Mind of Miller

Jeff Miller

Last week in this very space, I talked about my wide receiver rankings and how they got to be what they are. Among the players I touched on briefly was a breakout rookie from Kansas City who goes by Tyreek. At the time, I had him as my WR48, which drew the attention of one my readers:

screen shot 2017 03 08 at 13.42.35 1

I’ll start off by saying Dave is right, I was too low, and as such, have moved Hill up a few rungs to WR43. Yeah, the five spot change is pretty nominal, but I have reasons for that. So many reasons. Huge reasons. All the reasons. Stork Chocolate Riesens. Reasons.

Let’s put all the cards on the table: I have an intense dislike for gadget players in dynasty. I didn’t like Percy Harvin, I wasn’t much of a Tavon Austin guy, and I literally wrote the book on how overrated Cordarrelle Patterson was. For all the reasons I wasn’t in on them, I’m not in on Tyreek.

[am4show have=’g1;’ guest_error=’sub_message’ user_error=’sub_message’ ]

1. They don’t see consistent touches: Players that need to have touches manufactured can see great success in spurts, but coaches always seem to lose interest once the big plays stop coming. Which leads me to…

2. The sheer number of explosive plays from 2016 isn’t likely to continue long-term. As dynamic as Hill is, he isn’t entirely unique in that regard. All of the guys I mentioned above plus many others, Devin Hester comes to mind, shared his athletic profile, yet none were able to generate consistent explosive output.

3. Gadget players are gadget players because they aren’t good at anything other than being astonishing in the open field. If they could excel as a running back, they’d be a running back. If they were good receivers, they would be full-time receivers. A player that can play multiple positions is almost always a player without a position to play.

With all that out in the open, let’s examine Hill’s rookie season a bit closer. Really, it comes down to pre- Jeremy Maclin groin injury and post-Maclin groin injury.

screen shot 2017 03 08 at 13.42.55

In addition to the three issues I mentioned above, the return of a healthy Maclin won’t be a boon to Hill’s output in the near term, which, as we know, is what most matters for a player’s value. I wouldn’t necessarily expect Hill’s usage to drop to pre-groin injury levels, but Maclin will certainly command more attention from Alex Smith that Chris Conley and Albert Wilson. 

Going back for a moment to concern number two, Hill’s reliance on the big play is a big problem. Nine touchdowns on only 85 touches is absolutely unsustainable, a statement I’m not sure anybody would argue against. Also unsustainable (if he wants to be successful), Hill’s higher yards per carry (11.1) than yards per catch (9.7). The 11.1 will be difficult to repeat and the 9.7 is 1.6 less than Julian Edelman and 2.4 less than Jarvis Landry, two guys who are known for catching short passes almost exclusively. The stats speak to the unrepeatability of the big plays and the lack of prowess as a receiver, which is the number one thing that plagues players of this ilk. If you can’t get open on your own, coaches and QBs tire of finding ways to do it for you.

The biggest difference between Hill and the aforementioned Harvin and Patterson comes down to price. Despite Hill’s breakout, he is still only the 65th player, and 36th receiver, off the board in our startup ADP. Austin had a similar price (61) when he came into the league, but Cordarrelle (18!!!) and Harvin (27) have both carried significantly higher price tags. When looking at things from this perspective, it is difficult for me to argue too staunchly against the youngster. I strongly prefer several of the guys being drafted after him, but at WR36, it is hard to get hurt too bad, even if I’m right and he does fail as a consistent producer.

Another way to check value is to look at our rankings. While I have Hill at WR43, my compatriots have him as high as 31 and as low as 54. The consensus is WR37. I was honestly a bit surprised a few hadn’t ventured into the 20s, but that may have as much to do with the depth in that area of the position (see my article from last week for more on that) as anything else. There is also almost certainly some unintentional, or, perhaps, very intentional, bias due to a beyond reprehensible off the field transgression.

Hill is one of those guys who is going to have his believers. The explosiveness is hard to ignore for many, and impossible to ignore for some. While I’m not exactly ignoring it, I’m doing my level headed best to take it for what it is worth in relation to guys we’ve seen do this song and dance before. As ever, I’m open to being wrong, but in this case, I feel pretty confident I’m not.

[/am4show]

jeff miller