by Nick Ercolano
May 18, 2020
It's Terry for me. 1000%. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of sophomore WRs worth owning, and worth owning at their price, but McLaurin seems like arguably the best value in fantasy football drafts right now. Deebo, Metcalf, I'd expect to be around the same spot, but give me Terry without hesitation.
Terry is currently the 67th player being drafted in fantasy drafts, as WR28 - That's the 6.08. Unreal.
If you told me right now, that I could have Terry in all my leagues at the 6.08 come September drafts, I would accept without knowing who would be available there in every single draft.
Terry played in 14 games last year, finished with a 93-58-919-7 line. A full 16 and you were looking at 106 targets, 66 catches, 1050 yards and 8 touchdowns.... as a rookie. I mean, he was eviscerating some of the top CBs who were shadowing with kid.
I know a lot people are still hesitant to buy into Terry, because we didn't know shit about him coming into last year. Not a lot of pre-draft media coverage, didn't do much at Ohio State, and I think people look at Terry as sort of a one-trick pony, like strictly a deep ball. I do not.
To me, he reminds me of Robert Woods, with 4.35 speed.
He is an excellent route runner, can beat press/man coverage and he's not built like DeSean Jackson - guys he has two inches AND more than 30lbs on Jackson.
You want to talk about being a possession WR as well? McLaurin's contested catch rate - 68.4% - the single highest rate in the NFL among WRs.
There wasn't a single game he played on fewer than 86% of the Skins snaps, and what did they do this offseason to add to this competition? Nothing. Jordan Reed ded, they didn't use anything on a WR until the 4th round - Antonio Gandy Golden. Tells you that they're extremely comfortable with McLaurin being the alpha.
The real questions about Terry should have nothing to do with his talent. If you're off him for talent, you're doing fantasy football wrong.
It has everything to do with Dwayne Haskins being the QB. Let's take a look at his numbers last year with and without Haskins.
With Haskins, on the left side, he scored fewer fantasy points, but averaged more targets, receptions and yards, nominally. The TDs were the difference. And you can't really predict those. His involvement is what matters and it didn't waiver with Haskins under center, nor should it considering the two played together at Ohio State. Sneaky ting to remember.
Will Haskins take the next jump? He better. Overall, McLaurin's target accuracy on the entire season ranked 85th among WRs, both Haskins and whoever else was under center included in that, and McLaurin still balled.
I'm of the belief that Haskins isn't a bust by any means. He was thrown into an awful situation, with little time to prepare for it. They added almost nothing on the outside to compete with Terry this year, which tells me his target share on this offense is going to be massive. His volume, imo, will more than makeup for the lack of efficiency. You're getting a true possession #1 WR in an offense, who brings 4.35 speed with 70-yard TD ability. He had a 23% target share last year, which isn't small by any means. It's higher than Chris Godwin, Tyreek Hill, etc. He's going to see a big boost in target share this year. And how could you possibly be worried about him seeing the CB1... he literally already did all of 2019 and proved he's more than capable of beating it.
I think you're draft Terry at 6.08 at his absolute floor here, with legit top 12-15 WR upside.
Well, I think this is almost a two-part question. So we're breaking Hugo's original two-part question into more parts. Big parts guy over here.
First is, who is the WR2 in Green Bay, but I think the more important question is... does it matter for fantasy?
So, last year MVS and Geronimo Allison had every opportunity to gain control of the WR2 role, and didn't. Allison is in DET and there's no reason to think it's now going to be MVS.
Who else is there? Well, not a rookie because they forgot to draft one.
They signed Devin Funchess to a one-year $2.5M deal with incentives, etc. Funchess missed all of last year on the Colts with a collarbone injury. But, it's worth noting depsite Funchess seemingly being in the NFL for 42 years, he only just turned 26. He has the ability to extend his career far beyond the bad luck he's had recently. That being said, Funchess is best served as a role player imo. A big body, in tight, contested catch situations, RZ, etc. I don't think we're about to see a 100-target season from anyone not named Davante Adams.
The second WR that could take this spot is Allan Lazard. Lazard checks about every box, outside of the whole undrafted thing. Stellar athlete, alpha frame, CD, BOAge, target share, etc.
And most importantly, everyone inside the organization loves him. Aaron Rodgers can't stop talking about him. Neither can Matt Lafleur. However, they resigned him to a one-year $600k contract this offseason. That's nothing - that's we'll cut you if you don't ball out in camp type money. Lazard took as a near 65-75% snap guy in Week 6 last year, showing spurts of the inconsistent ceiling: A 4-65-1 game vs. DET, a 3-103-1 vs. NYG, and a 4-69-1 game in the regular-season finale against DET again. Outside of those three games he was mediocre, at best. And let's not pretend like DET twice and NYG were anything better than awful pass defenses in 2019.
So, while you think you like the upside of Lazard and he very well could be the WR2 in Green Bay this year, neither of these guys are enticing fantasy picks. The Packers are a run-first team under LaFleur. Davante Adams will engulf 30% of the team's targets in an offense that ranked 17th in passing plays/game. The GB running backs will combine to see another 20-25% of the targets. You spread the rest of the plays out between run plays and targets to their TEs (jace sternberger), lazard, funchess, MVS, etc and the upside just isn't there for anyone not named Davante Adams.
If I'm choosing someone, it's definitely Lazard, but I think he'll be touted as a more popular breakout/sleeper pick then he should be in fantasy this year.
So, after seeing this question, and wanting to dive into the research. I actually changed my answer, and my dynasty rankings.
You assume Cook has more relevant years left in fantasy than Zeke. Why do we think that though? Because he's a lot younger, right?
Dalvin Cook is 18 days younger than Ezekiel Elliott is. That shocked me. I thought Cook was like 24 (which he is) and Zeke was at least 26. Shows how much I don't know about anything.
They are both turning 25 in about 3 months.
So, why Zeke?
One of them has shown elite durability. One of them has not.
One of them has a long-term contract already in place. One of them does not.
Both are in very good offenses, but I'd argue the Cowboys offense is on the verge of being in the elite category. Maybe they won't hit the Chiefs or Ravens level, but they won't be that far behind.
It's as simple as that. Age is not a factor, since they're the same age. One has the elusive second RB contract already in place and Zeke's floor given his durability and high-powered offense gives him an unbelievable floor. And his ceiling, while maybe lower than Cook's in the passing game, is having a 16-18 total touchdown year.
So, you can say Zeke has all the tread on his tires, but how can you use it as a negative, when he's stayed healthy for it, and use it as positive for Cook, when he couldn't stay healthy with much less work. Those who live in glass houses.
No, definitely not. You do it in dynasty because it's about depth. You're in it for the long-haul. Your top tier picks in redraft are as important as anything. You could legitimately win your entire league with 3 high-powered studs. You can do the same with dynasty, but you'll be fucked over the long term because you had to have given up tons of depth, youth, picks to get those guys.
Also, the starting lineup is massively important in redraft. The waiver wire in redraft is way more fruitful than in dynasty. The rosters are far deeper, so there's barely ever a player you even get excited about not even a half chub. As opposed to redraft, you can find a starting WR on the wire in any given week. If an RB gets injured, the new starting back for that team is also available. Never happens in dynasty.
This is sort of a two-part, separate commissioner questions that I think I can answer together.
You really gotta look at a fantasy football league like politics. You want to get a policy change in the works, you're gonna have to politik your way into it.
First, understanding what it takes to change the rule. In ETGD we need a majority vote - so 6/10 (if it's 5 no change, must be unanimous if it's $$). So I'd have to convince 5 others. It's like you see in a TV show - you know, like someone wants to change something you gotta start plotting what to do - hmm, this person loves the knicks, let me get him tickets, if i get a blowjob from her we can swing her vote, etc. Reverse engineer each person.
I would do this privately to each person that you think you can sway. Don't do it in the groupchat outright. Cause if you have like even two people disagreeing out in public it's going to get messy, and the majority of people in the world, not just fantasy football are just followers - they'll do whatever the crowd does.
I would target the people that take fantasy football seriously, first. First say something like, quarterbacks are the single most important position in real football, it makes no sense that they don't matter in fantasy football. Superflex is a way of making them matter. Tell them that superflex is more difficult. The people who do more research, reep the rewards. The bigger the roster is, the more starting spots, the more the people that know more about more players benefit from it. Make them feel like Superflex is good for them, that it gives them more of an advantage.
Bonus Lifestyle Question
by Nick Ercolano
September 25, 2020
by Nick Ercolano
September 22, 2020
by Nick Ercolano
September 21, 2020