I'm bored, so I'll summarize the argument so I can get your thoughts.
In a 2-person keeper league, someone was deciding between keeping LT + Holt or LT + Gonzo. For me, I immediately thought Holt.
However, "Bob" suggested keeping Gonzo. I disagreed with him, and here are some responses:
A top tight end is much more valuable than a top wide receiver because there are so few good tight ends. You can get the 10th best wide receiver and there won't be much difference between him and the #1 wide receiver, but there is a huge difference between the #1 tight end and the #10 tight end.
Moss was the #1 WR from last year...16.7 fantasy ppg.
#10, Keenan McCardell, averaged 10.3 fppg.
At TE, Gonzo at #1 averaged 9.4 fppg.
At #10, Kleinsasser averaged 4.1 fppg.
Not to mention, you can get the #10 TE much lower in the draft than the #10 WR, since most 10-team leagues start a total of 30 WRs and only 10 TEs.
You may be right that there are so few good tight ends, but so few tight ends are needed that it doesn't make a top TE "much more valuable than a top wide receiver", as you can see in that stat comparison.
Thoughts? Am I missing something, or was this guy just off on his assumptions of the "huge" differences in production?