Taysom Hill qb/te on yahoo

[cyclone24 1,912]

So I have Hockensen , who really has not been great, Higbee, who gets a lot of volume, but not in the end zone. I know it’s against the grain a little bit, but on Yahoo Hill has qb and TE designation, and I’m thinking of throwing him in my tight end spot this week with Winston probably out? 
 

bad idea or edgy?
 

[weepaws 3,158]

Edgy

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

It's not the worst idea but you need to be equally prepared for a 12 point day and a 2 point day. Hill is very boom or bust. High ceiling, low floor, not a lot of consistency in the middle for him

[cavern 70]

Andy Dalton will start at QB in Winston's absence.  So, what the gamble is: will the Saints utilize Hill more in hybrid roles in order to make up for not having Winston in the game?

That's a difficult question to answer, honestly.  I sort of doubt the Saints view Dalton as such a drop off from Winston that they need to utilize Hill more, but what do i know?  I guess odds go up of Hill getting some QB run since, if Dalton is struggling they may need to go to Hill under center more (whereas usually it would be Winston-> Dalton instead) 

[weepaws 3,158]

8 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

It's not the worst idea but you need to be equally prepared for a 12 point day and a 2 point day. Hill is very boom or bust. High ceiling, low floor, not a lot of consistency in the middle for him

So after all that wasted space, edgy since it’s not the worst ideal? 

Lol you crack me up, not the worst ideal, prepare for a good game, or a bad game, boom or bust, high ceiling low floor. 

Oh my soul, just answer the OP question, Bad Ideal, or Edgy? 

Dang it man grow a set and make a darn decision on a topic , let this be that moment. 

 

[weepaws 3,158]

3 minutes ago, cavern said:

Andy Dalton will start at QB in Winston's absence.  So, what the gamble is: will the Saints utilize Hill more in hybrid roles in order to make up for not having Winston in the game?

That's a difficult question to answer, honestly.  I sort of doubt the Saints view Dalton as such a drop off from Winston that they need to utilize Hill more, but what do i know?  I guess odds go up of Hill getting some QB run since, if Dalton is struggling they may need to go to Hill under center more (whereas usually it would be Winston-> Dalton instead) 

Yeah so it’s edgy.  

[jrokh 608]

I wouldn’t start him over the Hoch.

[cavern 70]

7 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Yeah so it’s edgy.  

i guess so.  if i even understand what edgy means.

 

my other option, where i have hill, is everette.  i'm probably sticking with everette, personally.  

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

7 minutes ago, weepaws said:

So after all that wasted space, edgy since it’s not the worst ideal? 

Lol you crack me up, not the worst ideal, prepare for a good game, or a bad game, boom or bust, high ceiling low floor. 

Oh my soul, just answer the OP question, Bad Ideal, or Edgy? 

Dang it man grow a set and make a darn decision on a topic , let this be that moment. 

 

Do you feel better now? 

I was trying to outline the entire thought process I would have. 

Maybe you should read some more Bible verses to calm you down. Maybe you can add 4 more to your profile stuff. 

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

Just now, cavern said:

i guess so.  if i even understand what edgy means.

 

my other option, where i have hill, is everette.  i'm probably sticking with everette, personally.  

I'd stick with Everett. 

Honestly I'd stick with Hockenson in the OP's scenario but I can see if you are down big after last night or your opponent has good matchups trying to take the home run swing. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,487]

10 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Yeah so it’s edgy.  

Backing up your answer with detail isn't a bad thing.

[cyclone24 1,912]

I’m not really that interested in hill  somehow getting quarterback reps or even tight in routes but more of the rushing numbers. Kind of feel like that’s where he would rack up points?

[weepaws 3,158]

4 minutes ago, cavern said:

i guess so.  if i even understand what edgy means.

 

my other option, where i have hill, is everette.  i'm probably sticking with everette, personally.  

I would stick with Everett. 

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

2 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Backing up your answer with detail isn't a bad thing.

weepaws doesn't understand that apparently.

[cavern 70]

2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I'd stick with Everett. 

Honestly I'd stick with Hockenson in the OP's scenario but I can see if you are down big after last night or your opponent has good matchups trying to take the home run swing. 

yeah, i actually had higgins last night, so i'm more likely to go with the perceived safer play here.  Hill is not getting alot of looks at receptions so it's a big gamble as to whether he'll get an opportunity at the goal line (or if he'll something with 1 or 2 plays under center)

[weepaws 3,158]

5 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Do you feel better now? 

I was trying to outline the entire thought process I would have. 

Maybe you should read some more Bible verses to calm you down. Maybe you can add 4 more to your profile stuff. 

Bad Ideal or Edgy,  pick one? 

[weepaws 3,158]

With St Brown questionable I would think Hockensen is due for a uptick in targets.  

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,487]

58 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

So I have Hockensen , who really has not been great, Higbee, who gets a lot of volume, but not in the end zone. I know it’s against the grain a little bit, but on Yahoo Hill has qb and TE designation, and I’m thinking of throwing him in my tight end spot this week with Winston probably out? 
 

bad idea or edgy?
 

I think it's probably a bad idea because I "think" the Saints are going to start Dalton at QB.  If that happens, I think Hill's role doesn't change all the much.  Remember, this isn't Sean Payton's offense anymore, it's Dennis Allen's, and he appears to be less inclined to throw Hill out there.  Now, maybe with Dalton, he's a little more aggressive... but Hill's only got 5 touches Week 1 and 3 touches Week 2... and inactive last week.  Does he now get, say 7 touches?  Maybe.  I guess that's no different that any other "average" TE.  The thing is, his plays are usually rushing and not receiving, so you're dependent on "the big play".  I agree with @Sean Mooney.  You can do it if you want to, but the boom or bust tag is pretty accurate with Hill.

Hill still does have a rib issue.  That didn't go away.  It's possible that even if they use Hill, say 10 to 12 plays, it's possible that most are actually throwing the ball.  So, as stated, be prepared for low single digits if you do start him.  Of course, he could have a big run and a big pass and get you 20.  It's all about how risky you want to be.

[TBayXXXVII 2,487]

15 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

weepaws doesn't understand that apparently.

Yeah, and sadly, he's not the only one.  As you know, we definitely have some "Not uh" / 1 and 2-word answer people, here.

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

15 minutes ago, cyclone24 said:

I’m not really that interested in hill  somehow getting quarterback reps or even tight in routes but more of the rushing numbers. Kind of feel like that’s where he would rack up points?

Again- that is where the boom or bust aspect comes in. He did 81 yards in week 1 (which included a 57 yard run). Week 2 he had 14 yards total.

They aren't looking at him receiving wise so if they don't give him carries you are in trouble. 

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

6 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Yeah, and sadly, he's not the only one.  As you know, we definitely have some "Not uh" / 1 and 2-word answer people, here.

It's funny because weepaws completely ignored the idea of me trying to give some rationale on things to throw his fit.

 

On a side note- glad you and I can have friendly discourse in this section of the board.  

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

21 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Bad Ideal or Edgy,  pick one? 

It depends on the factors I mentioned.

I'm not into "bad idea" or "edgy." I'm into "here is why it may be good" and "here is why it may be bad."

[weepaws 3,158]

2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

It's funny because weepaws completely ignored the idea of me trying to give some rationale on things to throw his fit.

 

On a side note- glad you and I can have friendly discourse in this section of the board.  

#4 Bad Ideal or edgy? One time just answer the OP question, I bet you won’t, you have to much pride  

[weepaws 3,158]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

It depends on the factors I mentioned.

I'm not into "bad idea" or "edgy." I'm into "here is why it may be good" and "here is why it may be bad."

Lol chicken.  

[weepaws 3,158]

This OP is one sharpe dude, he already knows the answers, no one is teaching the OP anything about Hill, the OP asked a simple question. 

I picked edgy.  

 

[Sean Mooney 1,949]

12 minutes ago, weepaws said:

#4 Bad Ideal or edgy? One time just answer the OP question, I bet you won’t, you have to much pride  

 

11 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Lol chicken.  

I did answer it. You are just too brain wracked to understand that I did because it wasn't the simple "either/or" answer that your brain can comprehend. 

[cyclone24 1,912]

13 minutes ago, weepaws said:

This OP is one sharpe dude, he already knows the answers, no one is teaching the OP anything about Hill, the OP asked a simple question. 

I picked edgy.  

 

I can barely read.

[TBayXXXVII 2,487]

33 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

It's funny because weepaws completely ignored the idea of me trying to give some rationale on things to throw his fit.

 

On a side note- glad you and I can have friendly discourse in this section of the board.  

What happens "there", stays "there".

[jrokh 608]

2 hours ago, cyclone24 said:

So I have Hockensen , who really has not been great, Higbee, who gets a lot of volume, but not in the end zone. I know it’s against the grain a little bit, but on Yahoo Hill has qb and TE designation, and I’m thinking of throwing him in my tight end spot this week with Winston probably out? 
 

bad idea or edgy?
 

With Amon-Ra now ruled out, and Swift unlikely to play, you could make the case Hockensen is a must start.

[cyclone24 1,912]

47 minutes ago, jrokh said:

With Amon-Ra now ruled out, and Swift unlikely to play, you could make the case Hockensen is a must start.

Yeah, I think you’re right. I grabbed hill before I heard about Brown. 

[weepaws 3,158]

2 hours ago, cyclone24 said:

I can barely read.

I know shhhh.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,969]

9 hours ago, Sean Mooney said:

It's not the worst idea but you need to be equally prepared for a 12 point day and a 2 point day. Hill is very boom or bust. High ceiling, low floor, not a lot of consistency in the middle for him

This a fine analysis  of the question. I don’t know what weepaws is bugging out about. Reach. 

[DrG 102]

There’s no great predictability to his usage or effectiveness. He may be used even less since the Saints are down a qb or more, no one knows. I have him but don’t think I’d start him unless I was a big underdog.

[c.hammer 6]

I’m torn between pitts and hill. Doesn’t matter tho, whichever I choose will be a dud and the other will blow up on my bench

[jrokh 608]

46 minutes ago, c.hammer said:

I’m torn between pitts and hill. Doesn’t matter tho, whichever I choose will be a dud and the other will blow up on my bench

You’re torn between the #4 ranked TE (half ppr ECR) and #34? Umm okay…

[killerpopcorn 7]

1 hour ago, c.hammer said:

I’m torn between pitts and hill. Doesn’t matter tho, whichever I choose will be a dud and the other will blow up on my bench

If you said this prior to last week it would be a logical statement...now, it's just asinine.

[MDC 7,157]

Looks like Schultz won’t play so much only on her option is Conklin. Worth starting Hill for the possible upside?

[easilyscan 870]

1 hour ago, MDC said:

Looks like Schultz won’t play so much only on her option is Conklin. Worth starting Hill for the possible upside?

If it's PPR, I'd have to go with Conklin. Averaging 6 receptions per week....... If not, go with Hill and hope for a couple big plays.

[ZeroTolerance 584]

Going Conklin in PPR this week. 3-0 and in first by 56 points, this isn't the time to get cute (and while I'm down St Brown and Montgomery, I have London and Patterson to cover). If the Saints show a willingness to utilize Hill more with Winston out, that will open him up as a play going forward. 

[weepaws 3,158]

4 hours ago, c.hammer said:

I’m torn between pitts and hill. Doesn’t matter tho, whichever I choose will be a dud and the other will blow up on my bench

No no, go with Pitts, he’s the better pick, and hopefully the right pick.