Jump to content


ZWK

Member Since 14 Jul 2008
Offline Last Active Today, 09:13 PM
*****

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Dynasty: The 2014 All-You Team

Today, 03:22 PM

Taking ADP from here:

 

QB Griffin (11)
QB Romo (20)
RB DeMarco Murray (12)
RB Montee Ball (23)
RB David Wilson (28)
RB DeAngelo Williams (58)
RB Bradshaw (76)
WR Harvin (21)
WR DeSean Jackson (24)
WR Tavon Austin (30)
WR Colston (48)
WR Mike Williams (59)
WR Sidney Rice (114)
TE Bennett (16)
TE Gates (25)
TE Keller (35)

 

The QBs & WRs are better deals than the RBs & TEs.

 

Some hits and some disappointments, but I'm pretty satisfied with how this team is looking, especially considering that I would've had additional draft value to spend if this had been my roster in a startup. None of these guys had ADPs in the top 10 at their position, or the top 30 overall.


In Topic: ZWK's Dynasty Rankings (updated August 2014)

06 September 2014 - 06:27 PM

You really love some Davante Adams. Like a lot!

 

Great list.

 

Aaron Rodgers in his prime. Since Rodgers took over in 2008, Green Bay has averaged 107 WR VBD per season, second most in the NFL (behind Denver) and more than double the league average (52 WR VBD per season). They've done it with Jennings and Nelson, and to a lesser extent Cobb, late-career Driver, and James Jones. I'm buying WRs in that offense. (Although if Cobb re-signs that could be a problem.)


In Topic: ZWK's Dynasty Rankings (updated August 2014)

04 September 2014 - 12:13 PM

Always have greatly appreciated the work you put into these rankings.  Wonderful stuff.

 

I was wondering if you could elaborate on the two tier gap between Gerhart and J. Bell.  A lot of aggregate rankings have them ranked right next to each other.  Close in age, and it seems reasonable to expect similar production for the next few years (albeit one with higher efficiency in a better offense, and one with greater volume in a worse offense).  Just something that caught my eye, and I'm curious is all.   

 

These are non-ppr rankings, and I think most people have some gap between Gerhart & Bell in that format (FFCalculator has them at RB19 & RB25). I see Gerhart as having more upside, both this year and over the next couple seasons. In order to put up high-end RB2 numbers, Gerhart mostly just needs to keep his apparent workhorse role and have the Jags' offense to regress towards the mean. Joique would probably need Bush to get out of the picture (or have his role significantly reduced), which doesn't seem all that likely since Bush is only a year older than Bell and is signed through 2016 at a reasonably price.


In Topic: Dynasty QB Stashes...

02 September 2014 - 01:24 PM

 

That paragraph was unclear - I intended to say that rostering Henne in a 1 QB league is a terrible idea. I was agreeing with Adam's point that rostering low-upside veteran QBs is a bad idea in standard leagues, despite disagreeing with his claim that rostering non-pedigree QB prospects is a good idea. Fitzpatrick or Nassib? The answer is neither (in start 1 QB leagues, with 250ish position players rostered).

 

In a 2 QB leagues the calculation is very different, and there are probably 50+ QBs worth rostering (including all 32 starters).

 

I don't think we're disagreeing, I think we're just looking at different league types. I play in a 12-team league with 20 roster spots (plus 2 IR and 2 TS spots). In a format like that, there's no way in hell I'd burn a roster spot on Ryan Nassib. Roster spots are too dear to burn on backup QBs who might be years away from contributing, (though I did grab Osweiler in the last waiver run of the season just in case Peyton wound up retiring over the offseason).

 

My oldest dynasty league, on the other hand, is a 10-teamer with 30 roster spots and extremely generous IRs (up to 10 IR spots, no rule in place that the player in question must have already been on your roster when he was injured for you to place him on IR). By the end of the season we will have 300+ offensive players rostered, and at the moment there are 41 quarterbacks on rosters, with every owner but one rostering at least 4. (The relative scarcity on the wire and the fact that it's a 10-teamer also means quality quarterbacks command much higher trade values than you'd see in most 1QB leagues). In that league, yeah, I'll carry multiple backup QBs at once. (I currently have Glennon and Mallett.)

 

My point isn't so much that everyone should be rostering backup quarterbacks, it's that everyone should be smarter about what quarterbacks they roster. If you're going to carry three quarterbacks, you're better off grabbing a long-shot like Ryan Nassib as your QB3 than a no-shot like Eli Manning. Your QB1 is your starter, your QB2 is your "break glass in case of emergency" guy who should be able to at least give you some points in the event something happens to your starter, and your QB3 is a pure upside play. This also applies to rankings: once I get past the top 20 or so I've already covered all of the starters and quality "break glass in case of emergency" backups, so I start ranking quality upside guys over the known mediocrities who just happen to have a starting job at the moment.

 

 

You're right that league size makes a big difference. Waiting on a guy like Osweiler or Nassib is much less costly in a league where more players are rostered - roster slots are cheaper, so you're giving up less by keeping one filled.

 

I think your framing in the part of your response that I bolded ("If you're going to carry three quarterbacks...") is the wrong way to look at things. An owner shouldn't decide to carry three quarterbacks and then pick between Fitzpatrick & Nassib. The decision of whether or not to roster a low-upside veteran like Fitzpatrick is based on whether you might need him to start for you this year - if your top 2 QBs have the same bye, or if one of them gets knocked out for the season, then it might be worth rostering him as a potential stopgap. Otherwise, he's not worth rostering.

 

Nassib isn't competing with Fitzpatrick for a spot on your roster, he's competing with all of the prospects at the other positions like TE David Ausberry (and whoever you'd pick up if Ausberry busts in a few weeks, and the rest of the guys you'd churn through that roster spot). If the waiver wire is so thin at RB, WR, and TE that you can't do better than sitting on a QB like Nassib, then roster Nassib. If there still are some RB/WR/TE prospects with decent potential, and there are likely to continue to be decent enough prospects for there to be value in churning guys through that roster spot, then don't lock a QB prospect into the roster spot.

 

Prospects have no position. Their position is "bench" - guys who won't help me win now, and probably won't ever amount to anything, but have enough expected value to be worth keeping in your portfolio. They aren't competing for your roster space with other guys at the same position, they're competing with other prospects. If you have room to roster 8 prospects who are extremely unlikely to crack your lineup this year, then there is no particular reason to earmark exactly 1 of those spots to a QB prospect. Depending on the quality of the prospects out there at each position (and who you're able to beat the other owners to picking up) you might roster 4 QB prospects or you might roster none. It doesn't make much sense to be worried about rostering too few QB prospects, because odds are you'll end up with 0 fantasy-startable QBs out of the bunch regardless of whether you have 0 or 4 prospects. And it doesn't make much sense to be worried about rostering too many QB prospects (except insofar as you're passing up better prospect value at other positions), because odds are you won't end up with more than 1 fantasy-startable QB out of the bunch (and if you do wind up with more than 1, that is not a bad problem to have).


In Topic: Dynasty QB Stashes...

01 September 2014 - 07:48 PM

 

(Things are different in a 2 QB league or with very deep rosters. Also, rostering a low-upside veteran who will never see your starting lineup, like Chad Henne as your QB4, is an even worse idea than rostering a decent prospect like Osweiler or Nassib.)

 

In general I find that trades in superflex or 2QB leagues are based on need not hope. That is, if someone's QB2 goes down and Henne is still starting, it will be easier to get modest value in trade for him than a backup with little chance of starting any time soon. Holding Henne and Fitzpatrick both works as a trade chip (and one that's easy to let go if you find someone with need) and reduces the pool of QBs available. If you're not prioritizing Kyle Orton in a 2QB dynasty right now, you're letting a potential trade chip slip away. Sure he will never start for you, but that doesn't mean you want him starting (or providing depth) for someone else. I would prefer a solid stopgap like Orton in Buffalo, Weeden in Dallas, Clausen in Chicago, or Tarvaris in Seattle, over a "what if" prospect like Griffin, Savage, Kellen Moore, Aaron Murray, for a lot of the reasons you gave in your post, that most of the "what if"s are "probably never"s.

 

That paragraph was unclear - I intended to say that rostering Henne in a 1 QB league is a terrible idea. I was agreeing with Adam's point that rostering low-upside veteran QBs is a bad idea in standard leagues, despite disagreeing with his claim that rostering non-pedigree QB prospects is a good idea. Fitzpatrick or Nassib? The answer is neither (in start 1 QB leagues, with 250ish position players rostered).

 

In a 2 QB leagues the calculation is very different, and there are probably 50+ QBs worth rostering (including all 32 starters).