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!

Smathers WR dynasty rankings (1 Viewer)

Bracie Smathers

Bracie Smathers

Footballguy
Dynasty rankinsg, no PPR. Saw other thread and started cranking one out, figured it would get lost in that one.

Did mine in twelve player brackets so owners could see where their WRs rank in twelve player leagues. Gets increasingly more difficult futher from the top names so I would imagine most contention would come from latter names.

1. Reggie Wayne

2. Chad Johnson

3. Andre Johnson

4. Larry Fitzgerald

5. Marques Colston

6. Braylon Edwards

7. Roy Williams

8. Brandon Marshall

9. Steve Smith (CAR)

10. Randy Moss

11. Calvin Johnson

12. Anquan Boldin

13. Torry Holt

14. Plaxico Burress

15. Terrell Owens

16. Lee Evans

17. Roddy White

18. Santonio Holmes

19. TJ Houshmandzadeh

20. Javon Walker

21. Dwayne Bowe

22. Anthony Gonzalez

23. Sidney Rice

24. Chris Chambers

25. Jerricho Cotchery

26. Wes Welker

27. Santana Moss

28. Greg Jennings

29. Marvin Harrison

30. Hines Ward

31. Reggie Williams

32. Ted Ginn

33. Derrick Mason

34. Laveranues Coles

35. Donald Driver

36. Kevin Curtis

37. Vincent Jackson

38. Bernard Berrian

39. Mark Clayton

40. Ronald Curry

41. James Jones

42. Robert Meachem

43. Donte Stallworth

44. Steve Smith (NYG)

45. Bobby Engram

46. Kevin Walter

47. Joey Galloway

48. Darrell Jackson

49. Arnaz Battle

50. Dwayne Jarrett

51. Jason Hill

52. Reggie Brown

53. Bryant Johnson

54. Roydell Williams

55. Deion Branch

56. Chad Jackson

57. Jerry Porter

58. Laurent Robinson

59. Devin Hester

60. Nate Burleson

Missed but arguments can be made for the following:

Patrick Crayton

Amani Toomer

Demetrius Williams

Michael Clayton

Roscoe Parrish

Craig Davis

David Patton

Drew Bennett

Jacoby Jones

Chris Henry

DJ Hackett

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not a bad list, but I barely have Evans cracking my Top 30. There's no way I could ever put him ahead of Welker (who has a long term deal with the Patriots).

I'd probably just swap Welker and Evans, Jennings and Rice. Rice is probably still too high there. I have Hackett & Chris Henry 30-35. If Hackett resigns with Seattle, I'd put him in my Top 25. If CJ somehow gets dealt, Henry vaults into my Top 20.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Beaumont said:
Would you really trade Reggie Brown for Kevin Walter? Really??
Click to expand...
#86 Reggie Brown | WR Born: January 13, 1981Height: 6-1Weight: 197 lbs. Age: 27Experience: 3 years College: Georgia Drafted: Year:2005 Round:2 Pick:3, Eagles Stat Overview Receiving SPLIT REC YDS AVG LNG TD 2007 61 780 12.8 45 4 #83 Kevin Walter | WR Born: August 4, 1981Height: 6-3Weight: 214 lbs. Age: 26Experience: 5 years College: Eastern Michigan Drafted: Year:2003 Round:7 Pick:41, Giants Stat Overview Receiving SPLIT REC YDS AVG LNG TD 2007 65 800 12.3 46 4 I'm missing the incredulity of this comparitive study because I have Walter 7 slots higher than Brown and I'm comfortable with that.
 
Bracie Smathers said:
Beaumont said:
Would you really trade Reggie Brown for Kevin Walter? Really??
Click to expand...
#86 Reggie Brown | WR Born: January 13, 1981Height: 6-1Weight: 197 lbs. Age: 27Experience: 3 years College: Georgia Drafted: Year:2005 Round:2 Pick:3, Eagles Stat Overview Receiving SPLIT REC YDS AVG LNG TD 2007 61 780 12.8 45 4 #83 Kevin Walter | WR Born: August 4, 1981Height: 6-3Weight: 214 lbs. Age: 26Experience: 5 years College: Eastern Michigan Drafted: Year:2003 Round:7 Pick:41, Giants Stat Overview Receiving SPLIT REC YDS AVG LNG TD 2007 65 800 12.3 46 4 I'm missing the incredulity of this comparitive study because I have Walter 7 slots higher than Brown and I'm comfortable with that.
Click to expand...
Does the 7 games that A.Johnson missed matter with Walter?
 
Tiki_Barber said:
Not a bad list, but I barely have Evans cracking my Top 30. There's no way I could ever put him ahead of Welker (who has a long term deal with the Patriots). I'd probably just swap Welker and Evans, Jennings and Rice. Rice is probably still too high there. I have Hackett & Chris Henry 30-35. If Hackett resigns with Seattle, I'd put him in my Top 25. If CJ somehow gets dealt, Henry vaults into my Top 20.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I have no qualms with any criticism of Lee Evans. He is very hot/cold and the bulk of his production came in a lil over half his starts. He did have a QB switch and was breaking in a rookie and then ran into some bad weather down the stretch. I guess the key with Evans is that he will blow up and I'm seeing a pattern where he does well earlier in the year before those Buffalo/Cleveland blizzards roll in from the lake. Also taking a second look at Trent Edwards, hmmn. I like him but he slumped off at the end with three straight losses and weak stats but he was battling bad weather. I'd like to see what they can do together next year. I like Welker a lot but Brady never threw for more than 28 TDs in any single season till he got Moss and co. I think Randy plays a big part in the passing attack in NE. At the end of the year they were transitionning to the running game and having good results. I don't think they will go to a power run attack anytime soon but the spread may not work like clockwork if Randy doesn't produce as well as he did this year. Wes had insane numbers for a slot guy who had few big plays, which is the MO for Lee Evans. He's tremendous but I am just not sure he'd do as well without Moss as his wingman and I think Randy may not post the same numbers next year.Jennings is worthy of a second look or two. I think Farve is the key. I like the new WRs he's got to work with but in the past it took me awhile to warm up to Donald Driver. I like Jennings and Jones but I'm not sure what to expect should Bret hand em up.So I like Lee Evans from a big-play talent persepctive, the major question mark I see with him is his QB situation. Welker is a talent but not a big-play type of talent ALA Lee Evans IMHO. I love his QB situation and Moss as his wingman but I just don't see another 16-0 season on the horizon and I'm not sure Moss is healthy and productive/motivated/focused as much as he was this past year. He seemed to be drifting late in the season so looking at Tom Brady's historical TD totals, well he never was elite without Moss and company so I think the passing game may not be as potent in NE, jes my opinion but I can't argue against Wes. Then Jennings, ok you got me. I have liked him and may have gotten him a bit confused with Jones so he is a worthy bump and I can valid arguements against Evans and pro arguments for Welker as well. Per ClownDog,
Does the 7 games that A.Johnson missed matter with Walter?
Click to expand...
I look at it that he didn't get his shot till AJ went down. His QB situation, when Sage went in it seemed to have more impact on the production of the WRs on a whole than anything else. I guess I'm not as high on Ronnie Brown and the numbers of Walter and Brown are a near wash so I don't see a big discrepency in having one ranked slightly above the other. I do understand the point you are making, that Andre Johnson going down lead to Walter seeing the field implying he wouldn't see the field if AJ returns healthy next year. AJ went down and missed the third thru 9 games and Walter got his shot and after a slow start, only five receptions for 27 yards in the first three games, he began producing in the fourth game, 6 receptions for 77 yards and continued to produce even after AJ returned so I think he'll continue to be productive. The Philly WR situation seems cloudy. Curtis was targeted more than anyone but he doesn't get Red Zone looks. Brown doesn't seem like a #1 WR in my humble opinion. I think Philly likes Curtis and that its possible they are happy with Brown for their #1 WR or it wouldn't suprise me if they sought a #1 WR in the draft or tried to acquire one in a trade or free agency.
 
Biggest qualms:

Jennings

Coles

Brown

LRobinson

Your ranking of Welker is agreeable in my eyes, due to the fact you state this is a No PPR ranking.

 
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.

 
Fear & Loathing said:
ClownDogs said:
Does the 7 games that A.Johnson missed matter with Walter?
Click to expand...
Of course they do. It would be foolish not to consider that factor....I share your incredulity on this one.
Click to expand...
Seems to be a lot of Reggie Brown luv and I think its admirable to take a liking to a player but when comparing two players of equal stats for dynasty rankings I would take another look at Brown's numbers and compare them to Kevin Walter's.Reggie Brown.YEAR TEAM G 2005 PHI 16 REC YDS AVG TD FD 43 571 13.3 4 24 Nice solid first year stats for a rookie WR. Year two after TO left and entering his second season after a solid rookie campaign he was looked to contend to take over as the #1 WR, here is what he produced.2006 PHI 16 46 816 17.7 8 34 Not much of a reception increase but a nice bump in yards/avg first downs and TDs. Year three with TO long gone and the #1 WR up for grabs.2007 PHI 16 61 780 12.8 4 38 Reception bump but yardage/avg and TD drop. It doesn't look to me like Reggie Brown stepped up.Kevin Walter started out being claimed off waivers and never really had a shot in the Nati with Chad Johnson and TJ Housh and Kelly Washington etc but he hung out for three years lost in the weeds.YEAR TEAM G 2003 CIN and year's 04/04REC YDS AVG LNG TD FD 11 3 18 6.0 0 1 8 67 8.4 0 3 19 211 11.1 1 14 He lands in Houston in 06 and did nothing the first year.YEAR TEAM G 2006 HOU 16 REC YDS AVG LNG TD FD 17 160 9.4 0 12 Then last year he got his shot and took advantage of it.65 800 12.3 4 43 I have him ranked seven spots higher than Brown and I feel even more comfortable with it now that I've done the homework.
 
Tiki_Barber said:
Not a bad list, but I barely have Evans cracking my Top 30. There's no way I could ever put him ahead of Welker (who has a long term deal with the Patriots). I'd probably just swap Welker and Evans, Jennings and Rice. Rice is probably still too high there. I have Hackett & Chris Henry 30-35. If Hackett resigns with Seattle, I'd put him in my Top 25. If CJ somehow gets dealt, Henry vaults into my Top 20.
Click to expand...
I think Evans scores way too many goose eggs for a high #2WR and potential #1WR. I have never owned him but it seems like owners get frustrated with the down games and end up sitting him when he goes off. Rather than potential it is becoming a pattern but he cannot take all the blame considering the QB's.
 
Good list...

Both you and EBF have Chad Johnson ranked over young studs like Andre and Braylon (you have him ranked over Fitz as well) ... Do you see Chad outperforming the likes of Andre and Braylon that much over the next two years to rank him higher? Considering the age difference, i would have to go with the younger counterparts, who should be able to put up similar (if not better) stats.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
broncofan13000 said:
Good list...Both you and EBF have Chad Johnson ranked over young studs like Andre and Braylon (you have him ranked over Fitz as well) ... Do you see Chad outperforming the likes of Andre and Braylon that much over the next two years to rank him higher? Considering the age difference, i would have to go with the younger counterparts, who should be able to put up similar (if not better) stats.
Click to expand...
One factor here is injuries. Chad plays a very safe style of football like Wayne, Holt, and Harrison. I see him having very good longevity whereas Braylon has already shredded one knee and AJ seems to get dinged up a lot. I think you can make a case for AJ and Braylon higher, but I decided to put a premium on Chad's consistency. You know what you're going to get from him every year: 85 catches, 1,350 yards, and a handful of scores. That has a lot of value.
 
So hard to rank the older stud veterans in these lists.

The Reggie Williams ranking is a little mind boggling. Don't like him much despite the 10 TDs.

 
beto said:
So hard to rank the older stud veterans in these lists.The Reggie Williams ranking is a little mind boggling. Don't like him much despite the 10 TDs.
Click to expand...
He's an interesting player right now. He had 677 receiving yards and 10 TDs despite having fewer targets than guys like Brad Smith, Keary Colbert, Drew Bennett, Drew Carter, and Joe Jurevicius. Jacksonville doesn't seem eager to make him a true number one WR, but there is some upside there given his age, pedigree, and recent track record of production. Reggie Williams has been in the league for a while, but he's only 4 months older than Johnnie Lee Higgins. He's still very young and potentially developing.
 
Bracie Smathers said:
Tiki_Barber said:
Not a bad list, but I barely have Evans cracking my Top 30. There's no way I could ever put him ahead of Welker (who has a long term deal with the Patriots). I'd probably just swap Welker and Evans, Jennings and Rice. Rice is probably still too high there. I have Hackett & Chris Henry 30-35. If Hackett resigns with Seattle, I'd put him in my Top 25. If CJ somehow gets dealt, Henry vaults into my Top 20.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I have no qualms with any criticism of Lee Evans. He is very hot/cold and the bulk of his production came in a lil over half his starts. He did have a QB switch and was breaking in a rookie and then ran into some bad weather down the stretch. I guess the key with Evans is that he will blow up and I'm seeing a pattern where he does well earlier in the year before those Buffalo/Cleveland blizzards roll in from the lake. Also taking a second look at Trent Edwards, hmmn. I like him but he slumped off at the end with three straight losses and weak stats but he was battling bad weather. I'd like to see what they can do together next year. So I like Lee Evans from a big-play talent persepctive, the major question mark I see with him is his QB situation. Welker is a talent but not a big-play type of talent ALA Lee Evans IMHO. I love his QB situation and Moss as his wingman but I just don't see another 16-0 season on the horizon and I'm not sure Moss is healthy and productive/motivated/focused as much as he was this past year. He seemed to be drifting late in the season so looking at Tom Brady's historical TD totals, well he never was elite without Moss and company so I think the passing game may not be as potent in NE, jes my opinion but I can't argue against Wes. Then Jennings, ok you got me. I have liked him and may have gotten him a bit confused with Jones so he is a worthy bump and I can valid arguements against Evans and pro arguments for Welker as well.
Click to expand...
One thing to consider with Evans is that he has two years left on his contract, but he can void that last one. If he gets a chance to hit the open market and go to a team with a real QB I don't think he'll have these consistency problems.
 
Not sure I agree with the all the rankings, but generally, I'm in sync with how much value you put on youth (as opposed to veteran consistency) on this list. Good job.

 
Harrison #29, Gonzales #22???

Marvin's a little old and nicked up, but I think he comes back with a vengence next year for a few more years...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Silverstreak said:
Harrison #29, Gonzales #22??? Marvin's a little old and nicked up, but I think he comes back with a vengence next year for a few more years...
Click to expand...
Anthony Gonzalez, gut feeling that he'll blow up in the next two years. Major steps as a rookie that I wasn't expecting. I thought he would progress much slower like Reggie Wayne. Marvin, I think that their may be some lingering injury issues. For dynasty I have Anthony ranked high. Colt offense, his dedication and work ethic. I noticed and liked the timing he was forming with Peyton. In two years I think Marvin is going to be replaced by Gonzalez.Randy Moss. Patriots. I don't know about everyone else but I consider the Patriots story to be a once in a liftetime fairy tale so enjoy it Pat fans. The offensive line didn't suffer any major injuries neither did, Brady, Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Watson, etc. The Boston, Celtic-BoSox mojo may go on forever and no one other than Boston will every win anything but I doubt it. I also don't see the Patriots prancing on another primrose path to an undefeated season next year. I also don't see another record shattering perfect health airtight intact not effected by any outside distractions. I do not think that everyone, the entire team, will be motivated/focused/ or un-effected by the pressure of carrying the undefeated label all off-season and into next year. I expect a natural return of the team returning to a steady state as one of the top teams but I don't see another record shattering undefeated season and that applies directly to Moss coming down to earth. TJ was targeted more by Carson to punish Chad IMHO. TJ had a lot of drops. Personality aside, Chad is proven and he's better than TJ and he's got a QB who is getting back to one of the elites of the league. I think they will mesh again next year. Wayne took over for Marvin and stepped up. I think he's got potential to out-Marvin Marvin Harrison because I think he has more natural ability and Peyton is still in his prime. Per Brandon Marshall, the Broncos might end up dishing Javon and Brandon made huge strides last year. Also Cutler made huge strides. For a dynasty WR I'm not sure what to not like about his upside.
 
Jeff Pasquino said:
Biggest issue I have is Housh at 19. No way IMHO he's out of Top 10.
Click to expand...
I consider him a #2 WR. I only have Anquan as a #2 ranked higher. I don't have Fitzy ranked #1 due to Anquan. TJ was target more than any other WR in the NFL last year. Just a gut feeling. Carson is going to patch things up with Chad and Chad will steal those targets from TJ. But if the friction between Chad/Carson flares your issue with TJ being ranked lower will be validated.
 
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
 
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
Solid post and logic, but don't forget injuries happen (Patrick Jeffers?), some players who appear to be studs early in their career bust (Michael Clayton), and the championship for one or two years is worth something. Fact is, you need a balance. I want my starters to be studs and don't care too much about their age, although a young top 5 is obviously worth more than an older top 5. My bench usually consists of players in their first 4 years.
 
FUBAR said:
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
Solid post and logic, but don't forget injuries happen (Patrick Jeffers?), some players who appear to be studs early in their career bust (Michael Clayton), and the championship for one or two years is worth something. Fact is, you need a balance. I want my starters to be studs and don't care too much about their age, although a young top 5 is obviously worth more than an older top 5. My bench usually consists of players in their first 4 years.
Click to expand...
Injuries happen to the youngsters AND the oldsters. The primary difference is that the youngsters generally recover better and more quickly and have time to to "come back". As for young studs who turn out to be duds, again, that scenario happens as often or more often for older guys who WERE studs and then all of the sudden AREN'T studs anymore as it does in cases like Clayton's. Muhammad, Darrell Jackson, Joe Horn, Jimmy Smith, Eric Moulds, the list goes on and on.Would I want TO on my team for the right price? Hell yeah, I want studs too. But I'd much rather have him on my team as a result of drafting him or grabbing him early than paying through the nose for him in the last couple of years. Heck two or three years ago, the discussion might have been Harrison vs Moss. Moss was struggling, and Harrison was like clockwork. But Moss is younger and had TIME to work through the issues that were holding him back (team, injury) while Harrison just got older and finally broke down. Last year, Harrison was still "worth" a nice chunk of change to a lot of the "3 year windowers". Maybe they traded Braylon Edwards and a couple of draft picks for him. What's he worth now in a dynasty?I think a lot of times people talk authoritatively about the 3 year window mostly because a hefty portion of the dynasty leagues out there right now are less than three years old (the dynasty concept itself may not be "new", but it's popularity certainly is)! Of COURSE that strategy looks good in the early going. But I want to see what these guys say 5 or 10 years from now when their teams are getting crushed every week because when their "studs" got used up and they had no value left, the team was decimated and they had nothing to backfill.IMO, OVER THE LONG HAUL (which is what a dynasty league should be about), youth (talented youth of course) trumps most other considerations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Holy Schneikes said:
I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
Somehow I lived to tell about it. :lmao:Looking at a 3- or 4-year horizon makes sense only to the extent that you cannot predict what will happen to a player after 1-2 years, so don't even try to define his team, situation, contract, coach, offensive scheme, injuries, supporting network (players, coaches, team is good or bad, etc.). It's way too tough to gauge that sort of thing. Beyond 2-3 years, it's all about age and talent - but that's not the only factors for sure. That's why I weight the now and "near now" more than 2-3 years out. The point I have changed is that players that still have something left in the tank (either in age, skill, potential or whatever) have more value 2-3 years from now than aged veterans. That's why you won't be seeing Joe Jurevicius anytime soon on my WR list, as we know his upside ceiling and his limited career length remaining. Is Jason Hill better? Maybe, maybe not - but his upside in 2-3 years is much more likely to be worth more.
 
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.

At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.

Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.

So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.

I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.

Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
I don't play dynasty, but I think I'd rather have some studs NOW to help me win NOW and invest in some younger players. Yes, in three years Moss might have a value of zero but if he helps me win three championships in the meantime, so what? And how do you know your young player will turn out to be good anyway? According to your strategy, last year you would rather have had Roy Williams or Lee Evans over Moss because of their age? Where would that have gotten you this last year? Give me Moss now and I will draft or trade for the "next" Moss when he truly is old. So why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years, you ask? If not, how do you know when to trade someone? If you're always looking at youth, then you will never have a stud since you will be trading them all away for someone younger once they get "old".

The point of my post was for people to post how far ahead they are looking. This would affect the rankings. If you think his skills will start diminishing in five years, you would rank him higher than if you thought it would be two years. And thats just your own lists. People comparing their own lists to each other need to state their criteria or else you are comparing apples to oranges.

 
Nice list. :headbang:

A couple comments: I'm not sure there is not a person on earth who would take Roddy White in dynasty over Anthony Gonzalez. And Joey Galloway is too low. It doesn't matter that he's older then Moses, he produces.

 
3nOut said:
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.

At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.

Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.

So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.

I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.

Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
I don't play dynasty, but I think I'd rather have some studs NOW to help me win NOW and invest in some younger players. Yes, in three years Moss might have a value of zero but if he helps me win three championships in the meantime, so what? And how do you know your young player will turn out to be good anyway? According to your strategy, last year you would rather have had Roy Williams or Lee Evans over Moss because of their age? Where would that have gotten you this last year? Give me Moss now and I will draft or trade for the "next" Moss when he truly is old. So why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years, you ask? If not, how do you know when to trade someone? If you're always looking at youth, then you will never have a stud since you will be trading them all away for someone younger once they get "old".

The point of my post was for people to post how far ahead they are looking. This would affect the rankings. If you think his skills will start diminishing in five years, you would rank him higher than if you thought it would be two years. And thats just your own lists. People comparing their own lists to each other need to state their criteria or else you are comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...
Roy Williams vs Moss. PERFECT example. Moss is probably going to be "worth" 5 or 10 times what Roy will go for after this season (on many "lists" anyway), and that is a huge mistake. Will Randy keep it up? For how long? Will his back start bothering him again? How many years will he stay in NE? Will he go back to somewhere more like Oakland, looking for a big pay day? Roy on the other hand, HAS the skills needed to succeed, is very young and could be a top 5 receiver for 5 or 8 years in the future. If you DID play in dynasty leagues, the smart money would be to move Moss for a ton right now and be MUCH better in the future. I'm not saying you ALWAYS need to push your value into the out years, but if you consistently get more real overall value than you are giving up, you are going to end up with a VERY good team, flush with talent at all positions.I DON'T always "look for" youth. But I will always try to properly EVALUATE youth. Like I said, if I have had Owens or Moss (maybe I moved Harrison for him and couple of other nice prospects/draft picks a year or two ago) all along and my team is on the cusp, sure - I just roll with him.

As for the set years and apples to apples, I feel that lists should evaluate all players for all of their value (near years, mid years, far years, whatever). Simple as that. THAT'S apples to apples.

I'm not trying to blast you in particular here. A lot, if not most, guys doing and/or participating in these kinds of lists feel the same way you do. In fact four or five years ago, I might have argued FOR the vets over youth theory. But over time I have given this more and more thought (and practiced in different leagues with different approaches) and have come to conclusion that in most cases, youth is undervalued in general if you are in it for the long haul. JMO.

 
3nOut said:
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.

At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.

Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.

So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.

I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.

Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
I don't play dynasty, but I think I'd rather have some studs NOW to help me win NOW and invest in some younger players. Yes, in three years Moss might have a value of zero but if he helps me win three championships in the meantime, so what? And how do you know your young player will turn out to be good anyway? According to your strategy, last year you would rather have had Roy Williams or Lee Evans over Moss because of their age? Where would that have gotten you this last year? Give me Moss now and I will draft or trade for the "next" Moss when he truly is old. So why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years, you ask? If not, how do you know when to trade someone? If you're always looking at youth, then you will never have a stud since you will be trading them all away for someone younger once they get "old".

The point of my post was for people to post how far ahead they are looking. This would affect the rankings. If you think his skills will start diminishing in five years, you would rank him higher than if you thought it would be two years. And thats just your own lists. People comparing their own lists to each other need to state their criteria or else you are comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...
These rankings are dynasty league where the drafting or picking up a player can be a one-year rental to help win a championship or a developmental long-term project. Time would have to based upon each team/owner/rules etc so rankings encompass the avg DYNASTY value. I wasn't devaluing Moss so much based on age but in a post above I explained how I felt the Pat offense peeked this year and would regress and impact Randy's numbers but his age also is factored in. I do not see him repeating the numbers he had this year and wouldn't even if he were in his prime. But for dynasty, players age/long term wear and tear/accumulative injury/etc are factored in with scheme and supporting cast in addition to talent and chance to start and make an impact. So I guess I couldn't answer your question due to the fact a player's age isn't the only factor in a dyanasty league but it is a factor in dynasty that doesn't register in redraft leagues. I would encourage entering one dynasty league so you could understand the long range team building strategies and I'm sure their are a few good articles that it explain it far better than my feeble attempt.

 
Does anyone try to rank players for dynasty purposes by projecting how many years a player may perform at a #1 or #2 level for their position? I think you would then have to define what is worth more 3 years of WR 1 performance vs. say 8 years of WR#2 level? I have never tried this but just thought I would throw out that theory and see if anyone uses something like this.

 
Warhogs said:
Does anyone try to rank players for dynasty purposes by projecting how many years a player may perform at a #1 or #2 level for their position? I think you would then have to define what is worth more 3 years of WR 1 performance vs. say 8 years of WR#2 level? I have never tried this but just thought I would throw out that theory and see if anyone uses something like this.
Click to expand...
On some level, that's what I think we are all doing. One could try to force it into a more rigorous formula, but I think it would be very difficult to come up with anything meaningful. Not impossible, but very difficult with all of the variables you'd have to factor in.
 
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Never understood the 3 year thing. It's not like Larry Fitzgerald and Ben Roethlisberger are going to spontaneously combust on opening day in 2011.
 
EBF said:
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.

At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.

Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.

So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.

I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.

Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: Never understood the 3 year thing. It's not like Larry Fitzgerald and Ben Roethlisberger are going to spontaneously combust on opening day in 2011.
Click to expand...
Ok let me try to explain the 3 year thing.By making a projection or ranking for 3 years that does not mean that your evaluation of the player has them completely falling out of the league at the end of the 3 year window. That is unless you are projecting that certain players will fall out of being productive within that 3 year window. That is part of the reason for doing the projection in the 1st place. To identify those players who's windows may be closing. If the player is young and their career could last longer than 3 years great. You reproject all players every year anyways and push the 3 year window out another year then and evaluate what you expect from them in year 3 again and keep pushing this out each year.

So how is this spontanius combustion? Or a 3 year blinder? Thats rhetorical posturing without understanding how a 3 year window works.

I think looking ahead 2 years from the current season is more than enough flexibility to identify if the players window is closing and still be able to do somthing about it. For example draft or trade for a replacement to that player. Trade the player away before they lose value. At the same time the 3 year window helps a owner who is focused on the long term and youth to stay better focused on winning a championship THIS YEAR. This is the goal right? To win as many championships as you can and to sustain your competitiveness long term at the same time. A Balanced approach.

Too often in Dynasty I have seen owners overvalue youth and ignore current value. They are the same owners who traded Marvin Harrison away 5 years ago because he was 30 and getting old. Look at all the productivity they missed on because they were over valuing age. A 3 year window would have helped such an owner better evaluate when was the right time to move Marvin.

When doing projections/rankings for players say you have a group of WR that your projecting about the same over the 3 year window. How do you then rank those players? BY AGE youth trumps tie breakers like this. So it is not being ignored by the 3 year window. In fact age and the players window of career/value decline is part of your projecting out. And then age is again a tie breaker. So it gets factored in twice.

Returning again to the owner who over values youth. Young players who have been very good producers are always at a premium in dynasty leagues. Randy Moss value when he was 25? Yeah he was a top 5 player. Right now players like Colston/Andre/Edwards are premium values and will cost you a ton to trade for. So the owner who overvalues youth will trade Marvin (30 years old) PLUS to get Colston because of the age difference and hurt the overall value of his team by doing so. Then once Colston is getting up there (29/30) that same owner will over pay again to move that player for someone younger again paying a premium. Over time such value losing moves will hurt the overall strength of the team due to the cost paid in buying high. The other option for the owner who over values youth is to trade for young promising player who has not proven themselves yet. We know how this goes. Sometimes the player pans out sometimes they dont. If you give up players that are proven and can help you win now (and who still should be doing so for you 3 years from now) for players who are not really proven.. regardless of their potential.. you are taking on risk. For example you could have traded Harrison for Michael Clayton after his rookie year because of the age difference and got totaly burned.

There are several different ways to evaluate value in Dynasty and this is an issue I would like to see discussed more extensivly. I did open this conversation last year. I think different strats should be tailored to the current roster composition of your team. If you can win it all you should focus more short term and take advantage of the situation. I have lost championships in retrospect from trading that vet for a future draft pick or in a move to get younger. That one vet would have made a difference for me and there is no reason I couldn't have waited until after the championship to move that player. It is because of experiences like this for me that I have been shifting my thoughts more towards a win now approach. I think the 3 year window is balanced enough to keep your team on top while not hurting your chances too much this year. Longer term strat should be employed by teams needing to rebuild/get better.

I hope some of this rambling makes sense if you really dont understand the 3 year window. I am not saying that it is the best method. I think it is balanced. So if you have a strong team with a good mix of youth and veteran players the 3 year window perspective can help a owner with a roster like this maintain that team quality and competitivness. It does not ignore the value of young players while at the same time is reasonable enough to not over value those young players at the expense of the teams competitiveness.

 
Chadstroma said:
TheGreatest said:
R. Moss is too low IMO.
Click to expand...
It his age that knocks him down just like T.O.
Click to expand...
He's 31. 31 is not even CLOSE to old. After age 31, Jerry Rice produced 5 more top-10 seasons (and a sixth where he ranked 11th). In the 3 years since he turned 31, Owens was top-5 in PPG (but injured), and then had two straight second-place finishes (and his consensus top-10 dynasty ranking indicates people think more are in the cards). In the 3 years since he turned 31, Harrison has two more top-10 finishes. Stud WRs generally produce well into their 30s. Maybe at 32 or 33 you begin to start talking about how he's aging, but 31 is still the prime of a WR's career. If nothing else, hold him for a year, enjoy the production, and sell him off next year.
 
Biabreakable said:
EBF said:
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.

At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.

Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.

So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.

I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.

Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
:mellow: Never understood the 3 year thing. It's not like Larry Fitzgerald and Ben Roethlisberger are going to spontaneously combust on opening day in 2011.
Click to expand...
Ok let me try to explain the 3 year thing.By making a projection or ranking for 3 years that does not mean that your evaluation of the player has them completely falling out of the league at the end of the 3 year window. That is unless you are projecting that certain players will fall out of being productive within that 3 year window. That is part of the reason for doing the projection in the 1st place. To identify those players who's windows may be closing. If the player is young and their career could last longer than 3 years great. You reproject all players every year anyways and push the 3 year window out another year then and evaluate what you expect from them in year 3 again and keep pushing this out each year.

So how is this spontanius combustion? Or a 3 year blinder? Thats rhetorical posturing without understanding how a 3 year window works.

I think looking ahead 2 years from the current season is more than enough flexibility to identify if the players window is closing and still be able to do somthing about it. For example draft or trade for a replacement to that player. Trade the player away before they lose value. At the same time the 3 year window helps a owner who is focused on the long term and youth to stay better focused on winning a championship THIS YEAR. This is the goal right? To win as many championships as you can and to sustain your competitiveness long term at the same time. A Balanced approach.

Too often in Dynasty I have seen owners overvalue youth and ignore current value. They are the same owners who traded Marvin Harrison away 5 years ago because he was 30 and getting old. Look at all the productivity they missed on because they were over valuing age. A 3 year window would have helped such an owner better evaluate when was the right time to move Marvin.

When doing projections/rankings for players say you have a group of WR that your projecting about the same over the 3 year window. How do you then rank those players? BY AGE youth trumps tie breakers like this. So it is not being ignored by the 3 year window. In fact age and the players window of career/value decline is part of your projecting out. And then age is again a tie breaker. So it gets factored in twice.

Returning again to the owner who over values youth. Young players who have been very good producers are always at a premium in dynasty leagues. Randy Moss value when he was 25? Yeah he was a top 5 player. Right now players like Colston/Andre/Edwards are premium values and will cost you a ton to trade for. So the owner who overvalues youth will trade Marvin (30 years old) PLUS to get Colston because of the age difference and hurt the overall value of his team by doing so. Then once Colston is getting up there (29/30) that same owner will over pay again to move that player for someone younger again paying a premium. Over time such value losing moves will hurt the overall strength of the team due to the cost paid in buying high. The other option for the owner who over values youth is to trade for young promising player who has not proven themselves yet. We know how this goes. Sometimes the player pans out sometimes they dont. If you give up players that are proven and can help you win now (and who still should be doing so for you 3 years from now) for players who are not really proven.. regardless of their potential.. you are taking on risk. For example you could have traded Harrison for Michael Clayton after his rookie year because of the age difference and got totaly burned.

There are several different ways to evaluate value in Dynasty and this is an issue I would like to see discussed more extensivly. I did open this conversation last year. I think different strats should be tailored to the current roster composition of your team. If you can win it all you should focus more short term and take advantage of the situation. I have lost championships in retrospect from trading that vet for a future draft pick or in a move to get younger. That one vet would have made a difference for me and there is no reason I couldn't have waited until after the championship to move that player. It is because of experiences like this for me that I have been shifting my thoughts more towards a win now approach. I think the 3 year window is balanced enough to keep your team on top while not hurting your chances too much this year. Longer term strat should be employed by teams needing to rebuild/get better.

I hope some of this rambling makes sense if you really dont understand the 3 year window. I am not saying that it is the best method. I think it is balanced. So if you have a strong team with a good mix of youth and veteran players the 3 year window perspective can help a owner with a roster like this maintain that team quality and competitivness. It does not ignore the value of young players while at the same time is reasonable enough to not over value those young players at the expense of the teams competitiveness.
Click to expand...
The mathematics of all this stuff is complicated, but the big problem I have with the three year window strategy is that it doesn't account for the years that a player might play beyond those first three. A good example right now is Reggie Wayne vs. Larry Fitzgerald. On the surface these two players have a very similar dynasty value. Both guys are in the prime of their careers and should remain highly productive for the next three years assuming good health. So if you held strictly to a three year plan, you might conclude that Larry Fitzgerald and Reggie Wayne are equal in value.

IMO, this would be an incorrect conclusion. Larry Fitzgerald is five years younger than Reggie Wayne. It's impossible to predict the future, but the fact that Fitzgerald is so much younger means there's a very realistic possibility that he'll still be a star player several years after Wayne has washed out of the league. If you want to talk about absolute dynasty value, I think you can actually make a strong argument that Fitzgerald is twice as valuable as Wayne.

Assuming that both guys play at 100% until they're 35, Wayne has 6 more productive years left whereas Fitzgerald has 11 more years left. So what you're getting from Fitzgerald is nearly twice the value you're getting from Wayne. I know it's a bit more complicated than this simple analysis, but I think the general idea has a lot of merit.

The reason lots of owners value youth in dynasty is because youth has value. A three year window is short-sighted in a dynasty league. Yes, uncertainty reigns king in fantasy football, but that doesn't mean you can completely ignore the future. There's little reason to believe that guys like Larry Fitzgerald and Ben Roethlisberger won't be productive 7 years from now.

 
EBF said:
The mathematics of all this stuff is complicated, but the big problem I have with the three year window strategy is that it doesn't account for the years that a player might play beyond those first three.

A good example right now is Reggie Wayne vs. Larry Fitzgerald. On the surface these two players have a very similar dynasty value. Both guys are in the prime of their careers and should remain highly productive for the next three years assuming good health. So if you held strictly to a three year plan, you might conclude that Larry Fitzgerald and Reggie Wayne are equal in value.

IMO, this would be an incorrect conclusion. Larry Fitzgerald is five years younger than Reggie Wayne. It's impossible to predict the future, but the fact that Fitzgerald is so much younger means there's a very realistic possibility that he'll still be a star player several years after Wayne has washed out of the league. If you want to talk about absolute dynasty value, I think you can actually make a strong argument that Fitzgerald is twice as valuable as Wayne.

Assuming that both guys play at 100% until they're 35, Wayne has 6 more productive years left whereas Fitzgerald has 11 more years left. So what you're getting from Fitzgerald is nearly twice the value you're getting from Wayne. I know it's a bit more complicated than this simple analysis, but I think the general idea has a lot of merit.

The reason lots of owners value youth in dynasty is because youth has value. A three year window is short-sighted in a dynasty league. Yes, uncertainty reigns king in fantasy football, but that doesn't mean you can completely ignore the future. There's little reason to believe that guys like Larry Fitzgerald and Ben Roethlisberger won't be productive 7 years from now.
Click to expand...
I think a much simpler way of looking at this is to include "exit value" into considerations. Imagine you think Wayne and Fitzgerald are going to produce identical numbers over the next three years. Their value over the 3 year span will be identical... but when you factor "exit value" into the consideration, the difference becomes clear. Three years from now, a 33 year old WR won't be worth anywhere near as much as a 28 year old WR who produced the same value over that span.
 
SSOG said:
EBF said:
The mathematics of all this stuff is complicated, but the big problem I have with the three year window strategy is that it doesn't account for the years that a player might play beyond those first three.

A good example right now is Reggie Wayne vs. Larry Fitzgerald. On the surface these two players have a very similar dynasty value. Both guys are in the prime of their careers and should remain highly productive for the next three years assuming good health. So if you held strictly to a three year plan, you might conclude that Larry Fitzgerald and Reggie Wayne are equal in value.

IMO, this would be an incorrect conclusion. Larry Fitzgerald is five years younger than Reggie Wayne. It's impossible to predict the future, but the fact that Fitzgerald is so much younger means there's a very realistic possibility that he'll still be a star player several years after Wayne has washed out of the league. If you want to talk about absolute dynasty value, I think you can actually make a strong argument that Fitzgerald is twice as valuable as Wayne.

Assuming that both guys play at 100% until they're 35, Wayne has 6 more productive years left whereas Fitzgerald has 11 more years left. So what you're getting from Fitzgerald is nearly twice the value you're getting from Wayne. I know it's a bit more complicated than this simple analysis, but I think the general idea has a lot of merit.

The reason lots of owners value youth in dynasty is because youth has value. A three year window is short-sighted in a dynasty league. Yes, uncertainty reigns king in fantasy football, but that doesn't mean you can completely ignore the future. There's little reason to believe that guys like Larry Fitzgerald and Ben Roethlisberger won't be productive 7 years from now.
Click to expand...
I think a much simpler way of looking at this is to include "exit value" into considerations. Imagine you think Wayne and Fitzgerald are going to produce identical numbers over the next three years. Their value over the 3 year span will be identical... but when you factor "exit value" into the consideration, the difference becomes clear. Three years from now, a 33 year old WR won't be worth anywhere near as much as a 28 year old WR who produced the same value over that span.
Click to expand...
Yea, that's a big part of it and a big problem with the "win now" strategy. Operating in a small window of time doesn't give you much margin for error because if you don't win your league in one of those first two years, you're stuck with old players who will be very difficult to trade.
 
Holy Schneikes said:
FUBAR said:
Holy Schneikes said:
3nOut said:
These dynasty threads need to state how many years they want that player for. If you say three years then Moss should be much higher. If you say 6 years, then OK. The order of any ranking will change depending on your criteria.
Click to expand...
I never get this sentiment at all, which is why I value youth more than most in dynasty leagues.Why base anything on three years or even ANY set number of years? It doesn't make sense to do that.

At the end of that 3 or 6 years the player in question has a NEW value. For older guys, that value may be zero, for younger guys, it won't, whether you choose to continue using that player, or trade him away and get something out of him. The "outyear" value is what so many of these dynasty lists COMPLETELY ignore.

Too many folks figure, well, I can't figure out anything past 3 or 4 years, so I'll just ignore that time frame in my evaluation. But the FACT is, you DO know something fairly definitive about that time frame in many situations. If you are talking about a 30 year old receiver, you know that in four years he will have very little value. If you are talking about a 32 year old receiver, in four years he will have virtually no value (with some rare exceptions). With a 24 year old receiver, even if he isn't a stud right now, there is at least a chance he will still hold significant value in 4 years, and that potential value is WORTH something. It's not worth what CURRENT production is worth, I won't argue that, but it is worth SOMETHING and that value is what often gets ignored.

So age is critical to me. It's actually hilarious to watch dynasty rankings as they go on over the years. On average, every player's value should gradually decrease over time as they "use up" the years they can provide a team with useful points. But with some of these older guys, you see them drop like rocks near the end of their careers. Why is that? Because they were OVERVALUED leading up to the end. If you think in terms of a market perspective, where you absolutely don't want to be is buying a 32 year old receiver at a high value, right before it plummets down to the ground. Sometimes you get lucky and that player has a couple of late amazing years (ala Owens) and it pays off, but in general, you are not getting a good return on your investment. Where you absolutely DO want to be is catching a young guy on the way up BEFORE his value skyrockets. Where was Braylon Edwards ranked last year? The talent has always been there, but now all of the sudden he is worth 3 or 4 times more than he was a year ago (despite being a year older). He was undervalued last year. Sure, some young guys will bust, but if you have a young talented guy, he is worth a lot because not only does he have a chance to be the next stud, but he also represents a chance at a solid #2 guy that you can use for 4 or 5 years and STILL get some value out of at the end of that time if you so choose.

I absolutely bashed Jeff P a couple of years ago for ranking mid-tier older WRs fairly highly on his dynasty list (for the record, he took it well and I think the lists have improved in this regard). There were about 10 guys like that in the 40s and 50s (and some in the 30s) on the list I called out. Do you know where the vast majority of those guys are now? Not even on the list. And that is the bottom line. These lists are supposed to be kind of a snapshot of current overall value. If you list 10 guys in the 30s , 40s and 50s that are worth basically NOTHING in two short years (and not all that much between then and now), that's some bad value.

Beware the 3-4 year blinders.
Click to expand...
Solid post and logic, but don't forget injuries happen (Patrick Jeffers?), some players who appear to be studs early in their career bust (Michael Clayton), and the championship for one or two years is worth something. Fact is, you need a balance. I want my starters to be studs and don't care too much about their age, although a young top 5 is obviously worth more than an older top 5. My bench usually consists of players in their first 4 years.
Click to expand...
Injuries happen to the youngsters AND the oldsters. The primary difference is that the youngsters generally recover better and more quickly and have time to to "come back". As for young studs who turn out to be duds, again, that scenario happens as often or more often for older guys who WERE studs and then all of the sudden AREN'T studs anymore as it does in cases like Clayton's. Muhammad, Darrell Jackson, Joe Horn, Jimmy Smith, Eric Moulds, the list goes on and on.Would I want TO on my team for the right price? Hell yeah, I want studs too. But I'd much rather have him on my team as a result of drafting him or grabbing him early than paying through the nose for him in the last couple of years. Heck two or three years ago, the discussion might have been Harrison vs Moss. Moss was struggling, and Harrison was like clockwork. But Moss is younger and had TIME to work through the issues that were holding him back (team, injury) while Harrison just got older and finally broke down. Last year, Harrison was still "worth" a nice chunk of change to a lot of the "3 year windowers". Maybe they traded Braylon Edwards and a couple of draft picks for him. What's he worth now in a dynasty?

I think a lot of times people talk authoritatively about the 3 year window mostly because a hefty portion of the dynasty leagues out there right now are less than three years old (the dynasty concept itself may not be "new", but it's popularity certainly is)! Of COURSE that strategy looks good in the early going. But I want to see what these guys say 5 or 10 years from now when their teams are getting crushed every week because when their "studs" got used up and they had no value left, the team was decimated and they had nothing to backfill.

IMO, OVER THE LONG HAUL (which is what a dynasty league should be about), youth (talented youth of course) trumps most other considerations.
Click to expand...
One year ago, many people wrote Moss off as "washed up". #20 People preferred the younger Lee Evans, Santana Moss, Calvin Johnson, etc. to him. If you look at another dynasty thread, Crippler posted a draft from 3 years ago.

Among those taken in the top 30 because people looked past the 3 year window:

9. Micheal Clayton

11. Nate Burleson

14. Darrell Jackson

20. Ashley Lelie

21. Drew Bennett

23. Chris Chambers

24. Jerry Porter

26. Mike Williams

27. Troy Williamson

28. Kerry Colbert

30. Charles Rogers

Today, 3 years later, does Michael Clayton hold more "exit value" than

10. Terrell Owens

What WR taken #20-31 holds the most "exit value"?

25. Donald Driver

31. Derrick Mason

(ok, maybe Chambers does, but is it enough more to justify having him for the past 3 years over Driver or Mason?)

Maybe I'm reading you wrong, we agree that elite young WRs should be valued higher, but among the WRs ranked 20-on, it seems you're much better off not worrying too much past 3 years, the young guys going there usually aren't talented enough to be viable that long anyway.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yogibear
Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2026 Discussion Thread
Replies
41
Views
2K
Snoopy
Snoopy
Yogibear
Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of 2025 Discussion Thread
2
Replies
68
Views
3K
Tau837
Tau837
socrates
Early 2026 Dynasty Rookie Draft Rankings
2
Replies
52
Views
12K
Max Power
Max Power

Users who are viewing this thread

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