Reading the “12 Overvalued Players (Fantasy Football)”, and a I have a few comments.
Tagliere’s comments on Jonathan Taylor were correct, but I don’t think he went far enough. If Taylor played behind a bad offensive line, he wouldn’t be in the top 10 conversation. Taylor is a straight-up runner, with very little juke, and he doesn’t bowl people over. All he is doing is running through holes. I hope he sent his offensive line some nice Christmas presents last year, because they are making him look MUCH better than he is. By comparison, Kalen Ballage showed me more with a lesser o-line in LA. Put Ballage in Indy, and he could be an RB1.
I disagree with Pintado’s analysis of Cam Akers, specifically: " The additions of Matthew Stafford and receivers shows the team wants to push the ball downfield, which could limit the amount of carries Akers could get." This actually opens up opportunities for RB’s. Al Davis built his own offense on this theory. When defenses have to play on their heels, that leaves fewer defenders near the line.
Speaking of Pintado, he also misses the boat on Kyle Pitts. Yes, we all know the history of rookie TE’s. Or do we? Some notable rookie TE’s:
Mike Ditka (1961): 14 games, 56 catches, 1076 yards, 12 td’s
John Mackey (1963): 14 games, 35 catches, 726 yards, 7 td’s
Jeremy Shockey (2002): 15 games, 74 catches, 894 yards, 2 td’s
Rob Gronkowski (2010): 16 games, 42 catches, 546 yards, 10 td’s
Keep in mind, the first two were during the running era of the NFL. But Ditka’s stats were exceptional, even by today’s standards (today’s stats over a 17 game season: 68 catches, 1306 yards, 14 td’s).
If Pitts is truly a “generational talent”, then Ditka’s numbers come into play. Considering the lack of receiving options outside of Ridley and Gage and RB Davis, Pitts strikes me as a strong TE with plenty of upside. Pitts is my TE3, but only because I’m not feeling safe with Kittle’s injury history.