fakespike

Keelan Cole 2018 Outlook

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, DekuTree said:


You are. The point I was making was that even ignoring the first half of the season, when as a rookie UDFA he would obviously be acclimating to the field, that even from Week 9 on when he began receiving on average ~7 targets a game, he finished half of them with less than 50 yards and only 3 of them did he give production worthy of an actual start. And yes, 70+ yard receptions are great, but when your two 70+ yard receptions account for nearly 25% of your production in an 8 week span it's not exactly oozing consistency. 

 


Of course he's getting targets. Exactly 15% of the targets. Know who else is getting those exact same quality targets? Donte Moncrief with 18% of them. And? That's right, Dede Westbrook with 14% of them, and at a clip of 14.78 yards per target to wit. Not exactly screaming "low YPR" to me. Lower? Yes. Low? No. 

 

 

Okay but why was he not still acclimating to the field? I guess that's my whole point. you seem to think some things he did were disappointing where I see the same stats as encouraging because of how difficult it is to do what he did last year as a UDFA working his way into the #1 WR on the offense. 

 

Target% isn't the most important thing for Cole. If they all get equal target numbers but Cole is a league leader in YPR, which one do youthink will be worth the own? And it's not low, but it's also higher than his Year 1 significantly (cole's is not) and it IS substantailly different still than Cole's 17. 

 

34 minutes ago, DekuTree said:

Do we really need to go into the logical fallacy of extrapolating a 3-game sample size to an entire season? 

 

what logical fallacy? Any information is exactly what it says it is. 

 

For one, that's a 6-game sample. But for two, the point is that-- since becoming the WR1 in this offense, he has produced like that. It isn't supposed to be what I expect. If that was my expectation that would be nuts. Saying "This is what he's doing" Is different than saying "This is what he'll do." Surely I don't have to explain THAT. 

 

If he's a boom/bust WR2, he's still a top 24 WR. 

37 minutes ago, DekuTree said:

Again, claiming a fallacy for focusing on a 4 game sample and then turning around and extrapolating a similar sample size to an entire season? That's not how it works. Yes, 4 games out of 21 assumes a lot of situations that have changed, including injuries, his slower acclimation to the offense, etc. But regardless, where would you like to draw the line? When Hurns got hurt and he became a #2? 4 games out of 12. Ignore the playoffs because they're for some reason "different" (though wouldn't you want to employ your best threat and biggest talent in your most important games)? Fine, 4 games out of 9. Either way, he's been at best startable in 50% of the games he's played a major role in the offense.

 

Again-- you're using 4 of 9 like it's "terrible." He's had solid consistency for a player with his Highs and relatively not-bad lows since he's been the #1 WR in Snaps. 

 

38 minutes ago, DekuTree said:

And yes, many many of the top receivers out there don't post great numbers every game, but there's a wide gamut of types of fantasy receivers out there. Taking a guy's numbers who has only produced in half of his games, averaging them out and extrapolating them over an entire season does not mean that he produces those numbers every game and is thus a WR2/3. If you did the same with a player like Desean Jackson (not comparing the two, just demonstrating the volatility of averaging statistics), would you assume that he's a an every week WR2? No, you look at the actual situation and realize that he's a boom or bust player depending on the gameflow. And that's not to call Cole a boom-or-bust prospect, because he's obviously not - but his production does seem very influenced by gameflow, instead of any sort of established role as a focal point of the offense. 

 

In a season where Desean Jackson finished as a top 20 WR, you probably started him every week. I see this situation similarly. And no WR posts great numbers every game. 

 

39 minutes ago, DekuTree said:

Which is why I said 'the past year or two,' which doesn't include 2015 or 2016. And again, averaging - Lee was useless in 5/13 games played and averaged 4/54/.25... I mean, yeah, that's fine for a desperation WR3 but there are 30 players in the league that could put up those numbers any given week. 

 

Really? The last "year or two" does not include 2016... mmk.

 

Focusing on the games that Lee was "useless" is ridiculous. For 1, he was not the WR1 in Week1-- Allen Robinson was. He was a Fantasy WR2 (WR23) the entire time he was the WR1. You can debate his consistency all you want. You can't find 24 WRs that are much better over that stretch and THATS the only relevant point. It doesn't matter how many games he was relevant in, it matters how they compare to others. You're focusing on his bad games like if you did that to any WR18-24 they wouldn't look bad. 

 

There is no sample of 8 games over the past four years in which the WR1/primary in snaps for the Jags was not a top 24 WR. You literally can not find a single point I don't believe-- unless probably you include games where AR tore his ACL. 

 

45 minutes ago, DekuTree said:

the offense as it is currently structured, barring injuries or a major dip in defensive efficiency, isn't going to allow for Cole to produce meaningful enough numbers to rely on him as a week-to-week starter.

 

What's so different about the offense now? Bortles has always targetted his WRs. He was 11th in Passing yards last year. The idea that no WR/TE/Pass Catcher will be relevant consistently to me is far fetched. 

 

 

 

 

I just simply don't agree. I think every data point we have in Blake Bortles career tells us the #1 WR on teh Jacksonville Jaguars will be a low-end WR2 at worst by seasons end. That's a startable player in every league, just like I expect Cole to me. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

 

If there's a difference, its definitely not a full round. I think Westbrook is the better talent, but his upside is limited by Bortles' mediocrity

 

 

 

No, sir. I've perfected the pull out method.

 

You value Westbrook more than Cole in dynasty? Whoa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

 

What makes Cole better?

 

I don't think Cole is the best WR on that team. His OBJ one-handed catch didn't change my feelings on him. He's a good player but Westbrook has the upside. If I had to choose a dynasty guy from Jax it definitely wouldn't be Cole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, predator_05 said:

 

What makes Cole better?

 

Proven production in same offense. Similar to what makes Davante Adams better than Randall Cobb.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, FitzMagic said:

 

I don't think Cole is the best WR on that team. His OBJ one-handed catch didn't change my feelings on him. He's a good player but Westbrook has the upside. If I had to choose a dynasty guy from Jax it definitely wouldn't be Cole.

 

You don't play much dynasty then; Cole is clearly more highly valued in most leagues right now. Same age, better production pedigree.

Share this post


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

 

I don't think Cole is the best WR on that team. His OBJ one-handed catch didn't change my feelings on him. He's a good player but Westbrook has the upside. If I had to choose a dynasty guy from Jax it definitely wouldn't be Cole.

 

Well, he is commanding the most snap count and getting the most targets from Bortles.  I'd say that makes him the most valuable receiver on the Jags regardless of perceived talent.  I'd still argue Cole's talent is better than Dede's too.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, joshua18 said:

 

Proven production in same offense. Similar to what makes Davante Adams better than Randall Cobb.

 

There is a difference between perceived value and who is actually better. Sure, I don't argue Cole is currently more valuable in dynasty. I just believe it is false value, that's all. I never said he's a bad player, I just think Westbrook is better. I think it will eventually show and if not I'll eat my words.

Edited by FitzMagic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, joshua18 said:

 

Proven production in same offense.

 

I was comparing their talent, so i'm not too bothered about their current production. Obviously Keelan has more "proven" production, he's played in more games. Keep in mind that Westbrook currently plays in the slot, while Keelan plays on the outside, and these roles could easily change in the future.

 

17 minutes ago, kdko said:

 

Well, he is commanding the most snap count and getting the most targets from Bortles.  I'd say that makes him the most valuable receiver on the Jags regardless of perceived talent.  I'd still argue Cole's talent is better than Dede's too.

 

Westbrook averages more targets per game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

 

 

Westbrook averages more targets per game.

 

Wrong.  Through 2 weeks Cole has 12 targets, Westbrook has 11.

Share this post


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

I guess that's my whole point. you seem to think some things he did were disappointing where I see the same stats as encouraging because of how difficult it is to do what he did last year as a UDFA working his way into the #1 WR on the offense. 


Apparently this is what it boils down to for us. You seem to see his numbers and figure that for an undrafted prospect who started the season as essentially the #3 at worst on the team, his production was surprisingly efficient and as he worked his way up the depth chart due to injuries he showed more until at the end of the year he finally broke out and showed his full potential, a potential that you think will carry through this season. 


I look at those same numbers and see a guy who was handed a spot at the start of the season in 3-wide sets and did nothing with them, then was moved to a starting role when Hurns went down, saw his target numbers double and still didn't do anything noteworthy for another 3 weeks when he proceeded to go on a tear for a 4-game period (which coincided with Lee's injury) for 19-442-3, numbers which account for 35% of his career receptions, 44% of his yards, and 75% of his touchdowns. I see a guy who produced outstanding numbers when there were few other options in the offense, and who has entered the year still not seeing a clear majority target share.

If Bortles' numbers trend closer to his 2017 numbers, which they should considering the massive difference in their defense from 2016 to 2017, and if Cole maintains his target rate, he'll finish the year with less than 80 targets. Even if his share jumped to 20% he would barely crack 100 targets. Fun fact - there were 3 receivers last year who finished inside the top-24 with less than 100 targets: Diggs, Smith-Schuster and Agholor.

 

So if you're trying to say that Cole has a chance to put up Marqise Lee like numbers and finish as a WR3, no argument here, I think that's well within his wheelhouse. If you're arguing that Cole is going to finish as a WR2 or better getting 15% of the targets in Jacksonville's offense, I'm going to strongly disagree and say that it's going to take way more than just his talent to make that happen for him - there's going to have to be some serious changes to the current state of that offense. 



And I'm going to end this on a fun(ner) fact from all this mathing... With Cole's Week 2 outing, he now has exactly 1000 yards on his career. Not too shabby for an UDFA in 21 games, especially with his slow start last season and lackluster post-season. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people agree developing WRs in the NFL takes time. Its a bigger learning curve. Hence why we wait it out a couple of years before putting the book on them.

 

  • Westbrook is the faster of the 2 with better burst.  He has all the nuanced traits of becoming great at route running.. Cole has Size and Catch radius(longer wing span) over him. Westbrook being 6'0 yet only 178 LBs. Cole is always going to be the prefer'd the end zone target of the 2 despite a only 1 inch difference in height. (Cole has 6 end zone targets to Westbrook's 1).  Yet Westbrook has more YAC ability to create his own TDs, so *shrughs*

 

Neither of these young WRs are done developing and i think its foolish to assume that the development keeps the same trend that is favoring Cole right now.

Edited by Slatykamora
Edit: Not more targets, my bad hombie
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, kdko said:

 

Wrong.  Through 2 weeks Cole has 12 targets, Westbrook has 11.

 

Alright, if you know how to look up their numbers from the last 2 weeks, what exactly stopped you from looking at their numbers since they came into the league?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, predator_05 said:

Westbrook averages more targets per game.


And Moncrief averages the most. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, predator_05 said:

 

What makes Cole better?

 

1 hour ago, Slatykamora said:

Most people agree developing WRs in the NFL takes time. Its a bigger learning curve. Hence why we wait it out a couple of years before putting the book on them.

 

  • Westbrook is the faster of the 2 with better burst.  He has all the nuanced traits of becoming great at route running.. Cole has Size and Catch radius(longer wing span) over him. Westbrook being 6'0 yet only 178 LBs. Cole is always going to be the prefer'd the end zone target of the 2 despite a only 1 inch difference in height. (Cole has 6 end zone targets to Westbrook's 1).  Yet Westbrook has more YAC ability to create his own TDs, so *shrughs*

 

Neither of these young WRs are done developing and i think its foolish to assume that the development keeps the same trend that is favoring Cole right now.

You say that Westy has more yac ability, but it that translating to production on the field?  

 

I'd like to see those stats...I was in his camp last year, but it is Cole that is showing himself to be the dynamic wr that fights for every yard out there.

Share this post


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

 

You say that Westy has more yac ability, but it that translating to production on the field?  

 

I'd like to see those stats...I was in his camp last year, but it is Cole that is showing himself to be the dynamic wr that fights for every yard out there.

 

Just as he always has....nothing has changed. Glad to have you on board. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, joshua18 said:

 

Just as he always has....nothing has changed. Glad to have you on board. 

 

Thanks...now get me a drink sweetheart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, psygolf said:

Thanks...now get me a drink sweetheart.

 

You're the rookie on this train, so you get me the drink. Chop chop!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, joshua18 said:

 

You're the rookie on this train, so you get me the drink. Chop chop!

 

Must be fun to act like the Captain while sitting on another's lap.     I didn't have to waste a draft pick on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to interrupt this slightly homoerotic exchange, but can someone explain succinctly why Dede is preferable to Keenan?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2018 at 7:30 PM, Red Dog said:

Cole, 1200 yards and 9 TDS!

 

 

Just kidding.

 

I have cautious optimism, but will not start him this week.  Hopefully he's not another Rashard Higgins.

Pretty close ;)  he’s on pace for 1360 and 8. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BMcP said:

Not to interrupt this slightly homoerotic exchange, but can someone explain succinctly why Dede is preferable to Keenan?

Something hit a latent nerve.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

why Dede is preferable to Keenan?

It's JSmith > < McCardell all over again...just choose the cheaper one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keelan Cole didn't really get going until Week 5 last year. In the 12 regular season games since, he's put up 46/871/4 on 77 targets. If we extrapolate that to 16 games, that's a 61/1161/5.33 line which would be good for 170 points on 0.5 PPR and a WR16 finish last year, between Golden Tate and Robby Anderson. Solely based on Cole's last 16 games, he has 50/905/4, good for WR32, and the first four of those games he didn't get 15 yards. I think its pretty reasonable to consider him a WR2.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.