Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Josh Hill - TE - New Orleans Saints (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter SaintsInDome2006
- Start date
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
337 targets have left the team. - Tell you what, try to figure out how many targets, completions, yards and TDs Brees will deliver in a floor/down year and then who after Cooks, Colston and Spiller will get them. You've got 6 UDFA Wr's and TE (Hill, Coleman, SJones, Morgan, Harris, Saunders), a disappointing past 4th round WR, and a vet TE with some past successes to work with, who will get the bulk? Go.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Fleener had 51-774-8 in his third year in the league. So his ceiling is worse than what he's already done?
cr8f
Footballguy
They have lost a lot, what they'll do to make that up is the question. Training camp and OTA's should be interesting.
Yes
With more WR's likely on the field their will be less two tight end sets and if there is only one tight end on the field it's going to be the one that blocks and that's not Fleener.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
There was an article in a local rag that they might do this too, it doesn't take much imagination, it was the first thing I thought when I heard the Pats released him, he would have been a nice fit. I almost think the Bucs grabbed him to keep him away from the Saints.
cr8f
Footballguy
TZMarkie
Footballguy
I think you are "sort of" missing the mark here.
I am high on Josh Hill, but I am also smart enough to realize I don't see him duplicating the monstrous Jimmy Graham numbers at TE for the Saints.
I base my opinions on essentially 2 things.
A- The Saints offenses have had strong numbers at TE for a number of years now.
True, I think part of it is the far above average talent that Graham has, but we should at least see a bit of that is scheme and offensive planning.
B- The coaching and team seem to be high on the guy as well. He was limited in targets and action last year, and he did fairly well in those times where he did get the ball.
He does seem to have some ability, and the opportunity has now surfaced since Graham is gone.
So couple "good" ability, the organization seems to believe in him, and now the opportunity has arisen, I see this as a potential value situation.
We may or may not like to admit this, but year in and year out fantasy is a lot about opportunity, and this is a situation where its basically fallen into his lap.
All of the above leads me to believe he will have a good season, barring injury.
How good is a "good season", that is where the debate comes in.
For me, its doubtful he sneaks into the top 3, but a top 5 or right on that 5-ish cusp is easily attainable.
All the other muck like Julius Thomas, Coby Fleener, Martellus Bennett, and people in and around that 5-9 range, I can see him outperforming them all.
The top 4 at TE last year were Gronk, Gates, Graham and Olsen with Bennett coming in at 5th.
Its likely that Bennett slides a bit, and all the news coming out of Chicago seems like it leads to that conclusion.
It is also likely that Gates fall is coming at some point, and he may well tumble down the list too.....and Kelce may well rise a bit.
Regardless of who makes the top of the list, I can see Hill making it to the 5th or 6th spot at TE.
Currently his ADP is in the 112 range, and many mocks I am in he is going far later than that even.
Sign me up for possible top 6-ish TE production, when I can get it in the 11th or 12th round, possibly even later.
I wouldn't say I am unrealistically high on this guy, but he certainly seems like a decent option at TE, almost guaranteed to finish top 10 or so. PLUS some solid upside that may well land him around the top 5 range at the end of the year.
Unless he gets injured in the preseason, I am sure to get him in a league or two if I can get him very late like I mentioned above.
I hope the hype doesn't get too over the top as the season approaches.
TZM
For those who own him in dynasty leagues the buy price was so low this is upside all the way. Many of us with also have other TE options on the roster which helps protect against a poor season from him.
In redraft its much more of a lottery. With his value now you are going to have to pick him as your TE 1. That's a big risk to factor into your draft strategy. Its harder to pick him in that format over say a third 3 WR or backup RB than it is to pick him up on waivers in a dynasty.
In redraft its much more of a lottery. With his value now you are going to have to pick him as your TE 1. That's a big risk to factor into your draft strategy. Its harder to pick him in that format over say a third 3 WR or backup RB than it is to pick him up on waivers in a dynasty.
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
Wow. "5-ish cusp is easily attainable" ?? All I can say is I think you're in for a huge disappointment. He'll be a serviceable fantasy backup TE and that's about it. If he is better than about TE18 this year I'll be surprised.
Last edited by a moderator:
cr8f
Footballguy
Why all the hate? 5 is high but I can see him as a low TE1` or late TE2, we don't know at this point but many of us like his potential because of Brees and Sean Payton.Bruce Hammond said:
If they are high on him so am I. Give it a rest and let's find out as the season progresses.
You may be surprised too. At this point no one knows just our opinions are just as valid as yours.
Dan Hindery
Moderator
I think top 5 or 6 TE numbers are pretty easily attainable for Hill.Bruce Hammond said:
It wouldn't take anywhere near healthy Jimmy Graham production to put up a top 6 TE season. It's not like the level needed to reach TE6 is crazy high.
Last year Delanie Walker was the #6 TE with 63-890-4.
I think Hill gets at least 6 or 7 TDs and thus would only need about 60 catches for 720 yards to equal Walker's 2014 fantasy production. It's not a guarantee, but it's not at all far-fetched either.
TZMarkie
Footballguy
We all have our own opinions, but to me TE18 is somewhat humorous.Bruce Hammond said:
Realize that he was TE 26 last year, this was with Jimmy Graham there, and from the numbers I just got off ESPN, Hill was either off the field, or not even targeted in 7 games.
Hill finished with 45 points, while sitting at TE 26.
Lets just suppose he averages a meager 4 points a game, in those 7 games where he got no production. (be it from no targets or not on the field)
I think we can safely assume thats a fair guess, with the loss of a couple of the Saints weapons.
That would hypothetically leave him with 45 + the "28 hypothetical points" which sits him at 73.
Jason Witten finished the season on 93 points and he was TE 10 last season.
All Hill would need is roughly 20 additional points in the rest of the games combined to bring him to the TE10 range. Are you saying with the loss of Jimmy Graham and in that TE friendly scheme he can't manage an additional 20 points the rest of the season???
Injury is always a factor, and of course we all have our opinions.............
"Sign me up for possible top 6-ish TE production, when I can get it in the 11th or 12th round, possibly even later. I wouldn't say I am unrealistically high on this guy, but he certainly seems like a decent option at TE, almost guaranteed to finish top 10 or so. PLUS some solid upside that may well land him around the top 5 range at the end of the year."
Those words were quoted directly from my post, and I certainly don't think its out of the question all things considered.
TZM
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
Hey, to the guy above who called it "all the hate" please recognize the difference between opinion and hate. And I don't have to 'give it a rest' just because I come into the thread without the manlove for him the rest of you do. I have as much right to my opinion as you to yours.
Yes, top-5ish is waaay off the mark IMO and that's not hate, that's being realistic. There are 32 teams, 32 starting TEs. TE18 is about where I will put him given his role in the offense.
Payton is not making him a focal point of the offense, not even committing to a 25% increase in snaps necessarily, and he'll need a whole lot bigger increase in snaps to be a fantasy starter. Good luck all you who drink the Kool Aid on this guy, it isn't warranted and I am sorry if you don't like my opinion but there it is. And if you call my opinion hate, that's on you, not me.
Josh Hill - TE - Saints
Coach Sean Payton reiterated that Josh Hill's playing time is set to increase.
Payton clearly likes Hill, but even he is tapping the breaks a bit. When asked how much Hill's snap count will rise, Payton said, "It just depends on how much two tight end sets we’re in, how much sub (packages). I couldn’t say specifically that he is going to have 25 percent more playing time but certainly his playing time will increase. ... A lot of it will be by game plan and what we are trying to do." We still like Hill as an 11th- or 12th-round upside pick thanks to athletic ability and opportunity, but a Jimmy Graham-like eruption isn't happening.
Source: New Orleans Times-Picayune
Jun 16 - 9:56 AM
Yes, top-5ish is waaay off the mark IMO and that's not hate, that's being realistic. There are 32 teams, 32 starting TEs. TE18 is about where I will put him given his role in the offense.
Payton is not making him a focal point of the offense, not even committing to a 25% increase in snaps necessarily, and he'll need a whole lot bigger increase in snaps to be a fantasy starter. Good luck all you who drink the Kool Aid on this guy, it isn't warranted and I am sorry if you don't like my opinion but there it is. And if you call my opinion hate, that's on you, not me.
Josh Hill - TE - Saints
Coach Sean Payton reiterated that Josh Hill's playing time is set to increase.
Payton clearly likes Hill, but even he is tapping the breaks a bit. When asked how much Hill's snap count will rise, Payton said, "It just depends on how much two tight end sets we’re in, how much sub (packages). I couldn’t say specifically that he is going to have 25 percent more playing time but certainly his playing time will increase. ... A lot of it will be by game plan and what we are trying to do." We still like Hill as an 11th- or 12th-round upside pick thanks to athletic ability and opportunity, but a Jimmy Graham-like eruption isn't happening.
Source: New Orleans Times-Picayune
Jun 16 - 9:56 AM
Last edited by a moderator:
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
You've begun with a base of 5 TDs on 16 receptions and tried to build from there. That TD ratio is unrealistic to maintain.
Last year in PPR the TE18 (Daniels BAL) was at 124.7 FP (about 8.3 FPPG because he missed a game). TE17 was Cook STL at 133.4 FP, also about 8.3 FPPG since he played all 16 games.
Cook went 52-634-3 on 98 targets, Daniels went 48-527-4 on 78 targets.
I could see a stat line for Hill of about 48-580-12.1 Y/R - 4 TD = 130 FP and around the TE 18 range. Could be less if he is hurt or doesn't get the snaps (they still may sign Gresham).
Before you say "only 4 TDs?! He had 5 last year!" I'll say TDs are highly unpredictable and his TDs last year came as a result of being the guy defenses were least concerned watching. As starter his role and the attention of defenses will be different. I think 4 TDs on 48 catches (3 catches / game) is a much more reasonable projection for Hill. He's not special and there are better players coming up in that offense like Brandon Colemen and Seantavious Jones to go with Toon, Colston, Cooks, Spiller... I think Hill will be lucky to get 50 catches, and I predict he won't get that many.
Last edited by a moderator:
TZMarkie
Footballguy
I was never under the delusion that Hill would maintain the kind of pace he was on. 5 TDs in so few receptions is not sustainable for anyone, let alone Hill.
(it is for this reason that I also laugh at the people who view Mike Evans as highly as they do)
Just for clarification- I was getting my stats here. ---> http://games.espn.go.com/ffl/leaders?slotCategoryId=6
Before anyone points out that they may or "may not" be correct, lets just use those for the sake of this argument.
5 TDs in those few receptions is definitely flukey, but just how far fetched is 5 TDs in 9 games??? He had 5 TDs in the 9 games where he had receptions and numbers, and personally I don't think thats too unrealistic. (realize that with Graham now gone, he should rightfully get more targets and receptions)
The fact that he had that many TDs on such a small number of receptions is only an issue here, if you think he will keep that pace up, and we all know that won't happen.
Even if you say 4 is a more likely number, then 8 (for the season) is not out of the question now is it?
I do agree that TDs are flukey, but I don't see 8 as out of the realm of possibility, and I think at least 6 or 7 is actually a likely scenario, and that wouldn't make it hard at all for him to crack the top 10 mark I alluded to before.
Now there is one thing you are overlooking, and I myself didn't point it out in my post with the "hypothetical breakdown". I hinted at it above.
I noticed it earlier today but didn't go back and add it in.
A discerning reader may have looked at my numbers and said "those numbers look fair, but I think they may be a bit on the high side" which is what you seem to be saying.
The one thing you are overlooking is Hill's numbers should also increase in the games where he is on the field, and now Graham is not!
In other words, whatever the production was in the games last year where both were on the field, then Hill's numbers should rightfully increase now that Graham is out of the equation.
Say the TDs were flukey high in the limited action he saw last year, but on the same token his yardage and overall targets, receptions and numbers (TDs??) should increase as well.
So say his 45 points were "good" for 9 games, then exactly how much should it increase? We take Jimmy Graham out of the equation, say we give Hill the "very generous" 2 points each game, this can not be ignored.
That would put him at 63 and on an easy pace for the top 10. Also note thats just 2 points per game, that is no additional TDs in that same span.
Now, you also mentioned if they sign Gresham, or someone else.
All of my conclusions are of what we can see right now , and if they sign someone else then obviously everything goes out the window.
3 months before the season starts, I can only see what I see with the information at hand and make a guess at how this will play out.
And I believe he is an excellent bet for a top 10 finish, with the top 5-6 upside as I mentioned before.
I believe the numbers I outlined in my last few posts back that up pretty well.
(the mere fact I can get him in rounds 12 and beyond currently in mocks make it all the better)
I for one would like to make a pretty hefty bet somewhere, that Hill finishes top 10 or better................ as long as the situation there doesn't change.
But in fantasy you never know, and my opinion of Hill may change wildly if the Saints sign someone else before the season starts.
TZM
Last edited by a moderator:
Tau837
Footballguy
Post from the Who is going to catch the 440 completions from Brees? thread:
Last year, in one of my PPR dynasty leagues, Olsen was TE5, with 84/1008/6. In one of my non-PPR dynasty leagues, Bennett was TE5, with 90/916/6.
I think it is foolish to believe Hill was come close to 80+ receptions. Per PFF, he only ran 83 routes last season.
I projected 50 receptions above, which is in line with the stats Bruce posted about Cook and Daniels, who averaged 50 receptions between them. I agree with the notion that Hill could do a bit better than those guys on TDs, but it is no given.
Part of the problem in this thread is people are talking about Hill's production without placing it in context with the rest of the Saints' targets and without accounting for a potential reduction in passing attempts for the Saints this season.
Last year, in one of my PPR dynasty leagues, Olsen was TE5, with 84/1008/6. In one of my non-PPR dynasty leagues, Bennett was TE5, with 90/916/6.
I think it is foolish to believe Hill was come close to 80+ receptions. Per PFF, he only ran 83 routes last season.
I projected 50 receptions above, which is in line with the stats Bruce posted about Cook and Daniels, who averaged 50 receptions between them. I agree with the notion that Hill could do a bit better than those guys on TDs, but it is no given.
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Prepare to be surprised. Im also projecting top 5ish. Im confused on how so many FBGers are missing this hype train. Elite metrics, a known/provenTE-throwing QB, an offense that creates plays for TEs, and a team who lost weapons and didn't draft replacements. If you're projecting 18th TE then you must be new to this hobby.Bruce Hammond said:
That's really the only part I have an issue with. He certainly has upside in that offense, but top 10 is far from guaranteed out of a guy with 20 career receptions.
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
Ooooh, nice shot at me. Ya I'm new to this hobby.
You know, gentlemen, I'm not a hater, stupid, evil, mean, a rookie... I happen to carry a different opinion, and it seems people who are slobbering all over Hill just can't handle the mere thought of mediocre production for some reason. Let's just revisit it in January.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Lol. Seriously though....18? You're trolling right?
Tau837
Footballguy
Why the tool factor in your reply? Bruce was on staff at FBG and is far from new to this hobby.
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
OK I'll bite. Let's try this again. This thread has become a runaway hype train, projecting an undrafted guy with 20 career catches over two years to be an uber-stud top-5 TE. Few here seem to care that although his coach said nice things about him and that his playing time would increase, he also said "I couldn’t say specifically that he is going to have 25 percent more playing time but certainly his playing time will increase. ... A lot of it will be by game plan and what we are trying to do."
Won't commit to even 25% more playing time, yet somehow I'm trolling because I'm trying to point such things out and put a little sanity into the discussion. Some of you, without any basis, are assuming Hill will get big playing time numbers, and I'm saying he's an average talent on a team with oodles of other -- better -- options to throw to, a team who is exploring adding former 1st rounder Gresham, and who put in a claim for Tim Wright after he was released, and a HC who won't say Hill is going to get necessarily even a 25% bump in playing time. Quoting JWB above, "Per PFF, he only ran 83 routes last season." Hm.
As long as Payton is strongly suggesting Hill will be a part-timer, I'm not buying in as one of the Kool Aid mob, and I'm certainly not trolling.
And it gets pretty tiresome getting reamed by the SP every time I have an opinion contrary to that of the consensus mob. Do you have ANY idea how often the consensus mob is wrong when looking back at things???
Last edited by a moderator:
TZMarkie
Footballguy
First off, please do not take my points as a shot at you. I do try and respect your opinions, and most everyone else's here.
I just try to back up what say when I voice my opinion on matters like this (which admittedly is rare on this board, mostly I lurk).
I have made a living playing poker and gambling for the better part of 16 years, so the numbers behind things interest me more than the average guy I guess.
I don't really "call people out", nor do I post here looking for arguments.
The above posts, are what I perceive to be valid, potential reasons as to why he should be top 10 or so, with top 5-6 ish upside.
I certainly do not think I'm "slobbering all over Hill", but it just screams value situation to me, for the above reasons.
Now lets be fair............ suppose he finishes at 8th at TE in standard when all is said and done.
What does that prove?
It doesn't prove that I am right (and the Hill believers) and you are wrong. It just proves that my guesses were closer to the final outcome than yours.
Now, I am also that guy that when the season is over and someone screams "I told you so, the guy is a beast and I KNEW he would go off this season~!!!!", well I just kind of groan.
These people just don't look at the long term aspect of things. Its all about short term results and recency bias for them.
I look at things differently.
One thing I do take a small issue with, is something you said in post #120.... He's not special and there are better players coming up in that offense like Brandon Colemen and Seantavious Jones to go with Toon, Colston, Cooks, Spiller..
To be honest, I don't think we quite know exactly how "special" of a talent the guy may be.
His limited action didn't give us much of a clue to be honest. The only thing that I noticed in the games I watched, is the Saints believe him to be good talent.
Is he likely a top 3 TE talent? Its doubtful.
But on the other hand, from what the Saints seem to indicate, and the opportunity that has seemingly fell into his lap, I have a very hard time believing he will wind up as TE #18 too.
Hence my thinking he will be around top 10 at TE.
The beauty of fantasy, is everyone has a different opinion. The so called "experts" , well they are right a bit more often than the rest of the players.
I'm not one to rant rave and brag when I call a situation right, but this spirited debate will make it interesting when the season is over.
The sad fact is, they will likely sign someone effectively nullifying most of this debate, or Hill gets injured and misses significant time, thereby ruining the debate as well. LOL. (hopefully he does NOT get hurt though)
TZM
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Ok, I'm going to start over here. I'm not trying to offend anyone and my follow up post was intentionally lighthearted. Unfortunately, typing words on the internet doesn't allow the crucial, non-verbal aspect of conversation.
Anyways, you're entitled to your opinion just as much as anyone. I also don't think the majority is hyping Hill, I actually think he's still undervalued. Maybe the Hill supporters are overly-confident? I'll agree that's probably true but I don't think Hill fans are the majority at this point.
No matter which side of the coin you're on with regards to Hill's potential, the basis is lacking because he's only played 2 years as backup to the 1a TE in the NFL. Getting an edge in FF means being ahead of the curve and it's the only way to win consistently. You won't win consistently in FF by playing it safe and drafting chalk. Ideally, Hill would be in his 7th season with plenty of data to make a higher probability-based decision. Nobody has that luxury, but I do know this:
Drew Brees has proven that when provided an athletic TE, he will throw often enough to that player.
Josh Hill is an elite athlete
- Josh Hill is a very athletic TE, bordering on elite territory. He's nearly identical to Vernon Davis in the 3 cone, 20 yd shuttle and broad jump.
- He compares favorably, in practically every metric, over other stud TEs such as Gronk, Olsen and Julius
- Bottom line, Hill is an elite athlete for the position
- Since 2007, 3 seasons prior to Graham's breakout season, TE has been a steady producer in Payton's offense with Brees as QB
- If you take his worst yardage and TD figures from 2008-14, you'll get 4,400 yards and 33 TDs
- 3 of those seasons were without Graham
- He has done that with absolute unknowns at WR, essentially
- Jimmy Graham, Kenny Stills, Pierre Thomas and Travaris Cadet combined for ~2,500 yards in 2014
- The Saints did very little in the draft or FA to fill this void
- Colston and Cooks are the only 'proven' players in the receiving game and I use 'proven' lightly with Cooks
- Olsen and Bennett are good examples of current top 5 TEs who didn't produce consistently until their 6th season or so
Finally, regarding Payton's comments. What do you want the guy to say? Sounds like he's being cautious with his words which could be for a variety of reasons. IF Hill is a secret weapon, for instance, you think Payton would announce that by telling the media Hill is going to get 125 targets? He may have been very literal, as you suspect, with his words. There's no way of telling and at this point, there's not enough there to heavily weight Payton's comments, imo.
Tau837
Footballguy
Leading TE for the Saints 2007-2010:
2007: Eric Johnson 48/378/2 on 63 targets
2008: Billy Miller 45/579/1 on 62 targets (Shockey 50/483/0 on 72 targets)
2009: Shockey 48/569/3 on 67 targets
2010: Shockey 41/408/3 on 59 targets (or Graham 31/356/5 on 44 targets)
I don't see those years you cited as supporting your case for Hill. Quite the opposite, actually.
Lott's Fingertip
Footballguy
He may be speaking about New Orleans total TE production each season.
Dezbelief
Footballguy
http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/miami_dolphins_one_of_10_teams_to_put_in_waiver_claim_for_te_tim_wright/18975620?mb_edition=4694&linksrc=mb_favorites_head
The Bucs, the Dolphins, the Jets, Bears, Falcons, Browns, Saints, Chiefs, Steelers and Lions also tried to get the versatile tight end.
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
Good facts JWB. In the ballpark of the numbers I project upthread for Hill (48-580-4, for TE18 or so).
I believe some combo of Hill, Watson, and a TBD tight end (Gresham I'd bet as of now) will fill up the total TE stat volume; A little south of 50 completions on about 75-80 targets makes sense to me as Hill's piece.
I understand guys wanting Hill to become special, especially if they got him on the cheap when/before Graham was traded, as it would be very tasty to have a freebie pan out so well. While I can appreciate your hopefulness, I really don't believe the Saints view him in the same way you are hoping, and he'll have a lot more limited role than you anticipate.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hill went 14-176-5 on 20 targets in 2014. You expect him to get 4X the targets and go down in touchdowns?
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
Already covered this in post 120.tdmills said:
matttyl
Footballguy
Maybe this isn't the place to ask, but if Hill only gets 4 TDs, where are the other ~30 TDs that Brees throws going to go? Colston has only had 10+ twice, and has never had more than 11, and has had 10 combined the last 2 seasons. Cooks I don't think just jumps into double digits this year.
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
I dunno. Look at where they went pre-Graham. They didn't go 10 TD to one TE, and there's no reason to assume they will now. I'm gonna have to stop posting in this thread because all I'm doing is repeating myself when I say Hill's role isn't going to be nearly what people are hoping. It's too simple to say out with Graham, in with Hill. The Saints aren't even saying that he's getting a big bump in role (see above). So, the TDs go wherever, WRs, RBs, other TEs, but to just assume a big bunch of them will go to Hill because now he's the young TE is IMO a mistake. Geez, Watson could out-TD him for all I know.
Tau837
Footballguy
Saints passing TDs have dropped steadily from their peak of 46 in 2011 to 43 to 39 to 33 last season. In the 5 years with Payton and Brees before Graham's breakout season in 2011, the Saints had a total of 156 passing TDs, an average of 31.2 per season. This data plus Brees's age and the loss of quality targets in Graham and Spiller make it perfectly reasonable to project 30 passing TDs.
Only 23 of those 156 passing TDs in 2006-2010 were caught by TEs, and 5 of those went to Graham in 2010. Other than Graham, no Saints TE had more than 3 TDs in a single season in that 5 year span, and even that total was only achieved once.
This is data that supports a much lower TD total for Hill than many expect. It supports Bruce's viewpoint.
As for how 30 TDs could break down, it could easily be something like this:
6 Cooks
6 Colston
4 Hill
3 Spiller
6 other WRs
3 other TEs
2 other RBs
Run It Up
Footballguy
Bruce Hammond
Footballguy
I'll just add that Hill could get 5, 6, 7 TD... I am projecting 4 but like any projection I'm not betting my life savings on it. Or, he could get 2 or 3.
Last year's 5 TDs on 16 catches was an aberration, something that happens sometimes in the NFL and which generally has little carryover effect. To assume such carryover is I think a mistake. C Fauria was an example, in 2002 he had 7 TD on 27 catches and I remember guys drafting him the next year on that basis. He had a total of 8 TD in the 5 seasons following that, never more than 2 in one season. High TD ratios are flukey, and I expect defenses to adjust and the Saints to re-adjust.
Last edited by a moderator:
Boone22
Footballguy
ESPN Saints reporter Mike Triplett does not see a "major breakthrough" happening for third-year TE Josh Hill.
Triplett notes that 34-year-old blocker Ben Watson "might have led the Saints in catches during the OTA and minicamp practices that were open to the media," and may actually be a superior 2015 fantasy option to Hill. Coach Sean Payton recently suggested Hill's playing time will be limited to the "sub" offense, which would indicate Hill is not going to become a full-time player this season.
Triplett notes that 34-year-old blocker Ben Watson "might have led the Saints in catches during the OTA and minicamp practices that were open to the media," and may actually be a superior 2015 fantasy option to Hill. Coach Sean Payton recently suggested Hill's playing time will be limited to the "sub" offense, which would indicate Hill is not going to become a full-time player this season.
cr8f
Footballguy
A blind squirrel hoping he's right. I'll take Sean Payton's view before this guy.
Graham was hurt on a few occasions last season. We got to see what the Saints would like without him. Is there a reason to think it would be dramatically different? If anything, it would be more run-game-friendly, which arguably favors Watson, not Hill, but let's ignore that.
What we saw without Graham is consistent both with what Payton is saying and what Triplett is predicting:
*** Will Josh Hill see expanded usage? Definitely! Just like Payton said and just like Hill did when Graham was down, Hill will be on the field more and see more targets.
*** Will Hill see Graham-like target volumes, i.e. 100+ targets / 25% of total? No, just like he didn't come close to that in 2014. Hill will continue to share looks with Watson, maybe with another TE, probably also with Spiller. So his total share of the pie would settle in the 10-15% range, assuming everyone is healthy. That should be good for 45-50 receptions, which is great TE2 production on the cheap, but not Jimmy Graham stuff.
The only question is how productive do you think Hill will be with his touches? 10 ypc, 12 ypc, 15 ypc? How many TDs?
What we saw without Graham is consistent both with what Payton is saying and what Triplett is predicting:
*** Will Josh Hill see expanded usage? Definitely! Just like Payton said and just like Hill did when Graham was down, Hill will be on the field more and see more targets.
*** Will Hill see Graham-like target volumes, i.e. 100+ targets / 25% of total? No, just like he didn't come close to that in 2014. Hill will continue to share looks with Watson, maybe with another TE, probably also with Spiller. So his total share of the pie would settle in the 10-15% range, assuming everyone is healthy. That should be good for 45-50 receptions, which is great TE2 production on the cheap, but not Jimmy Graham stuff.
The only question is how productive do you think Hill will be with his touches? 10 ypc, 12 ypc, 15 ypc? How many TDs?
cheese
Footballguy
I'm really buying that someone has to be a steal in this offense. Hill is still a gamble though because when your value is entirely in situation, there is a risk of any guy off the street taking that opportunity from you. It's June. He might be worth a shot at ADP though and the closer we get to the season with this depth chart and this plan the more that risk decreases.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
while he wont be a plug and play replacement for Graham I would rather roll the dice with him then a lot of other people at his current ADP
Saints could be playing coy too, not wanting to tip their hands
Saints could be playing coy too, not wanting to tip their hands
