paulwall29

Established Members
  • Content Count

    1,546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

566 Excellent

1 Follower

About paulwall29

  • Rank
    Superstar

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

1,644 profile views
  1. Tyreek and Hilton are almost 20 pounds heavier than Hollywood. He'll never be Tyreek, and Hilton is a more complete receiver. DeSean is the closest comp and he was never a big TD guy. I like Hollywood but I think him and Andrews can coexist in this offense and he just doesn't do what Andrews does well--and is a major injury concern (has basically dealt with injuries his entire career). If he were to go down for an extended period of time you could easily see Andrews jump into the 125+ target range of elite TE's. I like Boykin, he's a freak athlete but a raw WR and had a late breakout age which usually doesn't bode well. He's not a factor yet as far as how he affects Andrews' value.
  2. Even if Hollywood is more than a field stretcher, he will never be a possession guy at 5'9 170 and will never be a red zone focal point. Andrews is both of those for the Ravens. Trading Hurst is a huge tell that they want Andrews on the field more and he will soak up many of those vacated targets. After increasing his targets by 50% from year 1 to year 2, and the Ravens dealing Hurst, it is certainly in the realm of possibilities that Andrews jumps into the elite tier in terms of TE targets.
  3. Even if Lamar throws ten less TD's Andrews could still feasibly jump top 3 or at least top for (he was 5 last year). He's the focal point of their passing attack. The only other viable option is Hollywood who is the field stretcher. Hurst is gone, which only means he'll be on the field more and that's an additional, and there's 40 vacated TE targets. He'll crack the 100 target mark at a minimum.
  4. Would it surprise you that Elway made a terrible decision?
  5. Yea he'll be drafted as a top 8 guy so doesn't really fall in the wait on QB radar this year.
  6. Lol I needed a good laugh this morning. Packers will draft a rookie WR in top 2 rounds.
  7. He is going to move further towards that end of the spectrum with Hurst gone.
  8. Gonna be a stud this year. Hurst gone vacates additional targets and shows the teams commitment to Andrews which should mean an increase in snaps. Ravens haven't added any receiving threats in FA and if they add a rookie it shouldn't have much of an impact on Andrews. Currently have him ranked as my #4 TE but wouldn't be surprised at all to see him finish top 3.
  9. Hahaha first it was that my entire representation of what you said was false, then I cite your own words back to you and now you get hung-up on me using "was" instead of "may." This is just ridiculous. The point I'm making is that running back is NOT a priority for them and that your take on their backfield and obsession with a "lead back" is a bad one. Just replace the "was" from my original quote with "may" and I still stand by my entire argument. Sure, they could draft any position with their 6th or 7th round pick but Moss will not fall that far and will not be on the team's radar for where they would have to take him. Do you realize that you're using articles that were written before the Niners restructured McKinnon's contract and placed a second round tender on Breida? Do you think that affects the draft outlook for the Niners? Do you realize that you're citing a fan website (fansided) where some guy named named Jeremy Wohlfart (who has 38 twitter followers) is just ranking his top 5 running backs for the draft (there is a comment on the article from 13 days ago and, ironically, the comment is putting him in his place for why RB isn't a need). Your second article is from the same site and is written by some guy named Josh Alford (who has 23 twitter followers) who was suggesting the Niners should take Zack Moss in the first round (laughable). You should know, sites like 'Fansided' will take contributions from anyone that takes the time to submit coherent content to them, these are not the type of sources you want to be getting your information from. You keep working on logical fallacies: comparing their secondary needs to their running back needs because both groups finished well last year is not an apples to apples comparison. The reason that secondary is a need for them is because Richard Sherman is a 32 year old CB that has dealt with injuries and is only under contract through the 2020 season and they had to run a platoon at their other cornerback spot where neither player proved to be consistent and they have very little depth behind them. Most articles stating 'secondary' as a major need, rather than cornerback, were written before the team resigned safety Jimmie Ward. Context is everything here. Feel free to rebuttal about how I misrepresented you.
  10. Lol are you serious right now? Denying your own claims makes YOU not credible and impossible to debate with. Direct quotes from your posts (in bold so you can't miss them): "You cite a number, no name(s). Telling, acknowledgement to the fact they don't have a lead 'back'" "Every coach wants as many lead 'backs as he can find" "I get rostering any one of these guys, but as a group, availability isn't exactly a strength." "I think RB, in particular, Zack Moss may be on this team's radar as a day three pickup" Now, here is my direct quote: "Your assertion was that because they have many RB's they are in need of a "lead back" and that Zack Moss was on their radar as a day 3 pick. My assertion was that they won't spend draft capital on a running back when they have FIVE bodies at the position (the most in the league) and were the number 2 team in the NFL last season with 2 backs averaging over 5 ypc." Now here are quotes from your most recent post just so we can be clear about what you said (again in bold so that they are very clear to you): "With respect to the 'niners backfield & availability, I reviewed every box score from this past season. The active roster availability looked good for the group, for each of them. But I would contend that it's misleading. On any given week you can find any one them assuming the lead role or close to a split. But then the following week, frequently one or no touches at all. Same thing regarding the supporting role, very often a different player. It was that way through week 11. On week 12 Raheem Mostert assumed the lead role on this team. He didn't dominate touches, but with his performance v Baltimore, he clearly became their lead 'back. That is, with one exception, their divisional round playoff game v Minnesota. Out of nowhere, Coleman re-emerged for 22 carries!" What are you talking about? You reviewed the box score and their roster availability looked good for each of them? Duh, hence my assertion that RB isn't a need for them to address this offseason because they have the same group that made their roster availability look good. "On any given week you can find any one them assuming the lead role or close to a split. But then the following week, frequently one or no touches at all." Yes, this is what a rotational backfield looks like. Once again, you are simply stating the obvious. "It's also clear from the evidence that Shanahan wasn't riding the hot hand. This unit's "depth" wasn't a luxury but more so relied upon, they needed to rotate them." Why would Shanahan not "riding the hot hand" and instead rotating his backs to keep them all fresh be a bad thing if led to the second best rushing output in the NFL--clearly Shanahan's approach was effective. If Breida or Coleman is moved then I would reassess the possibility of them drafting a back but until then I will work with the facts that Tevin Coleman is under contract and that the team extended a 2nd round tender worth 3.29 million dollars to their RFA RB, clearly indicating they value him and want him back. Your speculation doesn't usurp the facts.
  11. I'm not optimistic but I'm also not going to pretend I know what is going to happen come July/August. I understand the point about Brown having more time to bond with Allen.
  12. TBD. It still remains to be seen how limited QB's and WR's will be in their ability to workout together. Way too early to factor this into the equation.
  13. My point is I don't think Diggs' value is tied to Allen's inability to throw the deep ball and that his being used almost exclusively as a field stretcher last season was an outlier. Diggs' best fantasy season was the same season he had his lowest YPC. He doesn't need to achieve his 17.9 YPC mark from last season to be productive, he can do whatever he is asked, hence him being a special talent. Sure, there is a chance that Allen/Brown have a better rapport, but Brown did his damage in his first season playing with Allen, there is no reason to think a better player can't do the same.
  14. Doesn't change how I view DJ as a player, but there are only so many targets to go around in an offense. There are less targets following the Anderson acquisition than there would have been otherwise. Highly unlikely he will top the 135 targets he got last year. Hopefully he can score more TD's to offset any decrease in targets. I should clarify, he went from #10 in my rankings to #13 so I still think highly of him as a fantasy asset.