Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Taysom Hill 2020 Outlook


Message added by tonycpsu

[ As mentioned previously, Hill's TE eligibility is a league/platform-specific issue that needs to be discussed in either the Commissioner's Corner or Platform Central thread.  Believe it or not, there are people who just want to discuss his fantasy outlook without arguing about which positional eligibility is correct.  Please help us out here and take those discussions elsewhere. ]

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Bugs bunny said:

I have the opposite take. I believe ESPN dropped the ball before season started by labeling him a TE because of snaps at that position last year. When they should have gone off the Saints actual depth chart going into this year. 

I mean it's a fair take to have, but what from this season would you have seen to support that? Depth charts aren't the end all be all, and frankly they're often wrong because the coaches aren't the ones submitting them to any websites. Jordan Howard was listed as the starter at RB week 1 for the Dolphins, yet Myles Gaskin got 70% of the snaps. At this very moment Cordarrelle Patterson is listed as a second string wideout on Chicagobears.com, yet he's been the starting running back for them. Because of snap data though, sites have given him RB eligibility. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

taysom hill owners once their fellow league managers see him slotted into the TE position  

I really like his matchup this weekend, Atlanta is last in the league against TE's, so I'm expecting a pretty big game.  

Posted Images

Another player that some of you may be forgetting is CJ Spiller who had both WR and RB eligibility. So you can say it was probably an advantage at the time to use him at WR considering he had quite a bit of RB snaps. Again this isn’t the first or the last time a situation like this happens. It’s called fantasy football for a reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ajs723 said:

Makes perfect sense in baseball, and maybe basketball. Positions are drastically different in football. Yes, it's nice if a baseball player has 2nd base and CF eligibility or something. But you're still getting the same stats either way. 4 or 5 at bats. If center-fielders got 5 times as many at-bats as infielders, I'd be annoyed by that. 

QB and TE are drastically different positions, which provide drastically different production. Hill a QB. End of conversation. 

 

No it makes perfecr sense in terms of multi positional eligibility.

 

In baseball leagues people moved Victor Martinez up their draft boards all those years even though 80% of his games were at DH.  Evan Gattis one season carried as a DH/C and was a fantastic pick up.  The rest of the league didn't complain about it, they realized they missed a great opportunity and moved on.

 

WE HAVE NO IDEA IF HILL WILL EVEN BE A TOP 3 TE.  We have to see what his role is.

 

When you have a unicorn as rare as they are.  You don't go instantly killing the unicorn.  You nurture that unicorn and put it in your starting lineup at TE.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are on the topic of unfair, is there any way ESPN could possibly cut Dalvin Cook's weekly points in half? Any owner in good faith should feel bad about this cheat code. A level playing field for all. Perhaps make all games end in a tie so we can all be winners. Just throwing some ideas out there...

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PRoSPx said:

 

Here is why this is fundamentally incorrect.  There has already been precedent set with other players getting multi positional eligibility.  I referenced earlier how Hester was a CB who gained the WR tag, Tavon Austin.  If there is a precedent in which has already been set you continue on with the precedent.  You dont change it because some speculate it may be "unfair" in this case.  This is how multiple position eligibility works.  Again WRs & RBs throw passes, QBs rush, WRs rush.  It happens.  Next time know the league landscape better.

If a Safety gets hurt mid season with a season ending injury and the Cornerback goes back to play safety for duration of the year. The next year when the starting Safety comes back and the Corner moves back to his regular position. That said Cornerback should not get Safety eligibility as well as his standard Corner to start that season. 
about knowing my league landscape. I’m aware of everything in my league Thankyou. Positions in my league are set according to teams official depth charts going into the year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, PRoSPx said:

 

No it makes perfecr sense in terms of multi positional eligibility.

 

In baseball leagues people moved Victor Martinez up their draft boards all those years even though 80% of his games were at DH.  Evan Gattis one season carried as a DH/C and was a fantastic pick up.  The rest of the league didn't complain about it, they realized they missed a great opportunity and moved on.

 

WE HAVE NO IDEA IF HILL WILL EVEN BE A TOP 3 TE.  We have to see what his role is.

 

When you have a unicorn as rare as they are.  You don't go instantly killing the unicorn.  You nurture that unicorn and put it in your starting lineup at TE.

I'm not saying don't take advantage if you can, I'm saying the whole thing is a joke. He's not a TE in any capacity. Hasn't been all year. The Saints list him at QB. He plays QB. Anyone who remotely follows the Saints knows he's a QB. A few fantasy platforms messed up.  It's a mistake. An error. An oversight. A fairly egregious one.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bugs bunny said:

If a Safety gets hurt mid season with a season ending injury and the Cornerback goes back to play safety for duration of the year. The next year when the starting Safety comes back and the Corner moves back to his regular position. That said Cornerback should not get Safety eligibility as well as his standard Corner to start that season. 
about knowing my league landscape. I’m aware of everything in my league Thankyou. Positions in my league are set according to teams official depth charts going into the year. 

 

You are making my point for me.  The corner is capable of playing safety and did play there the year before he should be eligible to play both.

 

Again your arguement really can't be against Taysom Hill being TE eligible unless you are championing against multi positional eligibility all together.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, PRoSPx said:

 

No it makes perfecr sense in terms of multi positional eligibility.

 

In baseball leagues people moved Victor Martinez up their draft boards all those years even though 80% of his games were at DH.  Evan Gattis one season carried as a DH/C and was a fantastic pick up.  The rest of the league didn't complain about it, they realized they missed a great opportunity and moved on.

 

WE HAVE NO IDEA IF HILL WILL EVEN BE A TOP 3 TE.  We have to see what his role is.

 

When you have a unicorn as rare as they are.  You don't go instantly killing the unicorn.  You nurture that unicorn and put it in your starting lineup at TE.


The point you’re missing is that regardless of position eligibility, offensive players in baseball are getting the same stats across the board. They all accrue stats based on AB’s. 
 

This situation is completely different. You’re potentially giving a position (TE/WR) 20+ points for not even catching a single pass. A player that has RB/WR eligibility for example, that situation is much more feasible. Since the average point difference between the two positions is fairly negligible. However a QB on average scores twice as many points as a WR and 75% more than a TE! Not exact numbers here, but ballpark. 
 

Back to baseball, let’s take Ohtani for example. You don’t get offensive stats when he pitches. And you don’t get pitching stats when he hits. Because they are entirely different positions. Giving Taysom credit at WR/TE (if he plays QB which in all likelihood he will), is equivalent to somehow giving Ohtani offensive stats for pitching. You can’t, because it’s an entirely different set of production (pitching vs hitting). 

Edited by Sonny_D
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sonny_D said:


The point you’re missing is that regardless of position eligibility, offensive players in baseball are getting the same stats across the board. They all accrue stats based on AB’s. 
 

This situation is completely different. You’re potentially giving a position (TE/WR) 20+ points for not even catching a single pass. A player that has RB/WR eligibility for example, that situation is much more feasible. Since the average point difference between the two positions is fairly negligible. However a QB on average scores twice as many points as a WR and 75% more than a TE! Not exact numbers here, but ballpark. 
 

Back to baseball, let’s take Ohtani for example. You don’t get offensive stats when he pitches. And you don’t get pitching stats when he hits. Because they are entirely different positions. Giving Taysom credit at WR/TE (if he plays QB which in all likelihood he will), is equivalent to somehow giving Ohtani offensive stats for pitching. You can’t, because it’s an entirely different set of production (pitching vs hitting). 

Huh?  You haven't played in a league where a RB rolls out and tosses a TD?  You haven't had Julian Edelman - a WR who played QB in college - take a quick pass behind the line of scrimmage from the GOAT and then throws a bomb to Sanu?  You haven't owned Desean Jackson - a WR - who sometimes used to return kicks and he would run a kick return back for a TD?  He's a WR, yet he got points for returning a kick?  Lamar Jackson and Kyler Murray are QBs.  They're meant to throw the ball.  Yet they run a lot, and they actually score TDs running the ball like a running back. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CooL said:

Huh?  You haven't played in a league where a RB rolls out and tosses a TD?  You haven't had Julian Edelman - a WR who played QB in college - take a quick pass behind the line of scrimmage from the GOAT and then throws a bomb to Sanu?  You haven't owned Desean Jackson - a WR - who sometimes used to return kicks and he would run a kick return back for a TD?  He's a WR, yet he got points for returning a kick?  Lamar Jackson and Kyler Murray are QBs.  They're meant to throw the ball.  Yet they run a lot, and they actually score TDs running the ball like a running back. 

 


You’re missing the point. A play here and there, sure. But an ENTIRE game at a completely different position and getting credit for stats at a position that doesn’t even apply? How does that make sense? 
 

And your running QB example is a terrible analogy. He’s getting credit at QB because he’s a QB. He’s not getting credit at K because he’s playing QB. 

Edited by Sonny_D
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

I'm not saying don't take advantage if you can, I'm saying the whole thing is a joke. He's not a TE in any capacity. Hasn't been all year. The Saints list him at QB. He plays QB. Anyone who remotely follows the Saints knows he's a QB. A few fantasy platforms messed up.  It's a mistake. An error. An oversight. A fairly egregious one.  

 

Go reference his snap count as well as useage and there is much more merrit to the arguement that there is more reason for him to be TE eligible over QB eligible.  Which is exactly what ESPN tweeted out back in April.

 

If this was such an over powered exploit where was the dissent for the last 7 months? Why is no one protesting other multi position eligible players?

 

The concept of multi positional eligibility shouldn't just change on a dime week 11 because 11 of the 12 teams in your league missed out on the potential prize.

 

So stop being a salty leaguemate.  Be a classy leaguemate admit it was a good pick up and hope you can be on the next one.  No more of this "if I can't have Taysom no one can" attitude.  Let at least someone enjoy and reap the reward of good foresight.

 

Again Taysom is a unicorn don't kill the unicorn admire the unicorn in your (or a leaguemate's) TE slot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we still bitching about Taysom as a TE in ESPN? It is what it is.

Can someone sum up the thoughts on him as an actual QB in fantasy leagues? I’m not reading though 20 pages

A QB desperate team grabbed him in my superflex league and I think they’re going to rake

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PRoSPx said:

 

Go reference his snap count as well as useage and there is much more merrit to the arguement that there is more reason for him to be TE eligible over QB eligible.  Which is exactly what ESPN tweeted out back in April.

 

If this was such an over powered exploit where was the dissent for the last 7 months? Why is no one protesting other multi position eligible players?

 

The concept of multi positional eligibility shouldn't just change on a dime week 11 because 11 of the 12 teams in your league missed out on the potential prize.

 

So stop being a salty leaguemate.  Be a classy leaguemate admit it was a good pick up and hope you can be on the next one.  No more of this "if I can't have Taysom no one can" attitude.  Let at least someone enjoy and reap the reward of good foresight.

 

Again Taysom is a unicorn don't kill the unicorn admire the unicorn in your (or a leaguemate's) TE slot.


Lol. Why even have positions at that point? Why not just draft and start a team of 9 of the highest scoring players every week, regardless of position. I mean, you’re potentially taking a guy that takes 100% of his snaps at QB and playing him in your TE slot. Why don’t we just put him in the DEF/ST slot as well since he’s also played ST before. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, urban2014 said:

Colston was really good in this rookie year when was allowed to carry TE

Ha remember that.  Think that was only yahoo if I remember right.  The weirdest part of this situation is ESPN says they might take away his TE designation.  They didn't take away Ty Montgomery WR status when he became the starting RB for GB.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, owenmills said:

Are we still bitching about Taysom as a TE in ESPN? It is what it is.

Can someone sum up the thoughts on him as an actual QB in fantasy leagues? I’m not reading though 20 pages

A QB desperate team grabbed him in my superflex league and I think they’re going to rake

He's ranked at about #13-14 for the week, so even borderline startable in 1 QB 12 and 14 team leagues.  Certainly in a super flex, he's playable.  He's certainly one of the the top 24 QBs in the league this week, no?

7 minutes ago, Sonny_D said:


Lol. Why even have positions at that point? Why not just draft and start a team of 9 of the highest scoring players every week, regardless of position. I mean, you’re potentially taking a guy that takes 100% of his snaps at QB and playing him in your TE slot. Why don’t we just put him in the DEF/ST slot as well since he’s also played ST before. 

You're obviously a salty owner that missed out on him.  I've played once in a really dumb league where basically you started 1 QB, 1 RB, 1 WR, 1 TE, and then 5 super flexes.  Dumbest most idiotic league I've ever participated in.  

It is what it is.  He has multi positional eligibility.  Deal with it.  And maybe next year, consider rostering these guys which are bonanza when lightning strikes.

And if you don't like it, then propose a vote on your draft night.  You look at every single multi positional player and decide then BEFORE the season starts, how your league will deal with it if you choose to be different than the actual platform.

Don't understand why people weren't beeyatching about Taysom Hill for the first 10 weeks.  Surely you all are in some leagues where he has been rostered hoping that lightning would strike.  Was the league in uproar then?  Or were you all just snickering thinking how this sap was wasting a roster spot.  So hypocritical...

5 minutes ago, Thrill22 said:

Does anyone know how he is as a pocket passer? Seems like the logical defensive plan would be to stop the run/Kamara/contain Hill and dare him to throw.

I don't believe he's a pocket passer.  I think the Saints want to run.  Having a mobile QB puts the mystery into each play and will allow Kamara and Murray to have wider running lanes, etc.  I think that's a big reason why Jameis isn't getting the start.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, PRoSPx said:

 

Go reference his snap count as well as useage and there is much more merrit to the arguement that there is more reason for him to be TE eligible over QB eligible.  Which is exactly what ESPN tweeted out back in April.

 

If this was such an over powered exploit where was the dissent for the last 7 months? Why is no one protesting other multi position eligible players?

 

The concept of multi positional eligibility shouldn't just change on a dime week 11 because 11 of the 12 teams in your league missed out on the potential prize.

 

So stop being a salty leaguemate.  Be a classy leaguemate admit it was a good pick up and hope you can be on the next one.  No more of this "if I can't have Taysom no one can" attitude.  Let at least someone enjoy and reap the reward of good foresight.

 

Again Taysom is a unicorn don't kill the unicorn admire the unicorn in your (or a leaguemate's) TE slot.

Again, I'm not "salty". No one in my league is starting Hill at any position. 

Rotoworld:

QB, 

 

Pro football reference:

Taysom Hill

Taysom Shawn Hill

Position: QB

 

NFL.COM:

Taysom Hill

QB  #07
New Orleans Saints
 
NewOrleansSaints.com:
 

Taysom Hill

QB

#7

And ESPN.COM

TAYSOM HILL

New Orleans Saints
Edited by ajs723
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

Again, I'm not "salty". No one in my league is starting Hill at any position. 

Rotoworld:

QB, 

 

Pro football reference:

Taysom Hill

Taysom Shawn Hill

Position: QB

 

NFL.COM:

Taysom Hill

QB  #07
New Orleans Saints
 
NewOrleansSaints.com:
 

Taysom Hill

QB

#7

And ESPN.COM

TAYSOM HILL

New Orleans Saints

If no one is starting him in your league and it makes no difference you sure are wasting a lot of time in here reading and posting lol

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't knock it til you try it. Thank goodness some undrafted Qb's got their chances like Warner, Romo, Moon, and Delhomme. Dude has deserved his game starting chance and it couldn't be a nicer matchup. Horrific Atlanta pass D, at home, Michael Thomas back......I mean if he fails, he fails, but golly it's a sweet setup at least. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

Again, I'm not "salty". No one in my league is starting Hill at any position. 

Rotoworld:

QB, 

 

Pro football reference:

Taysom Hill

Taysom Shawn Hill

Position: QB

 

NFL.COM:

Taysom Hill

QB  #07
New Orleans Saints
 
NewOrleansSaints.com:
 

Taysom Hill

QB

#7

And ESPN.COM

TAYSOM HILL

New Orleans Saints

 

You continue to make an irrelevant arguement.  Positional eligibility in fantasy is set off of where that player played last year.

 

Again Devin Hester, Tavon Austin, Marques Colston, the precedent has already been set.  Do you not believe in multi positional eligibility? Do you not believe in players changing positions?

 

Again, why has Taysom Hill had TE eligibility all season as well as him having it last year and now all of a sudden it's an issue?  Honestly, that's where you lose a lot of credibility.  If Winston was named the starter there wouldn't be near the static.  This isn't a new concept and it's been speculated this could have happened since Taysom has been granted TE eligibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Silkk1211 said:

If no one is starting him in your league and it makes no difference you sure are wasting a lot of time in here reading and posting lol

Actually not at all.  My issue is I have played fantasy football for 20 plus years.  Never once seen a player lose his designation at a certain position.  Just seems like they are trying to cover their a**.  Hill should of never been a TE since every week he was listed as QB2 for NO(I think).  They got cute with his designation and should have to stick by it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Gandalfthecat said:

All of these positional disputes are dull. Agreed.
 

What’s this cat gonna do on the field?

Who knows honestly. But Payton gave this dude a bajillion dollars to be the future QB of the Saints, so I'm hoping he knows best in the end.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PRoSPx said:

 

You continue to make an irrelevant arguement.  Positional eligibility in fantasy is set off of where that player played last year.

 

Again Devin Hester, Tavon Austin, Marques Colston, the precedent has already been set.  Do you not believe in multi positional eligibility? Do you not believe in players changing positions?

 

Again, why has Taysom Hill had TE eligibility all season as well as him having it last year and now all of a sudden it's an issue?  Honestly, that's where you lose a lot of credibility.  If Winston was named the starter there wouldn't be near the static.  This isn't a new concept and it's been speculated this could have happened since Taysom has been granted TE eligibility.

You continue to fundamentally refuse to understand that this is precisely my problem with it. It's not about Hill, it's about this being an absurd, and obviously incorrect, thing to do. ESPN does this wrong. Most formats do not do this, because they understand how stupid it is. 

Moving on now. Good luck to all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...