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!
That stat is deceiving, too. The difference between VJax's 10 worst games and Wallace's 10 worst games was about 3 points per game. That'd be a nice boost, but you're spinning it as the difference between certain victory and certain defeat. How many games did you lose last year by 3 points or fewer? Meanwhile, the difference between Jackson's 3 best games and Wallace's 3 best games was about 9 points per game. How many games did you lose last year by 9 points or fewer?
I'm not sure, but those stats are deceiving as well, haha.How many games did Wallace perform closer to his mean in comparison to VJax? How many times when Wallace simply performed as he should did it win you the match-up when the extra bajillion points VJax scored were irrelevant. I just don't like the high variance in VJax's totals. I do however fully understand where you're coming from.
I think another way to look at this is probability. If you arbitrarily say 100 points is the average for a winning team and WR1 gets you 10 points on average. If you put it on a bell curve where you have a 50% chance to win at 100 points. So lets say you have a WR who goes 10, 10, 10 then V. Jax goes 0, 10, 20. With the 10, 10, 10 guy, you have a better chance of being 3-0 or 0-3 meanwhile a 0, 10, 20 guy has a higher chance of going 1-2 or 2-1. And fantasy is about making the playoffs so I'd much rather be 1-2 as opposed to 0-3 even if I'm 2-1 as opposed to 0-3. And again, playoffs in a 1 week do or die format, consistency is pretty irrelevant and feast or famine players can lead you to a victory much like MJD did a lot last year in week 14.
Obviously Freeman doesn't hold a candle to Rivers but Freeman also looks to V. Jax like Schaub on A. Johnson. Rivers spread the ball around and had many more weapons including Gates while Freeman seems to trust V. Jax a lot. It certainly isn't a great fit since they'll fun the ball a lot but I also expect them to be behind a decent amount so V Jax and Freeman will be forced to pass the ball.
I hear you, you're selling yourself short with the Schaub to A.J comparison though. VJax currently has 9 more targets than A.J (18), and as I said in another thread, A.J currently has the same amount of targets as Andrew Hawkins who only sees the field 50% of the time.
Good point, I don't really own AJ so I don't know the stats so I guess Brandon Marshall would be a better comparison. I just think he is going to get 7-10 targets a week even if they only throw it 20-25 times a week. He has already faced two of the harder defenses he'll face this year. He faces some terrible defenses against WRs in Wsh, Oak, KC, NO x2, Den, and Min. He does face Atl. x2, Phi, Car again (who shut him down although not sold on their CBs) and St. Louis. So that is at least 7 more very good match ups.
Whenever the subject of Jackson leaving SD has come up in the past, I've always said that I view it as a net positive. Rivers just doesn't target VJax enough for him to make a big leap. Right now, Jackson is getting a greater than 20% boost in targets in TB compared to SD. Even if his efficiency metrics drop- and they will, by a noticeable amount- a 20% increase in targets will cover for a lot of ills.'SameSongNDance said:
While I don't oppose to your argument on VJax in general, let's not pretend that 3 points per game isn't a big difference in fantasy football, especially at the WR position.3 points per game was the difference between Larry Fitzgerald and Lance Moore last year. Or, for a more related comparison, was the difference between Vincent Jackson and Jabar Gaffney.'SSOG said:
Yeah, i was thinking the same thing. But I guess, to some people, VJAX is like the anti-Chris Johnson. Because VJAX has a tendency to have up and down games, he gets downgraded for it while CJ does the same thing and he gets "See, He has SO much room to improve...if he ever does, hes a beaststud..." Its kinda crazy. I admit, owning VJAX takes a bit more tolerance than most, but he can flat out pull a game out of the fire for you in about 5 minutes some weeks.'SSOG said:
There's a difference between a 3 ppg difference just in a guy's worst games (offset by an extra 9 points in his best games), and a 3 ppg difference over a full season. Moore had lower lows AND lower highs than Fitz. Jackson had lower lows than Wallace, but he also had much higher highs. Losing 3 points per game in your bad games with no extra good games to offset it is a very bad thing. Transferring some of your production so you have worse bad games but better/more good games is not necessarily a bad thing.
Really good couple of posts here and the bolded part is really the clincher. I think for the people that want to look at VJAX's games where he gets you 3 points and pointing the finger and blaming him for their loss; well, they really need to look at their TEAM instead of just him. If one player's 3 points is the killer, then you likely have a bigger problem with your team. If VJAX gets me a puny output, yeah, its not ideal, but over the course of the season, he's going to do his part to likely get me in the playoffs (if my team is otherwise a good one) and once in the playoffs, he's one of the biggest guns you can own. He can put up the points and he's on a team that is targeting him heavy. In fairness, someone can say the same thing about Chris Johnson (who I am known to bash pretty freely), but the difference here is people who draft CJ take him as their #1 pick. That guy MUST be consistent. But when you grabbed VJAX much later, he's all upside because he's one of the few guys that you can draft that absolutely demolishes what the others drafted in the same range consistently produce.'sporthenry said:
I think it depends on your preference for risk vs. reward. Player 2 is more volatile and riskier. If I already had built a team of more consistent players I would be more apt to add a guy like player 2. If I had more risky options I would probably want option 1.'ZWK said:Suppose thatlayer 1 scores 10 points every game (15 games), for 150 total pointsPlayer 2 scores 5.25 points 12 times and 30 points 3 times, for 153 total points (10.2 ppg)Player 1 is perfectly consistent, and Player 2 is ridiculously inconsistent but has a slightly higher average. Which is more valuable?Based on a simulation that I just ran (making use of the weekly scores from one of my leagues last year), these two players are equally valuable. A team that starts Player 1 each week will win just as many games as a team that starts Player 2 each week, on average. Being super-consistent is a slight advantage over being super-inconsistent, but it's only worth as much as 3 fantasy points for the whole season.If you have a good team (so that you're favored to win most of your games), then that shifts things a bit more in favor of guys like Player 1. His consistency might be worth as much as 5 or even 6 extra fantasy points over the course of a season. However, the value of consistency will not get that high with real players because no actual player is nearly as consistent Player 1 (or as inconsistent as Player 2).
Matthew Stafford has been pretty injury prone. My sense is that people disregarded this in drafts this year, since he managed to play all 16 games last year.Well, they've now been reminded, and his price is being discounted accordingly.
I would reframe and say over discounted. Shoulder issues are behind him and he has not missed a game this year or last. It's the NFL. Everyone gets banged up. You can get him cheap right now and when playing he is a top option.
Respectfully disagree, I think he is a sell sell sell...Partly his own doing, mostly because the Lions are having more success running the ball 306 yards vs. 226 yards thru three games last year.They are also -2 in take/giveaways whereas in 2011 they were +11 on the season. They aren't getting the turnovers and they're Committing too many..Stafford had 9 Td /2 int thru 3 games last year, 3 Td 4 int this year..he simply isn't playing as well as he did last year..His qb rating right now is 83.5 where last year it was 111.2 thru three games..It's also a much tougher schedule than it was last seasonThe strong buys at qb are Big Ben, Eli , Flacco
Thanks for the heads up here.On one of my teams where I can handle the inconsistencies, I'm going to be gunning for VJax. You guys did a number on me.
staying with the chargers theme, keep an eye on jackie battle. with Matthews fumbling and injuries, he could be a nice asset. might turn into another tolbert
Awesome post. Also, as I'm fond of saying, consistency is very inconsistent. Last year, VJax was one of the most inconsistent WRs in the league. From 2008-2010, though, he was far more consistent than his season-ending totals would have suggested. There was nothing in his 2008-2010 performances that would have suggested he would have been so inconsistent in 2011. If you had a crystal ball and could predict consistency, it would be worth 3 points... but since I don't really know any good ways to do that, I'd rather just save my energy and not even bother with it.'ZWK said:Suppose that
Welcome to the dark side. I think you'll like it- we have cookies.
no it doesnt matter what your preference is. one is better than other, or there is a negligible difference. im not sure which, or really how to approach it, but im sure someone smarter and more patient than me could figure it out. probably run a bunch of sims. my gut says that particular hypothetical wont have much difference. ofc, a guy that scores 150 pts in one week, and 0 the rest, will certainly be worse for your team than the consistent guy.I think it depends on your preference for risk vs. reward. Player 2 is more volatile and riskier. If I already had built a team of more consistent players I would be more apt to add a guy like player 2. If I had more risky options I would probably want option 1.'ZWK said:Suppose that
All of this misses the point. Studs that you'd start every week are predictably (and now proven to be) uninteresting; the larger the number of players in your starting lineup the more this curve smooths.Far more interesting are marginal players that you'd bench/start based on perceived match-up difficulty. If you can accurately predict performances of these guys, two Player2 subbed into the same starting spot are FAR more valuable than two Player1. Even if it's impossible to accurately predict (the worst case), it's still almost a wash (big scores from both Player2s the same week hurts them).
This I do agree with. But some are more consistent than others. Tom Brady vs Mike Vick in his prime as an example. I'd rather have consistency in that case.
Tom Brady's best year outscored Vick's best year by over 100 points. That's not an example of poor consistency vs. great consistency. It's an example of a monster season compared to a good season. More points gives the impression of greater consistency but it's not. It's just more points.
In my league, Griffin has scored 51, 49, and 44 points. Brady scored 34, 29, and 38. Who is more consistent?
Well yes over 3 games. Ah forget it. Again I don't care about consistency or not. Get me good players who will outperform where I draft them... Buying low. Still think Stafford fits that bill because so many are deeply concerned last year was somehow an aberration.
As Demaryius owner he can definitely be bought. Nice production but I'm not sure he's a lock for top 10. Seems to be a lot of ball distribution in Denver. Very happy with what I'm getting for where I drafted him but would entertain offers no question. I'll say a firm buy is AJ Green if you can get him. I think he finishes as WR1 but he's yet to acquire the untouchable name recognition to make him too pricey.
I could see DT owner selling......can't see green owner budging at all! Great point, legit shot to be up top, in every game.Cobb back in mix? I'm sure he was dropped in some leagues. Another 7 targets today....I'll be curious to see snap breakdown.Sell on Fjax or spiller? If you own both might be a good idea to try to move one of them. Who knows what's gonna happen, I'd say both stay healthy and it's a crap shoot on which guy goes off. Sell the one that gives you best bang and hope for the best with the other....Buy Julio. There is no reason to believe he won't come on/have some great games.Sell fitz? Possible...
Tough schedule?
I don't like this advice at all. Two potential RB1s who are both dealing with injury. I'd hold both and see if one emerges. You've got top 5 RB upside and neither would gather much in trade at this point. I think Spiller is the guy to buy. His injury will be an afterthought in a few weeks and I remain skeptical that FJax will be able to hold him off.
Buy low, it isn't Stafford. He had 2 touchdown passes dropped last week. The offense coordinator for Detroit needs to be fired as well. It isn't that they aren't passing enough it is the way they are calling the game. It will change soon though, Detroit thinks it has a realistic chance to go far in the playoffs and at 1 - 3 they don't have any margin for error. They will go back to their bread and butter soon. Buy any Lions you can that are tied to the passing game. (minus Titus Young, he just sucks)
One game won't make Julio Jones a buy low, better hope he has 2 or 3 more games like this. Selling high on Roddy White might only work for dynasty, for redraft he is gold, and even dynasty it might be a year to early to sell him. Unless you are getting wr1 or rb 2 value for Hartline you can't sell high, he is going to finish as a top 20 receiver barring injury. Kevin Smith is done, Bell is next in line for Detroit and Best will attempt a comeback around week 7, Smith isn't even worth a roster spot. Calvin Johnson won't be a buy low unless he goes blind and loses a leg, because even blind I bet he could be a top 20 receiver.
I disagree about Julio. I agree that one shouldn't sell low on Julio after a bad game--but read the forums. There are a lot of his owners that are frustrated or in a panic about him. I love roddy and think he's great--but he had a monster game in a week where julio was battling a hand injury. If he can be packaged with a mid level player to get an elite guy like a calvin johnson in return--I could see deals like that being accepted because of his big week. I disagree on your Hartline statement--because he can be sold high. Look at where he was drafted--or drafted at all. The people that own him drafted him late or paid next to nothing for him. If he can be traded for a legit wr2--a desean jackson, a brandon lloyd---that's selling high relative to where he was picked up. I don't know if he'll finish as a top 20 wr. He had a monster game when reggie bush was playing hurt--and the other rb's weren't doing anything. I don't see tannehill throwing for 300+ yards per game. The problem is that he had such a huge week this past week that he might finish with a decently high ranking--because with that many yards in one game--it'll increase his season averages--it'll skew them upwards. I completely disagree with smith not being worth a roster spot. Leshoure has been a giant failure this far. Even his one good fantasy game wasn't that good--26 carries for 100 yards versus the 30th ranked run defense? His average ypc is lower than smiths so far this year--and smith ran against the 49ers. Detroit is going to ride leshoure soo hard that he's very likely to get hurt--in fact--he was questionable to play last week. Best is one concussion away from retiring--and bell is not an every down back. I'm not saying to drop a legit play to keep him on your roster--but if you have the opportunity to roster him without compromising much--I could very easily see the running back situation in detroit being a very fluid situation. Fact of the matter is that Detroit looked like a better team with him as the running back. They looked horrid against the titans, and they looked horrid against the vikings (although special teams had to be a major part of the blame in this game).
It doesn't matter where Hartline is drafted, if you sell him for a wr2 and he produces like a wr2 then you didn't sell high. I live in Michigan, and I have been preaching and begging my fellow sharks to not buy into the Kevin Smith hype. Detroit viewed him as a 2 week starter, that is it. He is done, all the writers, all the sport talk hosts, everyone in Michigan knows it. Hartline has been targets 12 times a game on average, if he only catches half of those that is 6 per game at an average at 12 yards per catch that is 72 yards a game (right now he is over 18 yards per catch), and a touchdown just under every other game. Average that out over the next 11 games of the fantasy season and it comes to 66 catches and almost 800 yards and 5 touchdowns. That is a high end wr2. Not to mention the only good defenses he faces the rest of the year is the Seahawks and the 49er's, but we said the Cardinals were an elite defense and he just torched them. Plus the Dolphins will be playing from behind all year. He is here to stay.
We've already had 1/4 of the fantasy season go by. Hartline is the #3 fantasy WR. His ceiling is a WR1, not WR3.
