What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What would you do with the 1st pick in a newly formed Dynasty League? (1 Viewer)

F

FantasyTrader

Footballguy
So? What would you do with the #1 pick in a newly formed Dynasty League? If you said LaDanian Tomlinson like everyone else, you're wrong. :bag: <pause for you to get back in your chair and stop laughing> Alright, relax - at least allow me to defend myself here. First, I gotta explain my dynasty philosophy in general before I start throwing around such absurd statements. In most Dynasty rankings I see a MUCH heavier weight placed on a player's value THIS year than they place on future years which serves Dynasty players well in terms of "win now, and worry about next year, next year". It's certainly an okay attitude to have as a Dynasty Leaguer. Personally, I feel that 3 years from now should be factored in ALMOST as much as this season. Yes, you need to have players in their prime - but you also need to consistently have an eye on future potential a well. If you feel like you may only be in your league for a year or two then Tomlinson would certainly be the pick. But if you're building your team for the long haul - he just isn't.

To be completely honest, I'd probably try trading down to the #4-#5 spot and grab Gore or Bush but that's another post altogether. Back to Tomlinson. Now I realize I might be adding apples and oranges here but as Exhibit A I present to you the inaugural draft board of my Dynasty League back in '02: 1) Marshall Faulk 2) Kurt Warner 3) Ahman Green 4) Eddie George 5) Shaun Alexander...

Thinking back on that draft now, Faulk was equally the LOCK at #1 that Tomlinson currently is. At the time we held our draft, Faulk was 29.5 years old and coming off of a season in which he scored 12 TD's on the ground and NINE more through the air! He was a no-brainer at #1. (Tomlinson will be 28.2 at the beginning of the '07 season). The statistical longevity of the average NFL R.B. is well documented so I don't think I need to go down that road. But with 6 NFL seasons, 2,000+ carries and almost 400 receptions, suffice it to say that (at least according to averages) - Tomlinson is beginning to near the end.

I can hear your argument already. "Well, I don't subcribe to future years being almost as important this year. Regardless of how much time Tomlinson has left as an elite runner - he's bar none the best RB in the NFL right now and deserves to be drafted as such." I couldn't agree with you more about the fact that Tomlinson is hands down the best RB right now in the NFL. It's the whole "deserves to be drafted as such" that's my sticking point for Dynasty purposes.

When you take the total fantasy points Tomlinson is projected to score over the remainder of his career MINUS the pts. Steven Jackson is projected to score in that same span and factor in the fact that you could get 3 more years out of Jackson - he's the long term play. <deep breath> Okay, let the ripping begin.

 
No RB is truly a long-term play. To find one of them, you need to go to other positions.

And while I know youth is at a premium, at 1.01 I would go Peyton Manning.

 
you take LT to give you the huge headstart, and you count on your ability to make good trades and rookie draft picks to deal with the "after LT" period.

 
What are your rules? Pick based on your scoring and positional plays.

I did not pay much attention to the starting requirements and didnt realize that starting 2 QBs and 3 rbs changes EVERYTHING. Where i had picked a wr or two, i should have been selecting rbs and qbs.

Start there. This may be an extreme choice but if you start 2 qbs and 2 rbs then QBs like Manning may be worth more then LT. Size of the league, is important too. Starting 2 qbs is easier in a 10 team league then a 12 team league. Byes become harder to cover.

Then comes the scoring. Does it weigh heavily to QB TDs? Or is it a PPR making some rbs more valuable then other positions?

So no players will be the right choice until the scoring and starting roster requirements are listed out.

Although Sigmund Bloom does have a good point.....

 
Sigmund Bloom said:
you take LT to give you the huge headstart, and you count on your ability to make good trades and rookie draft picks to deal with the "after LT" period.
Click to expand...
Yep, his trade value right now is so far ahead of anyone else that even if you don't think he's the best selection, you have to take him because most others do. Then trade him if you must.
 
fruity pebbles said:
Sigmund Bloom said:
you take LT to give you the huge headstart, and you count on your ability to make good trades and rookie draft picks to deal with the "after LT" period.
Click to expand...
Yep, his trade value right now is so far ahead of anyone else that even if you don't think he's the best selection, you have to take him because most others do. Then trade him if you must.
Click to expand...
I would definitely agree with this. The #4 and #5 overall would be my target personally.
 
I would take Steven Jackson. He is a young (23 y/o) talented back and last season he started his Hall of Fame campaign. I see nothin but goodness out of him. I also gotta say that I have complete undying loyalty to Jackson because of our affiliation with Oregon State. So yeah, my reasoning is laced with bias.

LT would be a great pick too, I just wonder if this is his year to get the injury. So far he has been healthy. He's due.

Other than those two I think I would try to trade down.

 
Cerwin said:
LT would be a great pick too, I just wonder if this is his year to get the injury. So far he has been healthy. He's due.
Click to expand...
LT had a groin injury in 2004 and rib injury in 2005 that would have sidelined most backs. Both lingered for almost half the season. My suspicion is that the groin injury was a tear, although I don't think the nature of the injury was ever comfirmed. Tear or mere strain, it definitely limited LT for a considerable part of 2004, enough that you could clearly see it. That's why Jesse Chatman got so many touches in 04. I believe the '05 was a break in the cartilage that connects the rib to the sternum. It hurts just to type that. So you've seen his "injured" years. 2006 was what you get when LT stays healthy all year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sigmund Bloom said:
Cerwin said:
LT would be a great pick too, I just wonder if this is his year to get the injury. So far he has been healthy. He's due.
Click to expand...
LT had a groin injury in 2004 and rib injury in 2005 that would have sidelined most backs. Both lingered for almost half the season. My suspicion is that the groin injury was a tear, although I don't think the nature of the injury was ever comfirmed. Tear or mere strain, it definitely limited LT for a considerable part of 2004, enough that you could clearly see it. That's why Jesse Chatman got so many touches in 04. I believe the '05 was a break in the cartilage that connects the rib to the sternum. It hurts just to type that. So you've seen his "injured" years. 2006 was what you get when LT stays healthy all year.
Click to expand...
he sustained that rib injury against oakland late in the year and was useless beyond that point
 
I don't think there's any way you can pass on LaDainian Tomlinson. My justification is as follows:

- He's easily the best RB in the NFL right now. It's not very close.

- He has the perfect build for a RB. He's short and squatty with monster legs. If you could design the perfect RB, he would be built exactly like LT.

- He has the perfect running style for a RB. He runs low, is elusive, and avoids big hits.

LT is truly an exceptional player. I think he can be another Curtis Martin or Emmitt Smith, meaning he might have 3-5 elite years left. Given that he's possibly the safest RB pick in the draft and that he's capable of scoring as much as two good RBs (as he did last year), you really can't justify passing on him at 1.01.

Remember, you can always add overlooked RB prospects later in the draft if you're worried about long-term depth. But where else are you going to find a RB who scores 30 ppg in PPR? Nowhere.

That said, I do agree with your general premise that owners place far too much emphasis on this (and last) year. If I had the 1.02 or 1.03, I might look to trade it. As good as Larry Johnson and Steven Jackson are, I feel like both guys have serious long-term question marks. In a PPR league, I'd rather have Reggie Bush.

 
3 years ago which of these top 10 RBs (from 2006) would you have picked in the first round of a Dynasty Draft:

Larry Johnson

Steven Jackson

Frank Gore

Willie Parker

Maurice Jones Drew

Brian Westbrook

My guess is exactly zero of those guys would have been drafted in the first round of a new dynasty draft. So 6 of the top 10 would not have been drafted in the first round. That leaves LT, Rudi Johnson, Tiki Barber and Deuce McAllister. And even Rudi and Tiki would probably have been very late 1st rounders if at all.

The short shelf life of RBs in the NFL and the huge turnover year to year at that position is exactly why you should take a guy like LT. It just doesn't pay to plan more than a year or two out with RBs. If you're concerned about LT's age at all you simply take one of the rookie RBs later.

And I actually agree that Manning may actually be the best pick. He's never missed a game and is a lock to be a top 3 fantasy QB.

 
One thought might be that you take LT because, simply, he has the most value. You can always trade LT later on and gain more from the trade than if you picked any other player.

 
GroveDiesel said:
3 years ago which of these top 10 RBs (from 2006) would you have picked in the first round of a Dynasty Draft:Larry JohnsonSteven JacksonFrank GoreWillie ParkerMaurice Jones DrewBrian WestbrookMy guess is exactly zero of those guys would have been drafted in the first round of a new dynasty draft. So 6 of the top 10 would not have been drafted in the first round. That leaves LT, Rudi Johnson, Tiki Barber and Deuce McAllister. And even Rudi and Tiki would probably have been very late 1st rounders if at all.The short shelf life of RBs in the NFL and the huge turnover year to year at that position is exactly why you should take a guy like LT. It just doesn't pay to plan more than a year or two out with RBs. If you're concerned about LT's age at all you simply take one of the rookie RBs later. And I actually agree that Manning may actually be the best pick. He's never missed a game and is a lock to be a top 3 fantasy QB.
Click to expand...
I certainly wouldn't have drafted MJD or Gore because they weren't in the NFL yet.But regardless, you've missed the point horribly. I'm not debating that a RB's shelf life is short. What I'm talking about is Jackson's shelf life AS IT RELATES TO L.T.'S.
 
FantasyTrader said:
To be completely honest, I'd probably try trading down to the #4-#5 spot and grab Gore
Click to expand...
I don't see how taking Gore over LT is better for the long haul, even if you are getting compensation for trading down. Gore has had major surjuries on both knees and both shoulders. I love him, but I'd never make that move in a million years.
 
Personally I think your nuts for passing on LT. There's no reason to think that he doesn't have at least 4 or 5 more great seasons in him. Yeah he probably won't hit last year's numbers but I don't see why he won't be a 1500 -1800 yd 12-15 Td type of back for the next few years. And the funny thing is you think Gore is a better long-term pick than LT. What makes you think that Gore, with his injury history and rugged running style, is going to be more effective than LT.

People out-think themselves in dynasty drafts. Sure it's nice to have some youth and certainly use age as a deciding factor when comparing players of equal value but talent should always trump youth and there isn't another talent out there like LT.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pipes said:
Personally I think your nuts for passing on LT. There's no reason to think that he doesn't have at least 4 or 5 more great seasons in him. Yeah he probably won't hit last year's numbers but I don't see why he won't be a 1500 -1800 yd 12-15 Td type of back for the next few years. And the funny thing is you think Gore is a better long-term pick than LT. What makes you think that Gore, with his injury history and rugged running style, is going to be more effective than LT.People out-think themselves in dynasty drafts. Sure it's nice to have some youth and certainly use age as a deciding factor when comparing players of equal value but talent should always trump youth and there isn't another talent out there like LT.
Click to expand...
Good response. But there's every reason to believe LT doesn't have 4-5 more great season's in him. His age. It is EXTREMELY rare for a RB to post 10-11 years of elite fantasy numbers. Could you explain to me a bit more about Gore's "rugged" running style? I've never heard him described in that way - he's not a Bettis or Brandon Jacobs who is tall to begin with and has been scouted as running too upright and taking punishing hits. But I just cited Gore as an example. I'd personally be happy with Bush as well if that's what does it for you. Or drafting Tomlinson and trading him at some point in the near future while hs value is still at a premium. I'm not advocating any runner because I believe they'll be better than L.T. in the short term, where people begin to lose me is wheney make the argument that you should take L.T. because his expected value over the remainder of his career is still up there with Gore/S-Jax/Bush.
 
FantasyTrader said:
Pipes said:
Personally I think your nuts for passing on LT. There's no reason to think that he doesn't have at least 4 or 5 more great seasons in him. Yeah he probably won't hit last year's numbers but I don't see why he won't be a 1500 -1800 yd 12-15 Td type of back for the next few years. And the funny thing is you think Gore is a better long-term pick than LT. What makes you think that Gore, with his injury history and rugged running style, is going to be more effective than LT.People out-think themselves in dynasty drafts. Sure it's nice to have some youth and certainly use age as a deciding factor when comparing players of equal value but talent should always trump youth and there isn't another talent out there like LT.
Click to expand...
Good response. But there's every reason to believe LT doesn't have 4-5 more great season's in him. His age. It is EXTREMELY rare for a RB to post 10-11 years of elite fantasy numbers. Could you explain to me a bit more about Gore's "rugged" running style? I've never heard him described in that way - he's not a Bettis or Brandon Jacobs who is tall to begin with and has been scouted as running too upright and taking punishing hits. But I just cited Gore as an example. I'd personally be happy with Bush as well if that's what does it for you. Or drafting Tomlinson and trading him at some point in the near future while hs value is still at a premium. I'm not advocating any runner because I believe they'll be better than L.T. in the short term, where people begin to lose me is wheney make the argument that you should take L.T. because his expected value over the remainder of his career is still up there with Gore/S-Jax/Bush.
Click to expand...
True Gore isn't a Brandon Jacobs or Jerome Bettis as far as running styles goes he's certainly no LT either, whom seldom takes a good shot. My arguement against Gore is with his injury history I just don't see him having a long career.Sure from here on out guys like S-Jax or Bush may put up better numbers but so what. I'd rather have the #1 back over the next 4 or 5 years vs the #5 back over the next 8 or 9. Yeah you'll have to do some work to replace LT in a few years but to me it's worth it.Using your logic about the expected value over the length of their careers why not take Adrian Peterson or Calvin Johnson 1st then?
 
FantasyTrader said:
Personally, I feel that 3 years from now should be factored in ALMOST as much as this season.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Just using some basic discounted cash flow analysis, year 4 should only count 75% as much as year 1 assuming only a 10% discount rate (This is extremely conservative in your favor because it assumes an average 10 year NFL career. If you assume only an average of a 7 year NFL career, that number drops to 65%). In fantasy football that discount rate is much higher in general due to injuries, short career lengths, etc.The problem here is you want to pass on a still young and proven stud in LT2 on the "hopes" that your younger guy ever is able to perform up to his standards = not likely to happen. IMO, too many guys try to build for the future in dynasty leagues and the future never arrives.Play for now or "the near" now if you want to not only be competitive year in and year out, but if you want to also make money while having fun in fantasy football dynasty leagues.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pipes said:
FantasyTrader said:
Pipes said:
Personally I think your nuts for passing on LT. There's no reason to think that he doesn't have at least 4 or 5 more great seasons in him. Yeah he probably won't hit last year's numbers but I don't see why he won't be a 1500 -1800 yd 12-15 Td type of back for the next few years. And the funny thing is you think Gore is a better long-term pick than LT. What makes you think that Gore, with his injury history and rugged running style, is going to be more effective than LT.People out-think themselves in dynasty drafts. Sure it's nice to have some youth and certainly use age as a deciding factor when comparing players of equal value but talent should always trump youth and there isn't another talent out there like LT.
Click to expand...
Good response. But there's every reason to believe LT doesn't have 4-5 more great season's in him. His age. It is EXTREMELY rare for a RB to post 10-11 years of elite fantasy numbers. Could you explain to me a bit more about Gore's "rugged" running style? I've never heard him described in that way - he's not a Bettis or Brandon Jacobs who is tall to begin with and has been scouted as running too upright and taking punishing hits. But I just cited Gore as an example. I'd personally be happy with Bush as well if that's what does it for you. Or drafting Tomlinson and trading him at some point in the near future while hs value is still at a premium. I'm not advocating any runner because I believe they'll be better than L.T. in the short term, where people begin to lose me is wheney make the argument that you should take L.T. because his expected value over the remainder of his career is still up there with Gore/S-Jax/Bush.
Click to expand...
True Gore isn't a Brandon Jacobs or Jerome Bettis as far as running styles goes he's certainly no LT either, whom seldom takes a good shot. My arguement against Gore is with his injury history I just don't see him having a long career.Sure from here on out guys like S-Jax or Bush may put up better numbers but so what. I'd rather have the #1 back over the next 4 or 5 years vs the #5 back over the next 8 or 9. Yeah you'll have to do some work to replace LT in a few years but to me it's worth it.Using your logic about the expected value over the length of their careers why not take Adrian Peterson or Calvin Johnson 1st then?
Click to expand...
Because neither of them has proven themselves in the NFL yet. I think we can agree there's a big difference in the potential of Steven Jackson than there is in Adrian Peterson (at least until we see Peterson for a year or two). I think that if you believe L.T. has 4-5 years left, you're right - he's definitely the play. I don't think he has 4-5 years left.
 
radballs said:
FantasyTrader said:
Personally, I feel that 3 years from now should be factored in ALMOST as much as this season.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Just using some basic discounted cash flow analysis, year 4 should only count 75% as much as year 1 assuming only a 10% discount rate (This is extremely conservative in your favor because it assumes an average 10 year NFL career. If you assume only an average of a 7 year NFL career, that number drops to 65%). In fantasy football that discount rate is much higher in general due to injuries, short career lengths, etc.The problem here is you want to pass on a still young and proven stud in LT2 on the "hopes" that your younger guy ever is able to perform up to his standards = not likely to happen. IMO, too many guys try to build for the future in dynasty leagues and the future never arrives.Play for now or "the near" now if you want to not only be competitive year in and year out, but if you want to also make money while having fun in fantasy football dynasty leagues.
Click to expand...
Again, agree with everything you said - other than describing LT as "still young" in relation to S-Jax/Bush/Gore.
 
I think that LT is the pick. But I think his value is as high as it will be, and you might be a ble to swing a great trade by trading back in the draft. I think I would be happy to land a couple of extra picks to move down a few spots. But if you stay put, I think LT has to be the choice.

 
radballs said:
The problem here is you want to pass on a still young and proven stud in LT2 on the "hopes" that your younger guy ever is able to perform up to his standards = not likely to happen. IMO, too many guys try to build for the future in dynasty leagues and the future never arrives.Play for now or "the near" now if you want to not only be competitive year in and year out, but if you want to also make money while having fun in fantasy football dynasty leagues.
Click to expand...
This is very true. If I am presented with the choice of 2 players that are relatively similar in my expectations of them for the next year, I will take the younger guy. But, there comes a point where the value drops too much for age to out-weigh it. Would you take reggie brown over chad johnson because he is younger? McGahee over LJ? Or Eli over Peyton?
 
Sigmund Bloom said:
you take LT to give you the huge headstart, and you count on your ability to make good trades and rookie draft picks to deal with the "after LT" period.
Click to expand...
:lmao: the other reason(i am sure its been mentioned) is that LT does hold the most value of any player in the NFL right now when you are talking FF...if you dont like him so be it, but you still should DRAFT him and then you can turn around and shop him...I wouldnt just trade the pick to move down...with LT you have the leverage...i would wait til the draft is done and then use LT to address any areas of concern you might feel that you havetrading LT(1.1) prior to the draft just makes the picks you get a crap shoot..waiting allows you to mold your team..take LTS & his VALUE and take advantage of it
 
streamkeeper said:
ThePittbully said:
stevegamer said:
at 1.01 I would go Peyton Manning.
Click to expand...
Damn beat me to it
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: I'd love to hear your logic on this statement.
Click to expand...
Ideally, you deal the pick and take manning later, but I love Manning due to the security: he's been a top 4 QB every year except his rookie year. Even though he's going to be 31 at the start of this season, QB's have more life then than a RB like LT does at this point.He's a very safe pick to be producing for you down the line over the next 5 years.Turning LT around & shopping him makes tons of sense. I was simply looking at what I'd do if I was forced to keep the player.
 
spec1alk said:
radballs said:
The problem here is you want to pass on a still young and proven stud in LT2 on the "hopes" that your younger guy ever is able to perform up to his standards = not likely to happen. IMO, too many guys try to build for the future in dynasty leagues and the future never arrives.Play for now or "the near" now if you want to not only be competitive year in and year out, but if you want to also make money while having fun in fantasy football dynasty leagues.
Click to expand...
This is very true. If I am presented with the choice of 2 players that are relatively similar in my expectations of them for the next year, I will take the younger guy. But, there comes a point where the value drops too much for age to out-weigh it. Would you take reggie brown over chad johnson because he is younger? McGahee over LJ? Or Eli over Peyton?
Click to expand...
I would disagree with your comparisons. In many rankings - Tomlinson is 1 and S-Jax is #2. Asking me if I'd take R. Brown/McGahee/Eli over C.J./L.J./Peyton is skewing the point. The gap between those players is much greater than the gap between Tomlinson and S-Jax.
 
FantasyTrader said:
I would disagree with your comparisons. In many rankings - Tomlinson is 1 and S-Jax is #2. Asking me if I'd take R. Brown/McGahee/Eli over C.J./L.J./Peyton is skewing the point. The gap between those players is much greater than the gap between Tomlinson and S-Jax.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I think the gap between SJ and LT is pretty wide. Its like comparing peyton to carson palmer.
 
Sigmund Bloom said:
you take LT to give you the huge headstart, and you count on your ability to make good trades and rookie draft picks to deal with the "after LT" period.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:
 
Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?

Assuming of course you cant trade LT, because he would clearly get more in a trade, the answer to this question should be the 1.1 pick.

I would bet that very few people here think LT is the correct answer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Burning Sensation said:
Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?Assuming of course you cant trade LT, because he would clearly get more in a trade, the answer to this question should be the 1.1 pick.I would bet that very few people here think LT is the correct answer.
Click to expand...
:thumbdown: This is all I have been trying to say. Its more complex than "L.T. is the best right now, end of discussion."
 
FantasyTrader said:
Burning Sensation said:
Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?Assuming of course you cant trade LT, because he would clearly get more in a trade, the answer to this question should be the 1.1 pick.I would bet that very few people here think LT is the correct answer.
Click to expand...
:confused: This is all I have been trying to say. Its more complex than "L.T. is the best right now, end of discussion."
Click to expand...
The guy whose career I most model LT's on is Walter Payton's. Right now, on Walter Payton's timeline, LT has just finished the 1980 season:
Code: 
+--------------------------+-------------------------+				 |		  Rushing		 |		Receiving		|+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards	Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1975 chi |  13 |   196	679	3.5	7 |	33	213   6.5	0 || 1976 chi |  14 |   311   1390	4.5   13 |	15	149   9.9	0 || 1977 chi |  14 |   339   1852	5.5   14 |	27	269  10.0	2 || 1978 chi |  16 |   333   1395	4.2   11 |	50	480   9.6	0 || 1979 chi |  16 |   369   1610	4.4   14 |	31	313  10.1	2 || 1980 chi |  16 |   317   1460	4.6	6 |	46	367   8.0	1 || 1981 chi |  16 |   339   1222	3.6	6 |	41	379   9.2	2 || 1982 chi |   9 |   148	596	4.0	1 |	32	311   9.7	0 || 1983 chi |  16 |   314   1421	4.5	6 |	53	607  11.5	2 || 1984 chi |  16 |   381   1684	4.4   11 |	45	368   8.2	0 || 1985 chi |  16 |   324   1551	4.8	9 |	49	483   9.9	2 || 1986 chi |  16 |   321   1333	4.2	8 |	37	382  10.3	3 || 1987 chi |  12 |   146	533	3.7	4 |	33	217   6.6	1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 190 |  3838  16726	4.4  110 |   492   4538   9.2   15 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
Do you think it's so guaranteed that Jackson will outperform LT over the next 5-7 years using Payton as the model?P.S. - don't forget that both 1982 and 1987 were strike-shortened seasons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
redman said:
FantasyTrader said:
Burning Sensation said:
Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?

Assuming of course you cant trade LT, because he would clearly get more in a trade, the answer to this question should be the 1.1 pick.

I would bet that very few people here think LT is the correct answer.
Click to expand...
:thumbdown: This is all I have been trying to say. Its more complex than "L.T. is the best right now, end of discussion."
Click to expand...
The guy whose career I most model LT's on is Walter Payton's. Right now, on Walter Payton's timeline, LT has just finished the 1980 season:
+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1975 chi | 13 | 196 679 3.5 7 | 33 213 6.5 0 || 1976 chi | 14 | 311 1390 4.5 13 | 15 149 9.9 0 || 1977 chi | 14 | 339 1852 5.5 14 | 27 269 10.0 2 || 1978 chi | 16 | 333 1395 4.2 11 | 50 480 9.6 0 || 1979 chi | 16 | 369 1610 4.4 14 | 31 313 10.1 2 || 1980 chi | 16 | 317 1460 4.6 6 | 46 367 8.0 1 || 1981 chi | 16 | 339 1222 3.6 6 | 41 379 9.2 2 || 1982 chi | 9 | 148 596 4.0 1 | 32 311 9.7 0 || 1983 chi | 16 | 314 1421 4.5 6 | 53 607 11.5 2 || 1984 chi | 16 | 381 1684 4.4 11 | 45 368 8.2 0 || 1985 chi | 16 | 324 1551 4.8 9 | 49 483 9.9 2 || 1986 chi | 16 | 321 1333 4.2 8 | 37 382 10.3 3 || 1987 chi | 12 | 146 533 3.7 4 | 33 217 6.6 1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 190 | 3838 16726 4.4 110 | 492 4538 9.2 15 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+Do you think it's so guaranteed that Jackson will outperform LT over the next 5-7 years using Payton as the model?P.S. - don't forget that both 1982 and 1987 were strike-shortened seasons.
Click to expand...
I dont think i would ever use that word in FF. I also try to avoid comparing one player to another. The point i am trying to make is, if you had to bet right now, who would you lay your money on to have more fantasy points between 2007 and 2013, LT or Jackson?Obviously there is more to it than that, but basically, that is the first thing i look at when gauging fantasy value.

 
I'd just point out that Jackson has had injury bugs in the past, so it's surely not clear cut for years to come. If history shows anything, LT2 has been durable. I'd bet on LT2, but I can understand an arguement for Jackson's case.

 
Burning Sensation said:
Bizkiteer said:
I'd just point out that Jackson has had injury bugs in the past, so it's surely not clear cut for years to come. If history shows anything, LT2 has been durable. I'd bet on LT2, but I can understand an arguement for Jackson's case.
Click to expand...
Your just saying that because you own LT. :goodposting:
Click to expand...
That is actually a good point though because as any LT2 owner knows how he's single handedly won games for them. So, maybe I'm biased...but there would be no way that I'd trade him for SJax straight up, but I would trade SJax stright up for him. All in all though, I think when you add his durability ontop of his production, he comes out ahead.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
Are you a cliff dweller in Dynasty? A Dynasty Locust?
Replies
36
Views
515
spurs44
S
bro1ncos
Lopsided offer in Dynasty. What do you do?
Replies
21
Views
599
Wigglytuff's Gruff
Wigglytuff's Gruff
eighsse2
The Dynasty "Next Move" Thread
Replies
37
Views
1K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top