Kelce or no

[hockeyrobot]

Which side. 0.5 ppr. Debating whether to just take Kelce 9th.
Kelce
Ekeler or barkley
Jeudy

Or

Hill
Ekeler/Barkley
Hock or Andrews

[senryu]

I like the Kelce side. It is sort of like Vasilevskiy, when you have the guy that is just better than the rest, you just set it and forget it. Andrews' production is entirely TD based, so that seems rather variable. Hockenson's value at ADP is based entirely on the presumption that the Lions offense is so depleted of talent, the Lions will have no choice but to go through him. That's not a valid ground, as it will be possible, if not probable, that the Lions will suck, which will prevent Hockenson from producing at a 4th/5th round level. Jeudy at least has the capability as a 2nd year, high pedigreed WR, with an improved QB situation to outperform expectations.

[2014olympicgold]

If Kelce is there at 9, I'd take him 100%, and if you can get Ekeler or Barkley in round 2, that's great value in my mind.

If you go Kelce -1st round, WR - 2nd round, You're settling with Montgomery, Henderson, James Robinson, Mike Davis, level of RB which I don't think I'd be too comfortable with.

But if you end up getting Kelce, D.Adams, to start your draft def take it and deal with having an RB2 as your lead back.

[hockeyrobot]

I'm thinking the Kelce side as well. I've done a few mocks and even though it's tough to pass up Hill or someone at 9, I always like the Kelce teams more.

[Feenom]

Kielce , Ekeler and Jeudy. Pretty good 3some.

[PenguinHunter]

I much prefer the Kelce side... especially if you do get Jeudy later!!

[Blues_fan1000]

its way too early to take jeudy in the 3rd round. i think kelce in round 1 at 9 is pretty good tho. it's unlikely he falls to you in the snake in round 2. but i could say eckler and barkley might not make it to the wrap either

assuming a 12 team league?

[Invictus]

I have a feeling I won't be getting Kelce lol.

[hockeyrobot]

its way too early to take jeudy in the 3rd round. i think kelce in round 1 at 9 is pretty good tho. it's unlikely he falls to you in the snake in round 2. but i could say eckler and barkley might not make it to the wrap either

assuming a 12 team league?

Was just a question about which side you prefer. It wasn't in order.

It's a 10 team league. Jeudy would be my target in the same range as Hock and Andrews.

[hockeyrobot]

Still debating this for my draft tonight.

Hill is 9th ranked and it's a 10 team league.

If I do go Kelce in round 1 to ensure I get him, that means 10 will take 2 of Hill, Barkley, Ekeler, Taylor, Diggs....

Such a tough call.

[2014olympicgold]

Still debating this for my draft tonight.

Hill is 9th ranked and it's a 10 team league.

If I do go Kelce in round 1 to ensure I get him, that means 10 will take 2 of Hill, Barkley, Ekeler, Taylor, Diggs....

Such a tough call.

I prefer Jonathan Taylor over Hill and Kelce if it matters. And if you can get 2 of Hill, Barkley, Taylor and Kelce, you're in a solid position.

[senryu]

Still debating this for my draft tonight.

Hill is 9th ranked and it's a 10 team league.

If I do go Kelce in round 1 to ensure I get him, that means 10 will take 2 of Hill, Barkley, Ekeler, Taylor, Diggs....

Such a tough call.

The question of who might be available in this instance isn't a consideration for me. All the guys you mentioned are perfectly viable picks at 9 or 12 overall. The questions are whether it is worth the gamble of hoping Kittle comes back in Round 3 and would you be ok with any of Pitts, Hockenson or Andrews in Round 4. Or round 5. My 14 team league drafted, and I got Kelce at 11. But Kittle surprisingly was there for me in round 3. Andrews and Hockenson went near the end of Round 4 and Pitts was in the middle of Round 5.

I don't see any appreciable difference between Hill and Diggs. Nor with Taylor and Ekeler in .5 PPR. So I'd lean to getting Kelce and taking the other guy, presuming that the owner at 10 goes RB/WR. If you really want to come out of the first two rounds with a RB, and your league is more conservative, then perhaps you take the RB at 9 and hope for Kelce at 12, thinking that the owner at 10 will follow the conservative path.

[hockeyrobot]

I do as well one to one. But if taking Taylor 9th means Kelce goes 10/11, I will miss out on Waller so now I'm likely reaching for Kittle, Hock, Andrews, or just waiting to draft at the end.

Taylor and Kelce would be great.

[hockeyrobot]

Think I cracked the code. Draft Taylor at 9 so that #10 definitely won't take both Chiefs. At least I hope not haha.

[2014olympicgold]

I do as well one to one. But if taking Taylor 9th means Kelce goes 10/11, I will miss out on Waller so now I'm likely reaching for Kittle, Hock, Andrews, or just waiting to draft at the end.

Taylor and Kelce would be great.

At the turn, it's hard to judge if you are reaching on Kittle, or Waller. Andrews could be there for you. Or Fant, Thoams, Hock, Pitts, or Tonyan could easily be there for you later.

Are you for sure knowing the guy is going to take Kelce at 10/11 turn? Guy could very well not be in the group that thinks Kelce is going to be worth that high of a pick with the amount of TE's available this yr. Kelce was insane last yr mostly because it was him and no other TE was close really. This yr it looks like it won't be as bad.

If Hill is there for him at 10, and I'm him. I'm not taking 2 KCC players especially going 20 picks between your 2nd and 3rd pick. And it would be hard to go about it with 2 KCC players and no RBs. I'd say if you leave Kelce and Hill for him at 10/11, you'll guarantee yourself one of them when you pick.