isleseeya Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Just cleared by all Dr's this Am ...being reported via multiple publications Anyone starting him ? I plan to especially since he appears to have been practicing hard last few weeks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 it's not a matter of wondering who is playing him, rather who actually wouldn't? the guy is a monster and as long as he's healthy, he's to be started without hesitation as he will hit the ground running. 8 rec for 95 yards and 2 Tds against the jets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Guess it depends on how much ya wanna risk it. Even the studliest of studs can show some rust in their first game back. Yes, he's been practicing, but game speed vs. practice speed is of serious consideration. In the leagues I own him, it really depends on the backup situation. I own him and Graham in one (1ppr for TE, 0.5 for WR/RB), where you can start 2 TEs. Obviously, with Graham on bye (and perhaps would have been out regardless), I picked up a scrub off the waiver wire (Delanie Walker). I had every intention of starting him to avoid the potential zero, but now with this official announcement, I've plugged Gronk in. In the other league, I own Rudolph and Cumberland. There I'm more inclined to start the other two just in case Gronk does show some rush and goes 4 for 45 yards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 In the other league, I own Rudolph and Cumberland. There I'm more inclined to start the other two just in case Gronk does show some rush and goes 4 for 45 yards. i think you're nuts but guess you could be right. if i were in that situation i'm 100% sure i'd be startong gronk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 i think you're nuts but guess you could be right. if i were in that situation i'm 100% sure i'd be startong gronk. I'm still debating... but at this point I feel OK with Cumberland and his 3 straight double digit games, against NEP who tends to let TEs run wild and are without their defensive leader. And Rudolph is coming off a huge game and gets the Giants, with Freeman starting for the team for the first time. So I guess I'm just saying it really depends on your backup(s) and your level of comfort with them and their respective matchups this week. The classic "safe vs. upside" type of debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I'm starting him in the one league where I own him, but given the situation, that might not be very helpful. I'm 0-6, and pretty much need to win out, to have any shot at the playoffs. Otherwise, assuming nothing changes (and he plays), I'd probably start him if you don't have another "sure" thing at TE. In other words, if I've got Witten, Julius Thomas, Gonzalez, Vernon Davis, Gates, Bennett, or Cameron Jordan (guys who get you close to double-digit fantasy points each week), I'm probably waiting a week, to see how Gronk does. If I'm starting Olsen, Rudolph, or Finley, I think it depends on how desperate you are (and how high you are on those guys this week). But, if your starting TE is Cook, Walker, or Myers (guys who either rarely reach double-digits or are very inconsistent), I think you might as well go with Gronk. Maybe that's obvious. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't trust the guy, and I'm not starting him this week unless my other options are very limited. But, that's just me. I hate nothing worse than taking a goose egg from somebody who comes back from injury, just to sustain another injury mid-way through the 2nd quarter (and we've seen that happen to him before, if my memory serves me right). On the other hand, if I have nothing to lose (like my 0-6 team), or my team is likely to lose this week, why not throw him in there, and hope for a multi-TD game (which we've also seen from him before). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I'm still debating... but at this point I feel OK with Cumberland and his 3 straight double digit games, against NEP who tends to let TEs run wild and are without their defensive leader. And Rudolph is coming off a huge game and gets the Giants, with Freeman starting for the team for the first time. So I guess I'm just saying it really depends on your backup(s) and your level of comfort with them and their respective matchups this week. The classic "safe vs. upside" type of debate. i hear ya and understand completely. i'm just saying that i'd never start cumberland over gronk. i understand working off rust but i doubt there's much and honestly, under any other circumstances would you ever bench a healthy gronk in favor of cumberland? i'd have rudolph in especially cause it's a monday night game and the vikes will end up having to throw it playing catch up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 starting at flex (finally) and really looking forward to it. Hope he can stay healthy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Pretty much what Darin said. If I need a huge game out of my TE, and my other options aren't likely to give me that, why not throw him in there? But, if I've got another TE who is likely to give me 50 yards, and scores every other week, I'd probably go that route (if I don't need a huge game, but just want to avoid a zero at the TE position). In other words, if I just want SOMETHING from my TE, and these are my choices: Rudolph - Floor of 3/40, ceiling of 7/90 and a TD, and a 2% chance he gets hurt Gronk - Floor of 4/50, ceiling of 9/130 and 2TD, and a 10-15% chance he gets hurt I might be more inclined to go with Rudolph, depending on how much I want to risk it. No idea if those percentages are close to being accurate, in terms of how often these guys get dinged up in a game, but it certainly seems like Gronk gets dinged up fairly often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 i hear ya and understand completely. i'm just saying that i'd never start cumberland over gronk. i understand working off rust but i doubt there's much and honestly, under any other circumstances would you ever bench a healthy gronk in favor of cumberland? i'd have rudolph in especially cause it's a monday night game and the vikes will end up having to throw it playing catch up. 90 times out of 100, I'd start Gronk over Cumberland. I think this *could* be one of those 10 times. Like I said, NEP is not good against opposing TEs. The Jets have been playing inspired defense and this is Gronk's first game back. Had Gronk played last week and went 6 for 70 with a score, I think my choice would be obvious. Not sure if you are a Huddle subscriber, but that Dorey guy agrees with me. On top of everything else, in this particular league, my team is garbage so I think I'd rather have the sure points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) I thihI think 90 times out of 100, I'd start Gronk over Cumberland. I think this *could* be one of those 10 times. Like I said, NEP is not good against opposing TEs. The Jets have been playing inspired defense and this is Gronk's first game back. Had Gronk played last week and went 6 for 70 with a score, I think my choice would be obvious. Not sure if you are a Huddle subscriber, but that Dorey guy agrees with me. On top of everything else, in this particular league, my team is garbage so I think I'd rather have the sure points. I think expecting Gronk to play a full tilt of snaps in his first week back is a bit much...could it happen? Sure, but not something I'd bank on. Oh, and to the reports that he's dominating in practice....IT'S PRACTICE! Edited October 18, 2013 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Another thing to remember is that Belichick can be spiteful...If he thinks Gronk could/should have been on the field sooner I can see him limiting his snaps and playing time....Just look back to the start of last year with Welker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Another thing to remember is that Belichick can be spiteful...If he thinks Gronk could/should have been on the field sooner I can see him limiting his snaps and playing time....Just look back to the start of last year with Welker. this right here worries me more than the arm, the back and his overall fitness combined Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I only drafted him in 1 league and that was 32 Homers. Been streaming TEs every week since week 1. If he's cleared, he's starting for me. Can't be any worse than Tom Crabtree... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenzal rhomb Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Several factors - most importantly my opponent this week has Gronk. Blackmon and Gordon had monster debuts - they were off suspensions not injuries but still ..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 gronk's gonna dominate this week, bank on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Several factors - most importantly my opponent this week has Gronk. Blackmon and Gordon had monster debuts - they were off suspensions not injuries but still ..... But still what? Apples and oranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 (edited) But still what? Apples and oranges. I could be wrong but I believe they weren't allowed to practice with their teams while suspended. At least Gronk's been practicing. for the record I think he'll be on a limited snap count sunday < half Edited October 18, 2013 by HowboutthemCowboys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I could be wrong but I believe they weren't allowed to practice with their teams while suspended. At least Gronk's been practicing. for the record I think he'll be on a limited snap count sunday < half Very true. I'm not sure if those two inparticular were able to practice with their teams or not. That said, even if they weren't, I still think returning from a series of serious injuries and returning from just being suspended are pretty different. JMHO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron677 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 But still what? Apples and oranges. Le'Veon Bell got 24 points his first game back off injury Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 Le'Veon Bell got 24 points his first game back off injury That's a much more apt comparison. Granted, Bell only had a foot sprain and Gronk's injuries were of a much more serious matter, but that's a good call. Of course, he followed up his 2-TD effort against the Vikes with a pretty mundane game against the Jets. Not saying Gronk isn't capable of going balls-to-the-wall on Sunday. In fact, I think there's a decent chance he does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddahj Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I have him in two leagues where I'm 2-4 & 2-5. With this being a must win week, I'm still not sure I will start him. I have Cameron in one league and Reed in another. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 I still think returning from a series of serious injuries and returning from just being suspended are pretty different. JMHO. agree. I'm pleased that he's been practicing, and looking good from all reports. The fact that they'll probably ease him back worries me more I have him in two leagues where I'm 2-4 & 2-5. With this being a must win week, I'm still not sure I will start him. I have Cameron in one league and Reed in another. 3-3 in the league I own him, Strating Cameron at TE and flexing Gronkowski this week over Powell, Boykin, Dobson and Obgyn....I think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenzal rhomb Posted October 18, 2013 Share Posted October 18, 2013 But still what? Apples and oranges. Im guessing coming off of major surgeries on differnet body parts is different then coming back off a dui a couple days ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingsofromance Posted October 19, 2013 Share Posted October 19, 2013 I doubt Gronk will come back to LESS than half snaps. I would put money that he is in on most of the snaps. He has practiced all year and from all reports he was not coming back until he was 100%. Which he is. He was cleared from team doctors week 2. If he had a leg injury I would think he would be limited, but not for his forearm. Gronk will have an insane game Sunday. I'm seriously thinking 150 3 TDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.