I've been interested in Papias for many years. His chiliasm is related to that in Revelation, that attributed to Polycarp of Smyrna and that expressed by Irenaeus, and probably related to later Montanism, and it appears that Cerinthus was a chiliast too, so it seems likely that chiliasm was an Asian (Phrygian) phenomenon; cf. the evidence of the religious influence of Zoroastrianism in Asia Minor (and cf. the possible influence of the Oracles of Hystaspes on Revelation). His grotesque oracle on the blessings of the vine in the messianic kingdom is closely related to the very similar statement in 2 Baruch 29:3-6, a late first century AD Jewish apocalypse. His similarly extravagent description of the death of Judas is closely related to that in Acts (which probably referred to Judas becoming "swollen" instead of "headlong"), and its details are informed through OT interpretation of Psalms 66 and 109 (the same psalms cited in the Acts story). Thus Papias is probably a witness to the same process of early Christian storytelling, drawing on OT material as a "witness" of Jesus' life, found in the canonical gospels.
Papias was also disliked because he stood in the way of the tradition that John the son of Zebedee wrote the gospel of John. The John of Ephesus that he personally knew was not John the disciple of the Lord, as he distinguished John the "elder" from John the apostle. Moreover, he reported the tradition that the two sons of Zebedee died early in Jerusalem (the gospel of Mark appears to imply similarly that the two sons would be martyred in ch. 10, and Mark was likely written in the late 60s).