HowboutthemCowboys Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 .. in a non-TE mandatory league? Bottom of the 2nd tier of wr's, top of the 3rd? or is this too high? Waddya think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 .. in a non-TE mandatory league? Bottom of the 2nd tier of wr's, top of the 3rd? or is this too high? Waddya think? In my league last season (non-TE required) . He ranked about 20th in WR's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 The Huddle projections have him at 80 catches, 1010 yards, 10 tds. In the neighborhood of Housh, Burress, Moss, Boldin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ksu70 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 Just finishing up an non-TE mandatory league draft and he was the 14th receiver taken at the 4.05 spot. He went before guys like Javon Walker, Deion Branch, Mark Clayton and Donald Driver (shouldn't have). I think this is about right. If he performs then you can pretty much count on around 80/1000/9. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thews40 Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 PPR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Plane Out Posted September 2, 2007 Share Posted September 2, 2007 here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted September 2, 2007 Author Share Posted September 2, 2007 (edited) here Thanks. I used that a few weeks ago, missed the box "check if league combines wr and te's". Edited September 2, 2007 by HowboutthemCowboys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 If it is a non mandatory TE league than I would let someone else take him to high. you can get a slightly lesser productive WR instead and his matchups will be easier to evaluate than a TE's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueapple Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 (edited) If it is a non mandatory TE league than I would let someone else take him to high. you can get a slightly lesser productive WR instead and his matchups will be easier to evaluate than a TE's. Matchup? Wouldn't Gates be a guaranteed starter every week, no matter what the matchup? Anyways, I think his value will be even higher than it was last year. 1) Rivers will be more developed as a QB 2) LT will still be amazing, but won't repeat last year. This will give a larger opportunity for passing plays. 3) Marty out, Norv in. While Turner isn't quite Mike Martz, he will be more bullish with passing plays than it has been in the past few years. 4) Vincent Jackson will be a MUCH better #1 this year than McCardell was last year. This will help take pressure off Gates. To answer your question, he has been going around number a 15-20 wideout in non-TE required leagues. On the more valuable side in PPR leagues. Edited September 3, 2007 by blueapple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 4) Vincent Jackson will be a MUCH better #1 this year than McCardell was last year. This will help take pressure off Gates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scare Tactics Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 Id have him ranked right after the top 15 WR's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 Solid #2 WR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 Solid #2 WR. Thats really how I considered him.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 If it is a non mandatory TE league than I would let someone else take him to high. you can get a slightly lesser productive WR instead and his matchups will be easier to evaluate than a TE's. TEs are more consistent scorers than wideouts. Even if he doesn't score a TD one week, he'll be sure to at least have a few grabs and some yardage, unlike good receivers who commonly have games mixed in where they only have one or 2 receptions the entire game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 I have Gates having a better year than Huddle projections. With Norv Turner in town Gates will be called on less to block and more to be involved with making plays for the offense. Norv always accentuates his skill players(see F Gore), and Marty was without question holding Gates back. We will all see what Gates is really about. He will be lined up in the slot and wide more than he will be in a three point, you can bank it, it wont be close. They have blockers in SD, they dont need Gates in there doing it. Why else would they let McCardell and the rest of the WR leave? He will explode with Norv's play calling. You will see more multi back sets and less of the 2 TE look. He will be mismatched on LB and nicklebacks all year, with a pretty good schedule to boot. I look for 88/1100/13, and without all that blocking of 300 lbs guys he used to have to do under Marty, a more fresh Gates in time for Fantasy Playoffs, and isnt that what its all about? After all, how many TD's would Ocho Cinco and M Harrison have if they had Marty making them block D Freeney and other D lineman for most of the season? And Gates STILL had 10+ TD's a season. 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.