UTH Water Cooler: Talking Rob Gronkowski

The UTH crew has an ongoing google chat that has become the speed-dating way to communicate with the entire group throughout the day. Email chains? It feels like Paula Abdul should be playing in the background with how archaic that feels by comparison. Still working on how to best format slices of the ongoing dialogue into digestible content on the site when applicable. Here is one from this morning about Rob Gronkowski. The conversation as a whole started when I was discussing my nearly-complete trade calculator, positional value, team-direction…you know, dynasty business. Here is a snippet:

*Contributors name-picture included with each segment of text*

Gronk is an interesting one

I see the dialogue out there that he should be slam dunk top-5 dynasty asset, if not 1.01

The trade calc doesn’t support that as TEs rarely maintain production well into 30s

Will Gronk transition his game to Witten-Gonzo-Gates style when vibrant youth fades?

Not sure

_______

Unmm ever hear of ANTONIO GONZALEZ???

Jk

Patrick 

_______

I see Gronk as an early fader, so the age 30/31 zone is a good fit IMO

_______

Early fader bc of the back?

Patrick 

_______

Gronk backers would mock that, but give me all the stud WRs at a similar age over Gronk

Physical style of play, every play is a war for him. Kind of like Lacy of TEs

_______

careful Chad, you are coming close to hurting me

Katie 

_______

More of a feeling than ‘here is all the data I can on it’ thing

I love Gronk like everyone, but would you deal Julio-Dez-Green types for him?

_______

you really want to break a girls heart on mothers day?

Katie

_______

Actually I’d deal Green for him

_______

Green was the one I almost didn’t type

What about Antonio Brown?

_______

and no I wouldn’t trade those WR for Gronk either

Katie

_______

I think finding mid-TE1 production is really cheap year to year

Now, try to find legit WR1 upside for pennies

Part of it is the positional value

Now, if the rosters are tight and starting 2 WRs, 1 TE, 1 flex, Gronk rises

I would rather have 3 top-end WRs than 2+Gronk is what I’m saying

Not a popular opinion, but I would rather figure it out at TE (like QB) than be hoping at WR

Question: Gronk w/o Brady – does that change anything?

Also, what are the odds that Gronk doesn’t finish in top-2 of TE PPG in this season? I have 5% on that for example

_______

I think Gronk would be fine without brady as opposed to other TE without their Q’s

so whereas JT could lose value when changing teams/q, Gronk would still be fine IMO

Katie

_______

Trying to think of a TE that produced without a QB1 level guy under center for long….

Vernon Davis had that one outlier year

Anyone else?

Did Witten have someone prior to Romo?

If you are rebuilding and Gronk is main asset you have. Do you take 1.01 + say 1.07 for him?

_______

yes

in a heartbeat

or 1.01 and a second year guy of interest

Katie

_______

What about 1.01 + 2.01?

That’s about the line in the calculator for example

_______

That would be too low for me, but I could see some taking it

Katie

_______

too low for me

i will say that Gronk’s considered pretty stable outside of injury but..

if Brady is suspended and Gronk’s production suffers without him

then people will see him as more tied Brady

and his perceived window of elite production will shrink

Patrick

_______

Plus, is he insulated from injury anymore?

Folks forget when he is playing, but another injury?

_______

no not really

Patrick