Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Here's a test for you.
Im going to think long and hard about what the 6 target guy might look like with 14 targets next week and vice versa.
Well of course, but without that, who would you choose? You are given no info but the target numbers. Certainly no one takes 6 targets in JAX vs 14 targets in NE.
What does this have to do with fantasy football? There is always more information. Lies, damned lies, and statistics... without context the stats are irrelevant, if not dangerous.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
I have him and I'm rooting for him. I'm probably even starting him this week. I'm just a bit worried.
Good counter, and I would say it's a matter of grapefruits and oranges. Those inside Welker routes that Edelman & Amendola are running Brady can complete in his sleep. Hit the Tiny White in the Middle of the Field. Done.
So then, what is your new "nothing short of" number?Nope as well as 8/150/0 would cut it either.So, 7/79/1 from your #3 WR doesn't cut it, huh?Thanks for the education of targets and what they mean as a guy who watches football I had no clue.Fat Nick said:
Again, Thompkins is involved and had 14 targets... HOW MANY POINTS THAT GET YOU?
Yes targets mean opportunity, but if you are involved and getting opportunity and doing nothing with it, what's the point?
Again he better get nothing short of 7/80/1 or he is gonna be gone off my team in all redraft.
If you think I'm so stuck on 1 yard and you dont realize my point thats your prob, but he needs to perform like a starter worthy of a roster spot on short bench in redraft.
Don't blame me for what is obviously a FBG site error - clearly its that time of the month for someone.I'm glad we got this well-reasoned and insightful post twice.
I don't see any way Cromartie won't be stuck to KT all night. He's the biggest threat outside the numbers, and that's Cro's office. This could be another ugly stat line. He is one of 3 or 4 corners I want nothing to do with as far as WR matchups.
Vincent Jackson had no problems with Cromartie last week. Definitely not comparing Vjax to KT, but just saying that maybe Cromartie isn't quite up to speed this year...
I didn't see much of that game. Did V-Jax's size give Cro problems or did he actually get separation?
I didn't see it ether but I read that vjax literally made cromartie his ##### all day, and was way too physically imposing for him to handle.
Timing with a rookie and off route running can play a role too. Not that I know it in this instance but it could.
From what I saw Brady was off this game, was not one of his better games for sure. In the third quarter he throws the ball to KT on a WR screen pass. The ball is so low he's scooping it up off the ground. One of the things said during the broadcast was how TB was quoted as saying KT could run any route and how TB was excited to play with him. One of the main reason I personally became interested in KT was because the reports were coming out that this guy was extremely smart, had excellent skills running routes, and that stat line from week 3 you mentioned was intreguing. So in a matter of 2 weeks this guy has either 1) forgotten how to run proper routes, 2) went from very smart to a dummy, or 3) Believe what my own eyes saw out of TB that game and know that a big reason for the 4-14 stat line was that was he was just off.
It doesn't work like that, but hey keep coming up with what ifs to try to change the game and make your point....
You're doing it wrong. You're only supposed to say that when people simply post their rosters.Phenix said:
It wasn't a special performance by Edelman to get two TDs. I think Brady threw great passes to him, every time and that's probably notable rapport-wise. Edelman dropped some gimmes. Few of us said earlier too.rickyg said:
You are an enormous douchebag, for the record.Phenix said:
Worst poster in this forum. Not just obnoxious but obnoxious and simple-a dangerous combination
I like how this post currently has 16 "like this". I dont think Ive ever seen more than a few likes for a post. Says a lot
As I have pointed out before this obviously is an alias for the banned JuSt CuZ who had the same obnoxious attitude and insulting behavior. The confirmation is the atrocious grammar he uses in many of his postings. I don't know why the Mods continue to let him come in and #### in every thread, but I don't run things around here.
I've had him on ignore since last season.I like how this post currently has 16 "like this". I dont think Ive ever seen more than a few likes for a post. Says a lot
It's up to 41 likes. Never seen anything close to that. Gonna head to Raider's page and see how many likes he has now. He could pad his "likes" by just following this guy around and calling him a douchbag.I like how this post currently has 16 "like this". I dont think Ive ever seen more than a few likes for a post. Says a lot
Years ago, the mods would have recognized that guys like Phenix contribute nothing and spend all day trolling, and they'd be banned and told to 'have a nice season guy'. There are a few others filithying up the Shark Pool, too. Unless they want this to become FFToday, they better start eliminating these guys who contribute nothing and just look to start fights and insult all day.It's up to 41 likes. Never seen anything close to that. Gonna head to Raider's page and see how many likes he has now. He could pad his "likes" by just following this guy around and calling him a douchbag.I like how this post currently has 16 "like this". I dont think Ive ever seen more than a few likes for a post. Says a lot
Thanks for the education of targets and what they mean as a guy who watches football I had no clue.
Again, Thompkins is involved and had 14 targets... HOW MANY POINTS THAT GET YOU?
Yes targets mean opportunity, but if you are involved and getting opportunity and doing nothing with it, what's the point?
Again he better get nothing short of 7/80/1 or he is gonna be gone off my team in all redraft.
It's pretty clear I need to dumb it down some. I'm guessing you're the guy who goes out and filters your league's FA pool to show who scored the most points last week and picks them up regardless of the situation. "Woo! Look at me! I just picked up Lawrence Tynes! He kicked 5 FG's last week, which means he'll be the best kicker ever because he scored the most points!" Oh, and thanks for the education on starting/having the guy who puts up the most points and what it should mean. As a guy who plays fantasy football I had no clue.Phenix said:
I'm sure it's frustrating for people to deal with those who ignore fundamental reasons players do or don't score points. Trent Richardson got an awful ypc last season, but people love the guy because he's recognized as a guy they are counting on anyway. As of the season so far, Brady is counting on Thompkins as much as any QB is counting on a WR. If he keeps up the 29% catch rate, sure he'll go away. But I think it's pretty reasonable to say that catch rate will increase. If it goes up to a still modest 43%, his points increase dramatically (in this case it would be at least 2 more receptions with whatever more yards you want to add as well as a possible TD). Next week, Thompkins could go 11 targets, 5/58/1 and fantasy fans will be very happy.Thanks for the education of targets and what they mean as a guy who watches football I had no clue.
Again, Thompkins is involved and had 14 targets... HOW MANY POINTS THAT GET YOU?
Yes targets mean opportunity, but if you are involved and getting opportunity and doing nothing with it, what's the point?
Again he better get nothing short of 7/80/1 or he is gonna be gone off my team in all redraft.It's pretty clear I need to dumb it down some. I'm guessing you're the guy who goes out and filters your league's FA pool to show who scored the most points last week and picks them up regardless of the situation. "Woo! Look at me! I just picked up Lawrence Tynes! He kicked 5 FG's last week, which means he'll be the best kicker ever because he scored the most points!" Oh, and thanks for the education on starting/having the guy who puts up the most points and what it should mean. As a guy who plays fantasy football I had no clue.Phenix said:
Clearly you put up the guy who you thinks will put up more points. The question is, unless you're Biff Tannen and know the future, you have to rely on stats and circumstance to figure out who will put up the most points. What we are all trying to tell you is that there is a correlation between targets and performance. In case "correlation" is too complicated of a word, I'll dumb it down. It's kind of like a kid playing with fire. Kids who play with fire often get burned. There is a correlation between getting burned and playing with fire, BUT not all kids who play with fire get burned. That said, if I was looking for a burned kid, I'd look for one who plays with fire...Kind or an ironic analogy...the whole rising from your own ashes after getting burned up, right Phenix? Maybe that's over your head.
FWIW, I'm done with you. You can believe whatever you want. No sweat off my back. I won't hijack this thread anymore and everyone would likely appreciate you doing the same.
My take on Thompkins is that he's got a good situation, and I don't see any reason why his targets should significantly decline this week. If he catches 4 of 14 again, I'll start to worry, but I highly doubt he will continue to catch >30% of passes thrown his way. As long as the targets are there in week 2, I'll be starting him in week 3.
