because they thought he was done and traded him due to injury. 

The Saints were $16M over the salary cap. Graham had started all 16 games the 2 years prior to the trade, although he did play through a shoulder injury in the last year.

If they did trade him due to injury concerns, they made the wrong choice.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, happyrid said:

1. The study was over a number of years, not just one. If the average in the study was 12, then there were probably some years where the number was 10 and some where it was 14, etc. 

2. We haven't had the 2017 season yet, so 2017 rankings are irrelevant for now. Would be interesting to see what those numbers look like after the season though. 

3. The 2016 TE rankings had Gronk, Eifert, Antonio Gates, Dwayne Allen, Julius Thomas and Ladarius Green all highly ranked. Some of those guys are not ranked highly now because they missed part or most of the 2016 season. I don't have time to do the math on what the number ends up being and it depends upon when you take the ADP from because some of them got injured during preseason.

 

Would love to see a link.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see who the 1st round picks at TE have been over the lat 10-15 years and how they faired. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

3. I know that people have an interest in Howard but that seems pretty illogical overall. You want your first round pick to be a player that you can give 5 years and who you may want to give a long term contract to. TE is quickly becoming a position where everybody is hurt. All the top TEs have had serious injuries. An early investment at TE (and RB for the same reason) doesn't make a ton of sense. 

 

16 minutes ago, MichaelWeston said:

Well no one wrote that. Sooooo. 

Okay Mister "I didn't say EXACTLY that, word for word", but you did say exactly what is in the bold. How is that so far off of what I said? You literally said all the top TEs have had serious injury as the reason to not draft a TE with a 1st round pick. Those are your words. How is that any different than what I said, which is ""Sometimes good TEs get injured so it's illogical to take a TE with a high draft pick" when making a general quote of your thoughts in this thread? The theme of your posts in this thread is absolutely "good TEs get hurt so we shouldn't use a 1st rounder on one". If that's NOT your argument, why the fuck are all of your arguments "good TEs get hurt so we shouldn't use a 1st rounder on one" ?????????

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

Doesn't mean you can't disagree but it's certainly not overly hyperbolic to say Gronk, Reed, Graham and Eifert have injury histories. 

 

15 minutes ago, MichaelWeston said:

It would be interesting to see who the 1st round picks at TE have been over the lat 10-15 years and how they faired. 

Is it at least slightly amusing that none of Gronk, Reed, and Graham were 1st rounders?

Does this mean we should avoid 2nd and 3rd round TEs? :huh:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, no one is forcing anybody to want Howard @9 overall.

I just don't see the point in cherry picking stats and flat out making things up and calling people "illogical" because they think Howard would be an OK top 10 pick.

If a team in the top 10 feels that they want the #1 TE in the draft or that Howard is the clear BPA with their pick, then he'll go in the top 10 regardless of Rob Gronkowski's injury history. There are about a billion non-TEs you can point out and stats you can cherry pick as a reason to not draft other positions as well. Typically, TEs aren't top 10 picks, that's 100% accurate. However, they can be, as there aren't clear black and white rules of what to do in the NFL draft as there are tons of variables each year.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, omgdrdoom said:

Look, no one is forcing anybody to want Howard @9 overall.

I just don't see the point in cherry picking stats and flat out making things up and calling people "illogical" because they think Howard would be an OK top 10 pick.

If a team in the top 10 feels that they want the #1 TE in the draft or that Howard is the clear BPA with their pick, then he'll go in the top 10 regardless of Rob Gronkowski's injury history. There are about a billion non-TEs you can point out and stats you can cherry pick as a reason to not draft other positions as well. Typically, TEs aren't top 10 picks, that's 100% accurate. However, they can be, as there aren't clear black and white rules of what to do in the NFL draft as there are tons of variables each year.

I am not calling people illogical. I am saying that decision would be illogical. And then I pointed to the logic that I had, that is sound have you, that reinforces that. You are more than allowed to have a divergent opinion. 

Sure there are tons of variables. But there is a reason that not many top 10 TE picks have existed and so many first round TEs have busted. Ignoring history is what got all of those TEs drafted. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, omgdrdoom said:

 

Is it at least slightly amusing that none of Gronk, Reed, and Graham were 1st rounders?

Does this mean we should avoid 2nd and 3rd round TEs? :huh:

It is painfully obvious that you are not trying here. There are 2 components to this. 

1. Is that top TEs get injured at a greater rate than other positions

2. Is that TEs drafted highly bust at a very high rate. Often due to injuries. 

Those things don't have to be one in the same. They are 2 reasons not to draft a TE early. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, omgdrdoom said:

 

Okay Mister "I didn't say EXACTLY that, word for word", but you did say exactly what is in the bold. How is that so far off of what I said? You literally said all the top TEs have had serious injury as the reason to not draft a TE with a 1st round pick. Those are your words. How is that any different than what I said, which is ""Sometimes good TEs get injured so it's illogical to take a TE with a high draft pick" when making a general quote of your thoughts in this thread? The theme of your posts in this thread is absolutely "good TEs get hurt so we shouldn't use a 1st rounder on one". If that's NOT your argument, why the fuck are all of your arguments "good TEs get hurt so we shouldn't use a 1st rounder on one" ?????????

You change the logic with the word sometimes over all. If sometimes TEs get hurt than the logic is less. And that is the assumption you are working with despite the evidence. If always or almost always TEs get hurt then the logic changes. If TE's get hurt more often than other positions, then the logic changes. Those last 2 are closer to the truth than sometimes. 

You aren't going to beat me in a conversation on logic. It's simply not going to be done. Your welcome to your points here but you should probably tone things back a bit. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, MichaelWeston said:

You change the logic with the word sometimes over all. If sometimes TEs get hurt than the logic is less. And that is the assumption you are working with despite the evidence. If always or almost always TEs get hurt then the logic changes. If TE's get hurt more often than other positions, then the logic changes. Those last 2 are closer to the truth than sometimes. 

You aren't going to beat me in a conversation on logic. It's simply not going to be done. Your welcome to your points here but you should probably tone things back a bit. 

ohh snap...logic battle....my favs...

I wonder what are the odds in Vegas in the great go-bengals.com logic battle of 2017 between the wily and confident vet MW and the saucy newcomer OMG Dr.Doom?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PatternMaster said:

ohh snap...logic battle....my favs...

I wonder what are the odds in Vegas in the great go-bengals.com logic battle of 2017 between the wily and confident vet MW and the saucy newcomer OMG Dr.Doom?

LOL.

Is there a streetfighting emoticon?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MichaelWeston said:

You change the logic with the word sometimes over all. If sometimes TEs get hurt than the logic is less. And that is the assumption you are working with despite the evidence. If always or almost always TEs get hurt then the logic changes. If TE's get hurt more often than other positions, then the logic changes. Those last 2 are closer to the truth than sometimes. 

You aren't going to beat me in a conversation on logic. It's simply not going to be done. Your welcome to your points here but you should probably tone things back a bit. 

In all fairness, you haven't really backed up your assertion that TE's are injured more than other positions. You keep stating that opinion as fact.

guest-102315-12.jpg.ba8ce137d4b9d8b95bf19362c8485cf6.jpg

The risk is pretty consistent across ALL open field positions. 

Zane Gonzales at #9 anyone?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

You change the logic with the word sometimes over all. If sometimes TEs get hurt than the logic is less. And that is the assumption you are working with despite the evidence. If always or almost always TEs get hurt then the logic changes. If TE's get hurt more often than other positions, then the logic changes. Those last 2 are closer to the truth than sometimes. 

You aren't going to beat me in a conversation on logic. It's simply not going to be done. Your welcome to your points here but you should probably tone things back a bit. 

You have made the very strong statement that "ALL the top TEs have had serious injury" on more than 1 occasion.

I don't think you want to "logic fight" someone with that bullshit. Fuck outta here with that nonsense.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, LostInDaJungle said:

In all fairness, you haven't really backed up your assertion that TE's are injured more than other positions. You keep stating that opinion as fact.

guest-102315-12.jpg.ba8ce137d4b9d8b95bf19362c8485cf6.jpg

The risk is pretty consistent across ALL open field positions. 

Zane Gonzales at #9 anyone?

Uh oh.

Facts and not overexaggerated hyperbole without any cherry picked statistics.

We're heading into uncharted territory ladies and gents.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, omgdrdoom said:

Uh oh.

Facts and not overexaggerated hyperbole without any cherry picked statistics.

We're heading into uncharted territory ladies and gents.

That data is for erryboddy. Melt down city!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MichaelWeston said:

That data is for erryboddy. Melt down city!

Maybe OJ Howard will suck enough for the sound logic "ALL good TEs have serious injuries!1!!!!!" to not affect him.

 

:mellow:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, omgdrdoom said:

Maybe OJ Howard will suck enough for the sound logic "ALL good TEs have serious injuries!1!!!!!" to not affect him.

:mellow:

https://www.playerprofiler.com/article/positional-fragility-rates/

Or maybe it just doesn't make sense to draft one early because the guys who see the most time get hurt more often than any other position. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MichaelWeston said:

https://www.playerprofiler.com/article/positional-fragility-rates/

Or maybe it just doesn't make sense to draft one early because the guys who see the most time get hurt more often than any other position. 

LOL. A fantasy football website. FYI, Wizards are more fragile than dwarves.

You're confusing correlation with causation. You're obviously willing to die on this hill, and I'm not. Howard most likely isn't in play for us anyway.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, LostInDaJungle said:

You're confusing correlation with causation. 

Adults said this phrase around you once and now you get to repeat it despite a lack of understanding of what it actually means. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MichaelWeston said:

Adults said this phrase around you once and now you get to repeat it despite a lack of understanding of what it actually means. 

Kind of like a guy not using sound logic while proclaiming he's the Billy Badass of logical arguments? 

"I never said that"

:mellow:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

Adults said this phrase around you once and now you get to repeat it despite a lack of understanding of what it actually means. 

I can only assume that if you knew what the phrase meant, you'd have a better reply. I've been awfully polite, so I think personal attacks are uncalled for.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

You have made the very strong statement that "ALL the top TEs have had serious injury" on more than 1 occasion.

I don't think you want to "logic fight" someone with that bullshit. Fuck outta here with that nonsense.

And so it begins...Doom lands an overhand right, flush on the face of MW!

15 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

MW counters with a jab

15 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

Uh oh.

Facts and not overexaggerated hyperbole without any cherry picked statistics.

We're heading into uncharted territory ladies and gents.

Doom responds with a jab of his own

15 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

That data is for erryboddy. Melt down city!

MW lands a vicious uppercut, sending the saucy newcomer stumbling back on his heels

15 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

Maybe OJ Howard will suck enough for the sound logic "ALL good TEs have serious injuries!1!!!!!" to not affect him.

 

:mellow:

Doom charges back into the fray and lands another jab 

14 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

https://www.playerprofiler.com/article/positional-fragility-rates/

Or maybe it just doesn't make sense to draft one early because the guys who see the most time get hurt more often than any other position. 

MW holds his ground, landing another uppercut...at this pace we are going to have the logic battle of the year.

15 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

In all fairness, you haven't really backed up your assertion that TE's are injured more than other positions. You keep stating that opinion as fact.

guest-102315-12.jpg.ba8ce137d4b9d8b95bf19362c8485cf6.jpg

The risk is pretty consistent across ALL open field positions. 

Zane Gonzales at #9 anyone?

 

13 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

LOL. A fantasy football website. FYI, Wizards are more fragile than dwarves.

You're confusing correlation with causation. You're obviously willing to die on this hill, and I'm not. Howard most likely isn't in play for us anyway.

What is this, we have another challenger to enter the fray and he comes in swing..MW is getting double teamed, it's not looking good for MW. 

 

13 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

LOL. A fantasy football website. FYI, Wizards are more fragile than dwarves.

You're confusing correlation with causation. You're obviously willing to die on this hill, and I'm not. Howard most likely isn't in play for us anyway.

Wow...Jungle just landed a vicious hook, sending the self proclaimed logic champ reeling into the ropes. 

14 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

Adults said this phrase around you once and now you get to repeat it despite a lack of understanding of what it actually means. 

OMG...MW lands a thunderous right to face of the would be usurper to the logic throne and it doesn't look good from Jungle...his legs are shaking like a newborn calf, he's going down folks

 

14 hours ago, omgdrdoom said:

Kind of like a guy not using sound logic while proclaiming he's the Billy Badass of logical arguments? 

"I never said that"

:mellow:

Doom sees that Jungle is taking a beating so he jumps in, determined to not let MW win this battle, and lands another counter jab

10 hours ago, LostInDaJungle said:

I can only assume that if you knew what the phrase meant, you'd have a better reply. I've been awfully polite, so I think personal attacks are uncalled for.

Jungle has thrown in the towel, he tried but the personal attack was too much to handle..

And that is the end of the first round, what an action packed logic battle. MW came in ready to fight and he didn't disappoint, he used his self-proclaimed superior logic hold his ground and stand toe to toe with all challengers. Doom showed no fear and counter nicely, let's go to Harold Letterman for the scores for the first round.

Harold: It's a tough one to score Jim, but I've got it MW 10 Doom 9. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: 

That's pretty good man, but Weston has still yet to prove any of the "logical" points he's making.

The NFL draft isn't black and white, you can't just say that it's illogical to take a TE with a top 10 pick and use cherry picked injuries from arbitrary years chosen by a fantasy football article about who the "good" TEs are and use that as your proof. It's flat out silly to anyone that understands what "logic" actually means.

The thread started out with "All the top TEs have had serious injuries. An early investment at TE (and RB for the same reason) doesn't make a ton of sense." and now in MW's latest post it's turned into "Or maybe it just doesn't make sense to draft one early because the guys who see the most time get hurt more often than any other position"

So it went from all of the "top" TEs have had serious injuries to guys who see the most time get hurt more often. That's a pretty big difference, no? Let's be honest though, neither really make sense as again, the draft isn't in a vacuum and you can't write off any position on offense or defense without understanding the context to each team composition and draft class.

It's just a matter of which stats Weston will allow and which ones he won't. He's clearly only wanting to use very specific data to "prove" his nonsensical "logic".

If you look at 2017, there are a lot of "top" TEs that were available for more games than "top" WRs around the league and vice versa. There are a lot of positions where injuries occur and I don't think there's some monopoly by TEs for sustaining severe injuries. For some reason the only data that's been OK'd by the Logic Master Weston has been some obscure fantasy football website that took data from a 2 year span and that's obviously enough proof when confirmation bias is involved. LIDJ posted a long term chart showing all positions over a 14 year span but that wasn't good enough since it showed how being a TE hasn't been a fast track to the injury report.

I guess the best point to make would be the fact that even if TEs got injured at a slightly higher rate than other positions, it's STILL not "illogical" to take a TE with early draft picks because yet a-fucking-gain, the NFL draft isn't in a vacuum where you can make that kind of blanket statement logically.

It's really frustrating to get a point across when someone is screaming from a mountaintop about how logical they are when they're being anything but. Go ahead and say you don't want Howard at 9 and I'm fine with that opinion. Just don't try to twist it into something that it doesn't need to be, which is what this thread has devolved into.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0