Teams have an incentive to list players like Pitts as a TE, and Pitts has an incentive to be listed as a WR. The depth chart is often a political tool as much as it is an informative one. I wanted to tie that speculation to Pitts’ contract for that reason. Pitts’ representation team will almost certainly argue he is a WR for the higher pay ceiling, and if he wins at that negotiation, would he be listed differently? Would he demand it? I don’t think we’ve ever seen a player try to negotiate his contract to change a depth chart. But we have seen that back and forth over the franchise tag. This happened with Jimmy Graham, and an arbitrator ruled against Graham. Wouldn’t you know, Graham was gone the very next year. Will Atlanta risk losing their brightest star over this?
If his pay is affected by where his name appears on a document, I would believe Pitts’ team would try to negotiate to get that changed. Nobody else is going to have the mix of play style, results, and leverage that Pitts will have in that negotiation. By the time he comes up for a new contract, would he still be playing in line just as much as he did in year one? If it happens, fantasy providers will have to start thinking about it, and it only takes one for the house of cards to fall.
That’s only an issue if they franchise tag him. If they sign him before they reach that point it doesn’t matter if they call him a TE or WR, they’ll pay him whatever money he’s worth. And I don’t think fantasy sites are going to change his position when he’s still considered by his team and the NFL to be a TE. I can’t think of anything they’ve done like that in the past. Jimmy Graham is a pretty good prototype for what’s going to happen with them and I don’t think any site changed his position.
He also lined up tight about 40-45% this year, so speculation that he’s barely going to play inline in the future is just that. What’s a fair percentage that you can play inline and still be considered a tight end?
Being able to play a TE is not just a fantasy advantage, but an NFL advantage too, if he’s a halfway decent blocker.
No argument there, though i have different cites for his in-line usage. But Graham didn’t have 1st round draft capital and he didn’t have Pitts’ record-breaking season (for a TE). The leverage will be entirely different. My question is not that fantasy sites list him based on whatever he is listed on the team depth chart. My point is that Pitts will almost certainly want that changed. He will demand WR money, which is far more significant than TE money. The Falcons will want to pay him as a TE. The franchise tag is a threat, and the Falcons would win that based on precedent. But they would then risk Pitts being mad enough to leave, like Graham did. Would they pay him like a WR and list him as a TE? I guess that is the most likely outcome, and then this never becomes an issue.
Let’s say a team, maybe Atlanta, maybe the next team, gives in to his demands and lists him as a WR to get him to sign an extension/free agent contract. Does that set a new precedent for other TEs? I just think it’s interesting, and I don’t think it is something that will resolve itself. The reason I brought it up is because it really would be an upheaval. Lots of leagues are removing the TE position altogether from fantasy, and it feels to have the same momentum that PPR and superflex had back in the day before those became so common
Removing the TE slot is pretty fringe, I think I’ve only heard of 1 or 2 leagues doing it. I don’t think it’s like PPR where it was common and quickly spread. I’m not very into the fantasy scene like I used to, so you might know better, but I doubt that becomes the norm or even a large minority in the near future. I also think it’s not really good for leagues - having the TE position fall off so fast introduces interesting strategic choices into teambuilding.
I’m not too worried about it. I think Atlanta is probably gonna pay him WR money whatever they call him and we won’t have franchise tag drama that makes him leave the team. I didn’t watch him very much so I don’t know how his in-line blocking is, but if it’s even average, there’s so much advantage to be gained by lining him up at TE half the time that Atlanta would be smart to actually use him as a real TE, not just a wink wink nudge nudge “TE” like Gesicki.
Incidentally - just curious - if we were having a startup draft tomorrow, where would you guys take Kyle Pitts? Same rules as we currently have.
I think I would try to go with a young QB in round 1, and he would be high, high up on the list for round 2. I guess it depends where I picked in the order. If he went in round 1, it isn’t a reach
Agreed. If I were picking 10th, let’s say, and all good young passers were off the board, he’d be my first choice and then grab a decent QB in the 2nd.
He’s still 21 until October. He’s kind of freakishly everything, including young. I wonder if he hits his ceiling if he’ll be considered a top 3-4 dynasty asset, that would certainly be unprecedented for a TE.
That’s actually a tough question to answer. The consensus is that Chase is more valuable but I really think people have consistently underrated the positional advantage of TE in fantasy. TEs also usually take 4-5 years to really develop, which limits their dynasty value - a 26 or 27 year old TE can be very valuable but it’s hard to compare their dynasty value to a 22 year old WR. Pitts is fairly unique in that he’s going to be a top TE even when he’s still very young.
I would have to think hard about it, but my first instinct is no… but that may be a choice-supportive bias on my part, we value what we already have more. If they both hit their ceilings, I think Pitts would be more valuable to a team in whatever wins over replacement metric you’d use.
I don’t see Pitts having huge value yet. Yeah, it’s nice that he got a thousand yards, but I would want a top-10 player to have one (preferably two) smash seasons under his belt and last year doesn’t qualify. Admittedly, TDs are the least predictable stat, but maybe he never scores a lot of TDs, like Julio Jones or Andre Johnson.
My re-draft dynasty picks would start with one of the QBs who puts up big numbers and isn’t too run-reliant - Mahomes, Allen, Herbert, maybe Burrow - and go from there. Pitts was the TE7 in this format last year. He arguably has the most upside of the guys ahead of him, but we’ll see.
I set Peteys’ FAAB to $110 based on our vote to change the way the consolation bracket winner is rewarded. I think it should be $120, and some other people agreed, but didn’t get a majority on that specific part. We did get a majority on changing it, but not to $120. I think we’re good to go for the start of the season. The only thing I can see is that our IR spots were carried over as 6 per team from last season. Hamlet suggested this originally, and while people voted against it, I’m now on board. I think it worked out fine. Should we just keep going with it since we’ve had it for 2 seasons now (sorta)?
The only reason I hesitate on IR slots is that IIRC yahoo expanded them so that the players didn’t actually have to be on IR, they could just be doubtful or out or suspended. I don’t have a problem with extended IR relief, but I hesitate to give 6 new slots that can be used for a wide range of statuses.
The cash league I play in does not use a dedicated TE slot. Skill position roster slots are
QB
WR
W/R
W/R
W/T
W/T
We think that best captures the flavor of today’s NFL while allowing for everything from 22 personal to empty backfield. But we also use a number of arcane scoring conventions that are probably pretty fringe for todays fantasy milieu.
As much as I love and generally need, IR slots, 6 may be too many. I’d be fine with 4, hell, even 3 if it is a problem with the rest of the league.
According to Rotowire, Kyle Pitts lined up as a TE for just 34% of his snaps last year. He blocked on just 33% of his snaps.
If he lines up as a WR, gets paid like a WR, why is he listed as a TE?
Of course the same can be said for Mike Gesicki. But Gesicki’s value plummeted this year when the Dolphins franchised him and will be using him much more as a blocker. Somehow I doubt the same will happen to Pitts.
What is the history of this league with IR slots? Rosters feel deep enough that I would think a single slot would be sufficient for most even if it meant carrying a player on IR for a few weeks in the active 25. I think making the protectable player group much larger reduces one of the only pressures for player movement beyond the rookie draft, which speaking from all my depth of dynasty experience sounds like an ungood thing.
Traditionally we had two IR slots, but during COVID Yahoo expanded those to six and it appears it’s been that way ever since.
My vote is two, but I’m pretty sure Hamlet feels strongly it should be more. I wouldn’t object to three, especially since the NFL itself allows more IR placements than back in the day.
Note: Since the season has started I would bet a dollar that we are locked into the six we have. Something to fix for next year.
It’s counterproductive to try and enforce a limit other than the Yahoo allowed limit. If it’s six it’s six.
I agree with Ellis. Three is probably a good amount of IR slots.
And thanks for the reviews Jules. I think you’ve pretty much nailed my team. I don’t expect to compete this year, but I feel like I’m building a good group for two years down the line (or maybe even next year).
Yeah, it looks like we are locked in to 6 again. That’s my fault. I didn’t know Yahoo would force me to update that before I updated the rosters for the completed draft. I thought we can update it any time before the first game kicks off. The lock happens when we finish the draft, so that’s on me