Dynasty Rankings (3 Viewers)

[Sabertooth]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

 

[Novice2]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

Anyone know when Stewart can become a free agent?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

Anyone know when Stewart can become a free agent?

Rotoworld's Contracts page: Stewart is signed through 2012, free agent in 2013.

 

[bweiser]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

i agree with your assessment, but if i remember correctly, SSOG ranks talent about almost everything else. talent eventually wins out. i owned stewart last season. i will probably not keep him and have not received a trade offer for him in my keeper league (only keep 10, 11 teams, not a dynasty).

 

[Jail]

D'oh. Just noticed you already posted them. Looks like no Hester love yet.

FWIW, those are Jason Kirsner's rankings not SSOG's. Hester has to be top 20 in SSOG's rankings. J/K.

Not too far off actually . I loved seeing the ranking. Even if I disagree (and I don't THAT much). I do think Hester can be a good WR. I love seeing this:

35 Devin Hester CHI 28.8 36.00 08/14/2011 6There are only three people in the entire world who believe that Devin Hester has what it takes to be a starting-caliber NFL WR. Unfortunately, one of them is me. Fortunately for me, the other two are Jay Cutler and Mike Martz. News out of Bears camps is that Hester has been the most impressive player there. Cutler and Martz have raved about him. He's already locked down a starting job while Knox has been sent to the bench. Hope springs eternal.

On Lloyd, SSOG and Lammey seem convinced. I am not a buyer at this price, but I have turned the corner to now think he is undervalued.

13 Brandon Lloyd DEN 30.2 76.00 08/14/2011 3Obviously I'm not on board the "Brandon Lloyd was a fluke" train. His talent has been readily apparent from day 1 in the NFL- Lloyd had several highlight reels on Youtube even before last season. Washington traded two draft picks for him. The problem with Lloyd has been consistency and mental toughness. Last year convinced me that both problems are in the rear-view mirror. Is 29 late in a career to be breaking out? Yes... but it's not unprecedented: Jimmy Smith broke out at 27, Joe Horn broke out at 28, and Ed McCaffrey didn't break out until 30!

Thanks for the rankings, SSOG.

 

[Sebowski]

What do you guys think of Mikel Leshoure right now? Seems like if you like him and can afford a roster stash it is a great time to buy. Does it come down to whether you believe Best will bust? Is someone like Quizz a better gamble?

 

[Instinctive]

SSOG - looks like you've still got a hard on for VJax.....

 

[Sabertooth]

SSOG - looks like you've still got a hard on for VJax.....

I agree with him and snagged Jackson during the holdout last year at a discount. I think Vincent Jackson leads the NFL in TD catches in 2011.

 

[Tau837]

SSOG - looks like you've still got a hard on for VJax.....

I agree with him and snagged Jackson during the holdout last year at a discount. I think Vincent Jackson leads the NFL in TD catches in 2011.

For you and others I have seen post something similar, how many targets do you expect him to get? Are you assuming a lot more than he got in 2008 and 2009? Are you assuming Gates misses time? I think VJax will be good, just not sure why there would suddenly be an improvement over his past performance.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

i agree with your assessment, but if i remember correctly, SSOG ranks talent about almost everything else. talent eventually wins out. i owned stewart last season. i will probably not keep him and have not received a trade offer for him in my keeper league (only keep 10, 11 teams, not a dynasty).

How come his talent can't beat out DeAngelo Williams, who is a good but not great player?

 

[Sabertooth]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

i agree with your assessment, but if i remember correctly, SSOG ranks talent about almost everything else. talent eventually wins out. i owned stewart last season. i will probably not keep him and have not received a trade offer for him in my keeper league (only keep 10, 11 teams, not a dynasty).

Where is all this vast talent though? He's never been able to even start over DWilly. Goodson looked just as good last season. I'm not sure he's anything special at all.

 

[Eastwood]

DeAngelo is a great player. I guess you didn't see what he did a few years ago. Yes, he's been dinged up as of late, but when healthy, D-Will IS a stud. I can safely say that as I've watched all his games during his Panthers career. Speed, vision, balance, power, even good hands, he has it all

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

DeAngelo has been in the league five years and had one great season, one pretty good season and three ho-hum seasons. If Stewart is as talented as he's made out to be he should have no trouble earning an equal or greater share of the job than Williams.

I'm one that bought into Stewart but I'm wondering if it's time to sell if I can find an owner that still loves him and will pay for him.

 

[jdoggydogg]

SSOG - looks like you've still got a hard on for VJax.....

I agree with him and snagged Jackson during the holdout last year at a discount. I think Vincent Jackson leads the NFL in TD catches in 2011.

Jackson's an elite talent. Not sure why the sexual reference applies here.

 

[Instinctive]

SSOG - looks like you've still got a hard on for VJax.....

I agree with him and snagged Jackson during the holdout last year at a discount. I think Vincent Jackson leads the NFL in TD catches in 2011.

Jackson's an elite talent. Not sure why the sexual reference applies here.

It's an American colloquialism expressing a hyperbolic expression of incredulity that, in this case, is in reference ti a player's ranking. One making that comment would probably do so in that even if you want to ride the elite talent train...he's not top 5. In which case one would use the expression in order to express the feeling that, in this case, the ranking is too high.He's no more an elite talent than Santonio Holmes...

 

[az_prof]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

i agree with your assessment, but if i remember correctly, SSOG ranks talent about almost everything else. talent eventually wins out. i owned stewart last season. i will probably not keep him and have not received a trade offer for him in my keeper league (only keep 10, 11 teams, not a dynasty).

How come his talent can't beat out DeAngelo Williams, who is a good but not great player?

He's been hurt all season, both of his three seasons in the league. There is no doubt it has hindered him as he hasn't even been able to practice most of the time.Now, you could say, Aha! He's injury prone! But, while he has been injured he has played! That's a very good thing. He has played eventhough he has not been a 100% and he played very, very well. In contrast, a guy many people are in love with and a guy who was drafted the same season, higher in most fantasy drafts, is McFadden. McFadden has NOT played when hurt. And his overall production since coming into the league is not as good as Stewart. He has 700 more yards, a slightly higher ypc, and 10 more TDs than McFadden in the same amount of time, and McFadden was handed the starting job but hasn't been able to nail it down because his injuries keep him off the field too much.

 

[gianmarco]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I know it's trendy to disagree with people's rankings when they don't conform. That's the beauty of this game is that there are always going to be people that like players better than others.That said, your ranking of Mario Manningham is mind-boggling. #52?I already started a thread about how underrated he is even ranked in the 30's. 52 simply doesn't make sense. In a nutshell, he's finished WR19 and WR30 in ppr the last 2 years. He fared even better at WR17 last year in non-ppr. He is in line for an INCREASED role as the clear #2 starter in NY (only started 8 games last year). And compared to Nicks, whom you have at WR6, Mario has a higher catch %, a higher YPR, and a higher TD rate than Nicks. The ONLY reason his numbers were "slightly" lower than Nicks last year was the # of targets. He still finished the year with 60/944/9 while only starting 8 games. He's only 25. So there's got to be some reason for him to be ranked an amazingly low and irrelevant WR52. If he performs at the pace he did last year and gets just 20 more targets (which is almost a given), he'll finish with top 10 WR numbers. A guy with that kind of upside at WR52 and who has already easily outperformed that ranking in 2 of his 3 yrs in the league just goes against any kind of logic.Is he at risk to miss time? Has he completely outperformed his talent level and the last 2 years of production don't really jive with what he'll do in the future? Is there someone that is a serious threat to take his position? Will his 90 targets go down?

 

[EthnicFury]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I know it's trendy to disagree with people's rankings when they don't conform. That's the beauty of this game is that there are always going to be people that like players better than others.That said, your ranking of Mario Manningham is mind-boggling. #52?I already started a thread about how underrated he is even ranked in the 30's. 52 simply doesn't make sense. In a nutshell, he's finished WR19 and WR30 in ppr the last 2 years. He fared even better at WR17 last year in non-ppr. He is in line for an INCREASED role as the clear #2 starter in NY (only started 8 games last year). And compared to Nicks, whom you have at WR6, Mario has a higher catch %, a higher YPR, and a higher TD rate than Nicks. The ONLY reason his numbers were "slightly" lower than Nicks last year was the # of targets. He still finished the year with 60/944/9 while only starting 8 games. He's only 25. So there's got to be some reason for him to be ranked an amazingly low and irrelevant WR52. If he performs at the pace he did last year and gets just 20 more targets (which is almost a given), he'll finish with top 10 WR numbers. A guy with that kind of upside at WR52 and who has already easily outperformed that ranking in 2 of his 3 yrs in the league just goes against any kind of logic.Is he at risk to miss time? Has he completely outperformed his talent level and the last 2 years of production don't really jive with what he'll do in the future? Is there someone that is a serious threat to take his position? Will his 90 targets go down?

Was about to reply that Manningham seemed very low myself. Curious why that might be

 

[SSOG]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

I just don't understand your Jonathan Stewart ranking. By my count he's only the 6th most productive running back of his own class (2008). I realize you can take a long view here, but how long can you wait on a guy? A running back is a position that doesn't tend to get better with age. He's not shown the ability to ascend the depth chart. I realize DeAngelo is a very good player, but he's not a hall of famer by any stretch. When he's healthy, Stewart is an afterthought. He never practices. He's always dinged and he just hasn't matched the production of his fellow classmates.

First off, all of my rankings are forward-looking. Yes, I've been waiting a long time, but at this point, that's a sunk cost. Two years ago, I had him ranked borderline top-10 with the expectation that he'd get the job in 2 years. I was wrong, but now I'm in the exact same situation- I expect he'll get the job in 2 years, so I have him ranked borderline top 10. The fact that I was wrong two years ago and will now have been waiting for 4 years is nothing more than emotional baggage which has no place in a purportedly objective ranking.Second off, you are radically underrating DeAngelo Williams. Go look up a complete list of RBs who have averaged 5.0+ ypc in three straight seasons. I've got three- Faulk, Brown, and Williams. Only one RB since 1975 has a higher career YPC than Williams (Jamaal Charles, for those curious). Stewart hasn't been sitting on the bench behind a pretty good RB, or behind an RB who's been playing pretty well- he's been sitting on the bench behind an amazing RB who has been playing lights out.

Third off, it's ridiculous to say that Stewart is an afterthought when Williams was healthy. Jonathan Stewart finished 24th in 2008, a season in which Williams never missed a game. And even if Stewart really was an afterthought when Williams was healthy, he's enough of a stud when Williams is hurt to make up for it. Arian Foster got a lot of buzz after week 1 last season because he needed 109 yards rushing in week 2 to set the record for most rushing yards in a player's first three starts. He fell short. I bring this up because the guy who owned the record that Foster was trying to break was none other than Jonathan Stewart, who in his first 3 career starts went for 26/120/1, 28/206/1, and 16/125/1. And that's despite the fact that, as you correctly pointed out, he never practiced and he was always dinged.

Fourth, so what if he hasn't matched the production of his classmates? Let's look at his classmates who have produced more than him. There's Chris Johnson, who I have ranked higher. There's Jamaal Charles, who I have ranked higher. There's Ray Rice, who I have ranked higher. There's Rashard Mendenhall, who I have ranked higher. Yeah, Stewart hasn't produced as much as these guys... but why on earth does that matter, since I have these guys ranked over Stewart? Forte has outproduced Stewart, but Forte is ranked within 2 spots of Stewart, and I've given an explanation for that ranking already. Meanwhile, though, I don't hear you complaining about Darren McFadden's ranking, despite the fact that he has less production even than Jonathan Stewart and is ranked even higher.

Stewart is a 24 year old stud. I'm going to have to sit on him, but I've demonstrated that I'm not going to downgrade a player too much just because I have to wait to get returns- look what I did with Vincent Jackson last year. Think of it this way- if you had a chance to get DeAngelo Williams as a rookie, knowing what you know now (that you'd have to wait 2 years and he wouldn't see the field until he was 25 or 26, but when he did he'd be a stud), how would you have valued him? The 10-15 range among RBs is always a dangerous range- guys in that area have a habit of falling off the face of the planet in a HURRY (recent years have seen Beanie Wells, Knowshon Moreno, and Marshawn Lynch all occupying that range). I personally think that's a very appropriate place to rank a guy like Jonathan Stewart, who has plenty of negatives... but none relating to his talent.

SSOG - looks like you've still got a hard on for VJax.....

Why on earth would you expect otherwise? What's changed between 6 months ago (when I had a hard-on for VJax) and today (when I still have a hard-on for VJax), other than that we know he's going to be playing a full season and his QB situation turned out a lot better than many expected it to?

For you and others I have seen post something similar, how many targets do you expect him to get? Are you assuming a lot more than he got in 2008 and 2009? Are you assuming Gates misses time? I think VJax will be good, just not sure why there would suddenly be an improvement over his past performance.

I'm banking on 140 targets. I know the Chargers have a history of franchising guys and then barely using them (Sproles), but despite that, I think the fact that they're giving Jackson 8 figures this year definitely suggests they're planning on using him a bit more than in the past. I'm not expecting 160 targets because Norv Turner is Norv Turner, but I think 140 is definitely reasonable.

Where is all this vast talent though? He's never been able to even start over DWilly. Goodson looked just as good last season. I'm not sure he's anything special at all.

24th place finish as a true backup, 11th place finish despite being a true backup for 13 games, NFL record for most rushing yards in first 3 starts, 4.7 career ypc (from a big, punishing bruiser rather than a small speed back like Charles or Johnson), and the filthiest stiff arm in the entire NFL (check out the highlights, you'll see it repeatedly). Besides, if you really want to play the "he can't even start over ______" card (which is a monumentally stupid card to play), then not being able to start over DeAngelo Williams is a hell of a lot less damning than not being able to start over THOMAS FREAKING JONES, yet I don't hear you complaining about me having Charles ranked a hell of a lot higher than 11th. DeAngelo Williams is a better RB than Fred Taylor, and yet few people had a problem with me ranking Maurice Jones-Drew in the top 10.

DeAngelo has been in the league five years and had one great season, one pretty good season and three ho-hum seasons. If Stewart is as talented as he's made out to be he should have no trouble earning an equal or greater share of the job than Williams.

I'm one that bought into Stewart but I'm wondering if it's time to sell if I can find an owner that still loves him and will pay for him.

DeAngelo has been a starter for 3 years. His per-game averages during that span are 97.9/0.8, which pro-rates to 1566/13 per 16 games. He averages 5.0 career ypc, which is the second highest total since 1975, ahead of Chris Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Marshall Faulk, LaDainian Tomlinson, Priest Holmes, and Barry Sanders. Just FYI.

I know it's trendy to disagree with people's rankings when they don't conform. That's the beauty of this game is that there are always going to be people that like players better than others.

That said, your ranking of Mario Manningham is mind-boggling. #52?

I already started a thread about how underrated he is even ranked in the 30's. 52 simply doesn't make sense. In a nutshell, he's finished WR19 and WR30 in ppr the last 2 years. He fared even better at WR17 last year in non-ppr. He is in line for an INCREASED role as the clear #2 starter in NY (only started 8 games last year). And compared to Nicks, whom you have at WR6, Mario has a higher catch %, a higher YPR, and a higher TD rate than Nicks. The ONLY reason his numbers were "slightly" lower than Nicks last year was the # of targets. He still finished the year with 60/944/9 while only starting 8 games. He's only 25.

So there's got to be some reason for him to be ranked an amazingly low and irrelevant WR52. If he performs at the pace he did last year and gets just 20 more targets (which is almost a given), he'll finish with top 10 WR numbers. A guy with that kind of upside at WR52 and who has already easily outperformed that ranking in 2 of his 3 yrs in the league just goes against any kind of logic.

Is he at risk to miss time? Has he completely outperformed his talent level and the last 2 years of production don't really jive with what he'll do in the future? Is there someone that is a serious threat to take his position? Will his 90 targets go down?

These rankings are still in the Beta stage. Someone already mentioned Manningham at DR.net, and he'll be coming up with the first update.

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Via Rotoworld.com

Roddy White confirms the Falcons plan a more aggressive aerial attack with the offense running through Matt Ryan this season.Explosive plays and mismatches are the buzz words in Falcons camp after learning from the Saints and Packers the past two seasons that a ball control style only carries an offense so far. Credit goes to NFL Films guru Greg Cosell for predicting as much after the Falcons traded up 21 spots for Julio Jones, who will be "force fed the ball because of his explosiveness." With healthy slot receiver Harry Douglas also "lying in the weeks" for a breakout, Ryan is a darkhorse candidate to lead the NFL in TD

I don't think he will because I think Turner can still turn in another double digit TD season, but it wouldn't be a shock to me either. Hope you bought low on Matty Ice while you could.

 

[Tau837]

For you and others I have seen post something similar, how many targets do you expect him to get? Are you assuming a lot more than he got in 2008 and 2009? Are you assuming Gates misses time? I think VJax will be good, just not sure why there would suddenly be an improvement over his past performance.

I'm banking on 140 targets. I know the Chargers have a history of franchising guys and then barely using them (Sproles), but despite that, I think the fact that they're giving Jackson 8 figures this year definitely suggests they're planning on using him a bit more than in the past. I'm not expecting 160 targets because Norv Turner is Norv Turner, but I think 140 is definitely reasonable.

With all due respect, I think you are probably at least 20 targets too high.First off, if we hold to past patterns before last year, there is a good chance that VJax may not play much in week 17, since I think the Chargers stand a great chance of having locked up the division before the last game. So we should probably talk more in terms of targets per game.VJax finished as WR12 (FBG scoring) in 2008 and WR10 (FBG scoring) in 2009, despite getting just 101 and 107 targets, respectively. He sat out week 17 in 2009, and he sat out the second half of week 17 in 2008. So his averages in those years were 6.5 targets per game in 2008 and 7.1 targets per game in 2009.The Chargers have more quality receiving targets now than they did in 2008 and 2009, and thus more competition for targets. Floyd and Gates are the same players, unless you are assuming they won't stay healthy. More importantly, Crayton, Ajirotutu, Washington, and Brown are much better WR3+ targets. Sproles is gone, but I expect the RB targets to be similar to past seasons.I haven't done a detailed breakdown yet, but I think more than 120 targets is too many to project.

 

[SSOG]

With all due respect, I think you are probably at least 20 targets too high.First off, if we hold to past patterns before last year, there is a good chance that VJax may not play much in week 17, since I think the Chargers stand a great chance of having locked up the division before the last game. So we should probably talk more in terms of targets per game.VJax finished as WR12 (FBG scoring) in 2008 and WR10 (FBG scoring) in 2009, despite getting just 101 and 107 targets, respectively. He sat out week 17 in 2009, and he sat out the second half of week 17 in 2008. So his averages in those years were 6.5 targets per game in 2008 and 7.1 targets per game in 2009.The Chargers have more quality receiving targets now than they did in 2008 and 2009, and thus more competition for targets. Floyd and Gates are the same players, unless you are assuming they won't stay healthy. More importantly, Crayton, Ajirotutu, Washington, and Brown are much better WR3+ targets. Sproles is gone, but I expect the RB targets to be similar to past seasons.I haven't done a detailed breakdown yet, but I think more than 120 targets is too many to project.

1. The last two seasons VJax played, Rivers had 478 and 486 attempts. Last year, he had 540. I expect his total this year to be closer to his total last year than his totals in '08 and '09.2. I think the idea that the RBs will get a similar proportion of targets is off base. Last year, Sproles got 75 targets and all other RBs got 79 combined. The other RBs might pick up some of Sproles' targets, but they aren't going to double their target totals.3. I'm not convinced that Crayton/Ajirotutu/Washington are better than Chambers or Naanee. We'll see.4. Jackson's been getting better as a WR... and more importantly, the team is paying him 8 figures to retain his services for a single season.5. You know I'm not a fan of projecting injuries, but at the same time, clearly Gates is a heightened risk to miss time. The guy is already beat up.A combination of all those factors- 60 extra pass attempts, 30-60 fewer targets going to RBs, Jackson playing more of a featured role- as well as a natural progression (Jackson had 101 targets in '08, was on pace for 115 in '09) should lead to a solid uptick in targets for Jackson. I view 120 as a pessimistic floor and 140 as a reasonable target.As for the resting starters during week 17 argument... few leagues are still playing in week 17. Besides, I'm pretty sure if you look up "putting the cart before the horse" on Wikipedia, the example they'd use would be expecting San Diego to have clinched anything by week 17. This is the team that has finished 9-7 and 8-8 in two of the last three seasons, coming off of three straight slow starts, playing for a head coach who is famous for underachieving in the regular season. They weren't even a playoff team last year. Expecting them to have clinched anything- the division, a bye, HFA- by week 17 is a bit daffy. Let's start with a winning record in the month of September.ETA: I'm sure you know this by now, but I'm not trying to be a jerk, and I'm sorry if my tone comes off as douchey. I enjoy the spirited back-and-forth. Just figured I should add that disclaimer in at the end since we're all gearing up for a new season.

 

[Tau837]

With all due respect, I think you are probably at least 20 targets too high.First off, if we hold to past patterns before last year, there is a good chance that VJax may not play much in week 17, since I think the Chargers stand a great chance of having locked up the division before the last game. So we should probably talk more in terms of targets per game.VJax finished as WR12 (FBG scoring) in 2008 and WR10 (FBG scoring) in 2009, despite getting just 101 and 107 targets, respectively. He sat out week 17 in 2009, and he sat out the second half of week 17 in 2008. So his averages in those years were 6.5 targets per game in 2008 and 7.1 targets per game in 2009.The Chargers have more quality receiving targets now than they did in 2008 and 2009, and thus more competition for targets. Floyd and Gates are the same players, unless you are assuming they won't stay healthy. More importantly, Crayton, Ajirotutu, Washington, and Brown are much better WR3+ targets. Sproles is gone, but I expect the RB targets to be similar to past seasons.I haven't done a detailed breakdown yet, but I think more than 120 targets is too many to project.

1. The last two seasons VJax played, Rivers had 478 and 486 attempts. Last year, he had 540. I expect his total this year to be closer to his total last year than his totals in '08 and '09.2. I think the idea that the RBs will get a similar proportion of targets is off base. Last year, Sproles got 75 targets and all other RBs got 79 combined. The other RBs might pick up some of Sproles' targets, but they aren't going to double their target totals.3. I'm not convinced that Crayton/Ajirotutu/Washington are better than Chambers or Naanee. We'll see.4. Jackson's been getting better as a WR... and more importantly, the team is paying him 8 figures to retain his services for a single season.5. You know I'm not a fan of projecting injuries, but at the same time, clearly Gates is a heightened risk to miss time. The guy is already beat up.A combination of all those factors- 60 extra pass attempts, 30-60 fewer targets going to RBs, Jackson playing more of a featured role- as well as a natural progression (Jackson had 101 targets in '08, was on pace for 115 in '09) should lead to a solid uptick in targets for Jackson. I view 120 as a pessimistic floor and 140 as a reasonable target.As for the resting starters during week 17 argument... few leagues are still playing in week 17. Besides, I'm pretty sure if you look up "putting the cart before the horse" on Wikipedia, the example they'd use would be expecting San Diego to have clinched anything by week 17. This is the team that has finished 9-7 and 8-8 in two of the last three seasons, coming off of three straight slow starts, playing for a head coach who is famous for underachieving in the regular season. They weren't even a playoff team last year. Expecting them to have clinched anything- the division, a bye, HFA- by week 17 is a bit daffy. Let's start with a winning record in the month of September.ETA: I'm sure you know this by now, but I'm not trying to be a jerk, and I'm sorry if my tone comes off as douchey. I enjoy the spirited back-and-forth. Just figured I should add that disclaimer in at the end since we're all gearing up for a new season.

I don't want to take the thread off on this tangent any further, so I'll just say a couple things.First, here is a recent post that touches on a couple things:

Last year, the Chargers ran 1039 plays from scrimmage, and they trailed on 470 (45.2%) of those plays. When leading or tied (combined), the Chargers ran 56% of the time (308 rushing attempts in 548 plays). When trailing, the Chargers ran 31% of the time (149 rushing attempts in 487 plays). Nothing too surprising there. However, I expect the Chargers to spend a bit less time trailing this year, due to improved special teams play, among other reasons. That would suggest more rushing attempts. However, improved special teams, trailing less, passing less, and running more may lead to running fewer plays from scrimmage. I could assume these factors will offset, but I think the running game is going to perform well this year, and I think that could lead to an uptick in rushing attempts. I'm going to go with 425 rushing attempts for the RBs....Here is the number of Chargers passing attempts since Norv arrived:2007 - 471, #26 in the NFL2008 - 478, #25 in the NFL2009 - 519, #23 in the NFL2010 - 544, #14 in the NFLThe upward trend corresponds with Rivers' improvement and the decline of the Chargers' running game (i.e., Tomlinson's decline followed by the injury issues for Mathews last year). Still, for reasons already mentioned, I think the passing attempts were forced up last year and will likely come back down a bit. I'll project 510 attempts.Here is the number of RB targets since Norv arrived:2007 - 120 (25.5% of passing attempts)2008 - 138 (28.9% of passing attempts)2009 - 127 (24.5% of passing attempts)2010 - 154 (28.3% of passing attempts)With Sproles gone and with the best group of WRs since Rivers has been in San Diego, I think we can assume the percentage of RB targets drops a bit. But it is a staple of the offense. I don't see it dropping below 24%, which would be the lowest of Norv's tenure, so that's what I'll project. On 510 attempts, that means 122 RB targets.

I think the Chargers will throw less often than last year, based on the reasons cited above. I project 510 attempts.IMO your view on Sproles' departure and its effect on RB targets is off base. You can see the RB targets from 2007 to 2010 above. Yes, Sproles had 75 targets last season... but he had 57 in 2009, 34 in 2008, and just 12 in 2007. Yet RB targets never dipped below 24.5% of passing attempts. I'm sure your next point will be that Tomlinson was a great receiver, which is true. But it's a staple of the offense, and IMO there is reason to believe that Mathews, Tolbert, Hester, and possibly even Todman are all good receiving RBs. I don't see the RB targets changing substantially.That's enough for now. I like Jackson. He's finished as WR12 and WR10 in his last two full seasons, and I certainly think he's capable of that again. I just don't see any reason to think he can finish much higher than that unless Gates and/or other receiving targets miss substantial time.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Panthers coach Ron Rivera revealed Wednesday that Jonathan Stewart is now sitting out practices after aggravating his Achilles' tendon.

 

[Concept Coop]

1. The last two seasons VJax played, Rivers had 478 and 486 attempts. Last year, he had 540. I expect his total this year to be closer to his total last year than his totals in '08 and '09.

I am interested to hear how you come to this opinion. It seems off to me, because:1. The Chargers lost the games in which Rivers had to throw above his career average. 2. The special teams unit put the Chargers in bad positions, again and again. The offense was not only on the field more, but playing from behind more. This is being addressed by the team.3. The Chargers running game should be better. They have more options, and more diversity in their options. All of these things brings me to believe his ATT are coming back down to earth - bringing his totals down with them.I have heard the theory that and thought that "Rivers did X without Gates and Jackson; imagine what he will do with them." This logic is faulty, to me. Defenses have to adjust to the weapons on the field. Bring Gates and Jackson into an offense that didn't feature them, and defenses are more inclined to play softer on the running game.

 

[Lash]

i don't want to quote everyone who got this wrong about DeWill because the list is too long

he is a great player

do a search on FBG for "the most talented" RBs or some such, don't remember when it was and i hate this search engine so someone else can... DeWill was way up top in alotta people's opinions

 

[thriftyrocker]

F&L was pushing Beanie a little yesterday on twitter.

@SigmundBloom I agree. Just refuse to write off Beanie because he looked bad while playing through a nagging knee injury last year.16 Aug @SigmundBloom That's how a Ryan Williams supporter would translate it, sure.16 Aug @azcsports: Whisenhunt on Beanie Wells: "I'm very pleased with what he's done at camp." #Cardinals16 Aug

Any thoughts on Beanie? Seems there's a very strong Williams contingent who were vindicated by some beat reporter saying Williams looked like a more natural runner. But it still seems like a great opportunity for Wells to establish himself. If he stays healthy, I think it will be hard for Williams to push him out.

 

[SSOG]

I am interested to hear how you come to this opinion. It seems off to me, because:1. The Chargers lost the games in which Rivers had to throw above his career average. 2. The special teams unit put the Chargers in bad positions, again and again. The offense was not only on the field more, but playing from behind more. This is being addressed by the team.3. The Chargers running game should be better. They have more options, and more diversity in their options. All of these things brings me to believe his ATT are coming back down to earth - bringing his totals down with them.I have heard the theory that and thought that "Rivers did X without Gates and Jackson; imagine what he will do with them." This logic is faulty, to me. Defenses have to adjust to the weapons on the field. Bring Gates and Jackson into an offense that didn't feature them, and defenses are more inclined to play softer on the running game.

1. Correlation vs. Causation. Rivers was throwing because the Chargers were losing, the Chargers weren't losing because Rivers was throwing. The fact is that Rivers' throwing was the only thing keeping them in a lot of those games. In 2008, SD averaged 447 points and 5673 yards. In 2010, San Diego put up 441 points and 6329 yards, despite a much weaker offensive cast (no Tomlinson, no VJax, Gates injured, Floyd injured, Matthews injured, Naanee injured, Crayton injured) and much worse field position. They're a better offensive team when Rivers throws the ball. Moreover, I don't know if you can expect them to squeeze out that many more wins- they've won 9 or fewer in two of the last three seasons.2 and 3. Maybe, although in theory, the Denver Broncos defense is being addressed by the team, but it doesn't seem to be getting much better. Just because a team wants to do something doesn't mean they'll succeed. Fact is, the three most talented offensive players on the team are Rivers, Gates, and Jackson. The offense scores the most points and puts up the most yards when going through the air. The team has a history of choking and can't be counted on to win double-digit games. My money is on Rivers finishing closer to his 2010 attempts total than his 2009 attempts total. Especially because the team totals aren't that different- as a team, San Diego passed 519 times in 2009 vs. 544 in 2010. The big difference in Rivers' stats was due to him sitting out week 17. I don't expect San Diego to have clinched anything, which just makes it that much more likely that Rivers finishes in the 520-540 range.As for your final paragraph... yes, defenses play the run softer, but you've got two conflicting factors in play. One is a dramatic and direct strengthening of the passing game based on the addition of a hugely talented player. The other is a slight and indirect strengthening of the running game due to defensive schemes changing to account for the first point. Looking at it that way, the first factor is significantly stronger, so the addition can be expected to have a more positive impact on the passing game than the running game. Or, looking at it this way- if Larry Fitzgerald becomes a free agent next year and some team gives him a $60 million contract, do you think that signing will do more to improve the team's passing game, or running game? Because my money is on the passing game...

 

[DoubleG]

Any thoughts on Beanie? Seems there's a very strong Williams contingent who were vindicated by some beat reporter saying Williams looked like a more natural runner. But it still seems like a great opportunity for Wells to establish himself. If he stays healthy, I think it will be hard for Williams to push him out.

I agree. Beanie was given the opportunity to be the man - and his opening schedule this season certainly isn't going to hurt his chances (Carolina, Seattle and Washington IIRC). If he can establish himself early in the season, it'll be tough for him to be ousted. If he can't establish himself against those teams, he's done anyway. I guess the good news is, we'll know fairly early.

 

[CBower4545]

Have Brady/Manning become trap players in a startup dynasty? It's hard not to rank them fairly high, it's hard to not want to take them over less proven players but it's also hard to build a team that support their draft position. If your taking a balanced approach or building a team to peak in years 2, 3, or 4, are you taking too much of a risk that you will be replacement shopping right when your team is peaking. So unless your building a team to be at it's peak in year one and two, do they even makes sense assuming you have to spend a reasonable high pick?

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Have Brady/Manning become trap players in a startup dynasty? It's hard not to rank them fairly high, it's hard to not want to take them over less proven players but it's also hard to build a team that support their draft position. If your taking a balanced approach or building a team to peak in years 2, 3, or 4, are you taking too much of a risk that you will be replacement shopping right when your team is peaking. So unless your building a team to be at it's peak in year one and two, do they even makes sense assuming you have to spend a reasonable high pick?

I am one who likes to draft for the long haul. However, I expect to be a serious contender in year 2 at the latest and possibly year 1 if things work out well. There is no reason whatsoever to think you can't win AND build a strong younger core by year 2. Waiting until the 3rd year is too long...and this opinion is from someone that builds around a strong young core. That being said, I would have no worries taking either Brady or Manning early in a draft. They have a solid 3-4 elite years. If you use the 3 years as a benchmark, it gives you plenty of time to have a replacement lined up. Also, if you draft well and have some solid younger players, you can always trade for a QB if need be. I like to draft with the intent of having a strong contender in year 2 and not worrying about year 1. But overdoing the draft in favor of younger players can cost you in terms of value.

 

[Tau837]

Have Brady/Manning become trap players in a startup dynasty? It's hard not to rank them fairly high, it's hard to not want to take them over less proven players but it's also hard to build a team that support their draft position. If your taking a balanced approach or building a team to peak in years 2, 3, or 4, are you taking too much of a risk that you will be replacement shopping right when your team is peaking. So unless your building a team to be at it's peak in year one and two, do they even makes sense assuming you have to spend a reasonable high pick?

I am one who likes to draft for the long haul. However, I expect to be a serious contender in year 2 at the latest and possibly year 1 if things work out well. There is no reason whatsoever to think you can't win AND build a strong younger core by year 2. Waiting until the 3rd year is too long...and this opinion is from someone that builds around a strong young core. That being said, I would have no worries taking either Brady or Manning early in a draft. They have a solid 3-4 elite years. If you use the 3 years as a benchmark, it gives you plenty of time to have a replacement lined up. Also, if you draft well and have some solid younger players, you can always trade for a QB if need be.

I like to draft with the intent of having a strong contender in year 2 and not worrying about year 1. But overdoing the draft in favor of younger players can cost you in terms of value.

I don't think the bolded is necessarily true, the key word being "elite". I would not draft either of them at their likely draft position in a startup dynasty.

 

[Sabertooth]

1. The last two seasons VJax played, Rivers had 478 and 486 attempts. Last year, he had 540. I expect his total this year to be closer to his total last year than his totals in '08 and '09.

I am interested to hear how you come to this opinion. It seems off to me, because:1. The Chargers lost the games in which Rivers had to throw above his career average.

2. The special teams unit put the Chargers in bad positions, again and again. The offense was not only on the field more, but playing from behind more. This is being addressed by the team.

3. The Chargers running game should be better. They have more options, and more diversity in their options.

All of these things brings me to believe his ATT are coming back down to earth - bringing his totals down with them.

I have heard the theory that and thought that "Rivers did X without Gates and Jackson; imagine what he will do with them." This logic is faulty, to me. Defenses have to adjust to the weapons on the field. Bring Gates and Jackson into an offense that didn't feature them, and defenses are more inclined to play softer on the running game.

I don't agree with this. The running game looks like a wash.

 

[Sabertooth]

Any thoughts on Beanie? Seems there's a very strong Williams contingent who were vindicated by some beat reporter saying Williams looked like a more natural runner. But it still seems like a great opportunity for Wells to establish himself. If he stays healthy, I think it will be hard for Williams to push him out.

I agree. Beanie was given the opportunity to be the man - and his opening schedule this season certainly isn't going to hurt his chances (Carolina, Seattle and Washington IIRC). If he can establish himself early in the season, it'll be tough for him to be ousted. If he can't establish himself against those teams, he's done anyway. I guess the good news is, we'll know fairly early.

Beanie was as highly touted in 09 as Ingram is this season. He didn't just forget how to play football.

 

[shader]

Any thoughts on Beanie? Seems there's a very strong Williams contingent who were vindicated by some beat reporter saying Williams looked like a more natural runner. But it still seems like a great opportunity for Wells to establish himself. If he stays healthy, I think it will be hard for Williams to push him out.

I agree. Beanie was given the opportunity to be the man - and his opening schedule this season certainly isn't going to hurt his chances (Carolina, Seattle and Washington IIRC). If he can establish himself early in the season, it'll be tough for him to be ousted. If he can't establish himself against those teams, he's done anyway. I guess the good news is, we'll know fairly early.

Beanie was as highly touted in 09 as Ingram is this season. He didn't just forget how to play football.

Totally untrue.

 

[Sabertooth]

Any thoughts on Beanie? Seems there's a very strong Williams contingent who were vindicated by some beat reporter saying Williams looked like a more natural runner. But it still seems like a great opportunity for Wells to establish himself. If he stays healthy, I think it will be hard for Williams to push him out.

I agree. Beanie was given the opportunity to be the man - and his opening schedule this season certainly isn't going to hurt his chances (Carolina, Seattle and Washington IIRC). If he can establish himself early in the season, it'll be tough for him to be ousted. If he can't establish himself against those teams, he's done anyway. I guess the good news is, we'll know fairly early.

Beanie was as highly touted in 09 as Ingram is this season. He didn't just forget how to play football.

Totally untrue.

Not so sure about that. I just read Kiper's blog on the 2009 draft and his comments could have been used for Ingram almost verbatim. He slipped. Value. Went to a high powered offense. I posted it in one of the Ingram threads. Hindsight is 20/20.

 

[Sabertooth]

I'm in a start 2QB league where I've built a pretty tough squad. I had Ryan Fitzpatrick as my QB4 to go along with Rivers, Peyton, and Romo. So I didn't really need him. I offered him out to about 5 different owners. I didn't expect any takers. 5 minutes went by and somebody actually gave me DeAngelo Williams for him.

I know the 2QB thing really tilts things but I feel I got the better of this deal (I also own Stewart).

How many years does DeAngelo have left? Also, in this league I have the 1,2, and 5 picks and I am seriously considering Cam Newton with the 2 or 5. Is this advisable? I have a lot of Chargers, but that situation is a lot different than having a lot of Panthers.

 

[eaglesfan7]

At DR.net you have Jonathan Stewart ranked # 11 for running backs. Was that decided before or after the DWill extension that made him the highest paid veteran running back in football? I'm just curious because I like JStew but he is hurt again and behind DWill. Thanks.

 

[Gawain]

At DR.net you have Jonathan Stewart ranked # 11 for running backs. Was that decided before or after the DWill extension that made him the highest paid veteran running back in football? I'm just curious because I like JStew but he is hurt again and behind DWill. Thanks.

I traded for Jon Stewart before last year, after I was infected with SSOG's man crush for him. The past two years, Stewart was inflated by the belief that once he got the starting job he would still only be 24 years old and would have 4 good seasons left. Now, if all contracts run to completion, he won't have a chance to leave for another two years, putting him in a starting role when he is 26. He is basically Michael Turner circa 2006. 11 is much too high for him now and can only be justified if you think that Stewart will beat out DeAngelo this coming year. Turner is 29 now and has given owners two great years, but his dynasty value is low.

 

[EBF]

I think Stewart owners got shafted by the juggernaut of ineptitude known as the Carolina Panthers.

Running backs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. This team has tons of holes. So what do they do with their free agent money?

Blow it on a 28 year-old RB.

I don't think there was any way to assume that the Panthers would retain Williams. In fact, I would have bet heavily against.

But they did, and that's why they're a last place team.

I would say drafting Stewart as a top 10 dynasty RB sometime in the past 1-2 years qualifies as "good process, bad outcome."

 

[corpcow]

I think Stewart owners got shafted by the juggernaut of ineptitude known as the Carolina Panthers.

Running backs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. This team has tons of holes. So what do they do with their free agent money?

Blow it on a 28 year-old RB.

I don't think there was any way to assume that the Panthers would retain Williams. In fact, I would have bet heavily against.

But they did, and that's why they're a last place team.

I would say drafting Stewart as a top 10 dynasty RB sometime in the past 1-2 years qualifies as "good process, bad outcome."

How so? What should they have addressed that they didn't? They drafted what they think is a QB of the future, and put weapons around him to help him succeed / ease him in with a strong running game, keeping Steve Smith, and adding TEs like SHockey and Olsen. They also retained their high profile UFA in Charles Johnson.

Sounds to me like someone just bitter about the fantasy prospects of Jonathan Stewart.... Just saying.

 

[Gawain]

If you think Carolina blew their money, ten you have to think Stewart is ready to pass Williams right now. I wish I saw that happening, but I don't. Instead, I think Carolina resigned their workhorse. I'm just hoping for a 60-40 split. If Stewart can get 10 carries a game and two receptions, he still may be an adequate flex. Anything other than that and he's bench material.

 

[EBF]

I think Stewart owners got shafted by the juggernaut of ineptitude known as the Carolina Panthers.

Running backs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. This team has tons of holes. So what do they do with their free agent money?

Blow it on a 28 year-old RB.

I don't think there was any way to assume that the Panthers would retain Williams. In fact, I would have bet heavily against.

But they did, and that's why they're a last place team.

I would say drafting Stewart as a top 10 dynasty RB sometime in the past 1-2 years qualifies as "good process, bad outcome."

How so? What should they have addressed that they didn't? They drafted what they think is a QB of the future, and put weapons around him to help him succeed / ease him in with a strong running game, keeping Steve Smith, and adding TEs like SHockey and Olsen. They also retained their high profile UFA in Charles Johnson.

Sounds to me like someone just bitter about the fantasy prospects of Jonathan Stewart.... Just saying.

Bitter? Hardly. I have him on a whopping one dynasty team. I just don't think that it's smart business to pay top dollar for a RB on the backslope of his prime when you're a last place team with holes everywhere.

RB is one of the least important positions in the NFL. Hence why perennial winners like the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Ravens, Chargers, and Packers tend to go cheap there. Sure, they might use a late 1st rounder on a good back every once in a while, but you don't generally see them giving a RB a fat contract. Especially a 28 year old one.

Carolina is a crap team. A rudderless ship. There is absolutely no chance that they will make the playoffs this season. So rather than wasting money on diminishing commodities like Shockey, Smitty, and D-Will, they should be looking towards the future and assembling the pieces of a team that can compete 2-3 years from now.

But there's a reason why they're a last place team. Re-signing D-Will for big money when they had a competent Stewart and Goodson waiting in the wings show that.

It's like a last place FF team that trades away all its future rookie picks for Hines Ward, Braylon Edwards, and Steven Jackson. Sure, it might help their record by a couple wins this season, but it's bad management in the long run.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I think Stewart owners got shafted by the juggernaut of ineptitude known as the Carolina Panthers.

Running backs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. This team has tons of holes. So what do they do with their free agent money?

Blow it on a 28 year-old RB.

I don't think there was any way to assume that the Panthers would retain Williams. In fact, I would have bet heavily against.

But they did, and that's why they're a last place team.

I would say drafting Stewart as a top 10 dynasty RB sometime in the past 1-2 years qualifies as "good process, bad outcome."

How so? What should they have addressed that they didn't? They drafted what they think is a QB of the future, and put weapons around him to help him succeed / ease him in with a strong running game, keeping Steve Smith, and adding TEs like SHockey and Olsen. They also retained their high profile UFA in Charles Johnson.

Sounds to me like someone just bitter about the fantasy prospects of Jonathan Stewart.... Just saying.

Let's see...they could have signed not one but 2 WRs to help out their rookie QB. They have Steve Smith and nothing else at all at WR. They have needed WR help for a long time. They need at least 2 starters in the secondary. Their interior defensive line is terrible. They didn't get the top overall pick because they are good. They need a lot of help in a lot of places. They badly overpaid for a 28 year old when they had a bunch of holes they could have filled. They could have done a lot better with that amount of money. If they were a contender, this would be a totally different story.

 

[hitchcock]

About to take JStew at 56 overall. Talk me off the ledge?

 

[corpcow]

Bitter? Hardly. I have him on a whopping one dynasty team.

I just don't think that it's smart business to pay top dollar for a RB on the backslope of his prime when you're a last place team with holes everywhere.

RB is one of the least important positions in the NFL. Hence why perennial winners like the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Ravens, Chargers, and Packers tend to go cheap there. Sure, they might use a late 1st rounder on a good back every once in a while, but you don't generally see them giving a RB a fat contract. Especially a 28 year old one.

Carolina is a crap team. A rudderless ship. There is absolutely no chance that they will make the playoffs this season. So rather than wasting money on diminishing commodities like Shockey, Smitty, and D-Will, they should be looking towards the future and assembling the pieces of a team that can compete 2-3 years from now.

But there's a reason why they're a last place team. Re-signing D-Will for big money when they had a competent Stewart and Goodson waiting in the wings show that.

It's like a last place FF team that trades away all its future rookie picks for Hines Ward, Braylon Edwards, and Steven Jackson. Sure, it might help their record by a couple wins this season, but it's bad management in the long run.

Let's see...they could have signed not one but 2 WRs to help out their rookie QB. They have Steve Smith and nothing else at all at WR. They have needed WR help for a long time. They need at least 2 starters in the secondary. Their interior defensive line is terrible. They didn't get the top overall pick because they are good. They need a lot of help in a lot of places. They badly overpaid for a 28 year old when they had a bunch of holes they could have filled. They could have done a lot better with that amount of money. If they were a contender, this would be a totally different story.

Chase Stuart had a great post on the related topic of the Titans spending their money on CJ. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=9196The QB is perhaps the most important position and they clearly attempted to address (regardless of whether you're a Cam Newton believer or not) with the 1st overall pick. And yes, a playmaker WR would help, but so would a strong running game that takes off pressure and two talented TEs who can both block and provide big targets for that young QB. As for the interior DL, yeah, losing Ron Williams hurts, but they drafted two DTs in the 2nd and 3rd round.

The comparison to trading future picks in dynasty football isn't apt either, because the only person they gave up a future pick for (a 3rd rounder) was Olsen. DeAngelo, Shockey, etc all cost nothing but the actual dollars - and by all accounts the Panthers were way under the cap FLOOR.

I mean really - other than maybe Sidney Rice (who I am a huge fan of but certainly has health concerns), who could they have thrown money at to address this? In a short and particularly odd offseason, most of the better WR UFAs this year were resigned and never really on the market: Santonio, VJax, Santana Moss, and James Jones. TO tore his ACL, Braylon is inconsistent and a bit of a headcase, the other Steve Smith might be out awhile (not to mention confuse the #### out of everyone), and Plax is not without his ?s. Floyd, maybe, but is he that much of an improvement over a slightly younger Naanee?

It's also important to remember that signing UFA isn't strictly about money. There are players that really might not be interested in CAR just because they want to try to get a ring or whatever. It's not a strict auction where they can just throw money and be assured of getting Nnamdi.

My point is, it's not the direct trade-off that you guys are trying to make it out to be. You can ding them for not addressing what you view as certain holes, but I really don't think whatever contract they gave to DWill was the cause of that.... and like I said, there are compelling arguments to be made for that being a reinvestment in the rookie QB.

Or if it makes you feel any better - maybe they're just trying to ensure that Jonathan Stewart is not overworked and still has tread on the tire once Cam develops.

 

[SSOG]

Have Brady/Manning become trap players in a startup dynasty? It's hard not to rank them fairly high, it's hard to not want to take them over less proven players but it's also hard to build a team that support their draft position. If your taking a balanced approach or building a team to peak in years 2, 3, or 4, are you taking too much of a risk that you will be replacement shopping right when your team is peaking. So unless your building a team to be at it's peak in year one and two, do they even makes sense assuming you have to spend a reasonable high pick?

I am one who likes to draft for the long haul. However, I expect to be a serious contender in year 2 at the latest and possibly year 1 if things work out well. There is no reason whatsoever to think you can't win AND build a strong younger core by year 2. Waiting until the 3rd year is too long...and this opinion is from someone that builds around a strong young core. That being said, I would have no worries taking either Brady or Manning early in a draft. They have a solid 3-4 elite years. If you use the 3 years as a benchmark, it gives you plenty of time to have a replacement lined up. Also, if you draft well and have some solid younger players, you can always trade for a QB if need be.

I like to draft with the intent of having a strong contender in year 2 and not worrying about year 1. But overdoing the draft in favor of younger players can cost you in terms of value.

I don't think the bolded is necessarily true, the key word being "elite". I would not draft either of them at their likely draft position in a startup dynasty.

I kind of agree. I think I've got both QBs lower than most (QB5 for Peyton, QB8 for Brady). I often feel an urge to rank them slightly lower still, but so far I've been able to resist it.

I'm in a start 2QB league where I've built a pretty tough squad. I had Ryan Fitzpatrick as my QB4 to go along with Rivers, Peyton, and Romo. So I didn't really need him. I offered him out to about 5 different owners. I didn't expect any takers. 5 minutes went by and somebody actually gave me DeAngelo Williams for him.

I know the 2QB thing really tilts things but I feel I got the better of this deal (I also own Stewart).

How many years does DeAngelo have left? Also, in this league I have the 1,2, and 5 picks and I am seriously considering Cam Newton with the 2 or 5. Is this advisable? I have a lot of Chargers, but that situation is a lot different than having a lot of Panthers.

I got DeAngelo last year for Tomlinson and Law Firm after he went on IR (the owner was desperate for short-term RB help).

At DR.net you have Jonathan Stewart ranked # 11 for running backs. Was that decided before or after the DWill extension that made him the highest paid veteran running back in football? I'm just curious because I like JStew but he is hurt again and behind DWill. Thanks.

After. Here's the comment from the rankings: "I had Stewart ranked several slots higher under the assumption that he'd move up if Williams left, and down if Williams remained. Williams remained, so Stewart moves down. Still, he's so much better than any of the guys below him that it's hard to move him down much further. I might grit my teeth at the wait, but I hold Stewart because I firmly believe he'll prove himself worth it."I'm probably going to move Matthews ahead of him in the next update, dropping Stewart to 12. Below that, though? Not going to happen. Stewart is too good and too young, even if I will have to wait a year or two to receive any payoff.

I traded for Jon Stewart before last year, after I was infected with SSOG's man crush for him. The past two years, Stewart was inflated by the belief that once he got the starting job he would still only be 24 years old and would have 4 good seasons left. Now, if all contracts run to completion, he won't have a chance to leave for another two years, putting him in a starting role when he is 26. He is basically Michael Turner circa 2006. 11 is much too high for him now and can only be justified if you think that Stewart will beat out DeAngelo this coming year. Turner is 29 now and has given owners two great years, but his dynasty value is low.

Funny, I don't think Stewart will beat out DeAngelo this coming year... and yet I still manage to justify a #11 ranking.Look, if you can find any old dynasty rankings, go back a few years and look at the names in the 11-15 range. 80% of the guys are going to make you shake your head because you'd forgotten they were ever ranked that high. Kevin Smith once fell in that range. Marshawn Lynch did, too. Beanie Wells and Knowshon Moreno were there just last year. I've seen Grant and Benson there in recent years. Sure, one out of five of the guys wind up being guys like Chris Johnson or Jamaal Charles- guys who rocket up into the top 5- but most 11-15 range guys are mediocre backs who are just taking up space while we wait for them to fall off the map and for the next young thing to take their place. People think that RB11-15 is such a valuable range, but it's really not. It's a crapshoot, and one that it unnaturally likely to come up snake eyes. Of the guys who I currently have in that range, Stewart is far and away the one who I think is most likely to make that jump into the top 5. Yes, he has a lot of warts- the injury history, the delayed payoff, possibly the age- but everyone in that area has warts. Jonathan Stewart's biggest strength is that one of his warts is not "mediocre talent".

 

[SSOG]

Also, I get the DeAngelo signing. It pisses me off, but I get it. Do you think Steven Jackson played a role in the development of Sam Bradford? People talk about getting a young QB a good safety valve, but what better safety valve than an elite RB to keep defenses honest? I think Stewart is elite, too, but both DeAngelo and Stewart have injury histories. If your goal is to use resources as efficiently as possible to maximize wins, then spending that much on an aging back when you already have Stewart on the roster is insane. If your goal is to spend whatever it takes to maximize your franchise QB's development, then I don't think it's a bad idea to devote a huge chunk of your cap space to ensure that your franchise QB will always have an elite partner in the backfield keeping his jersey clean and keeping defenses from teeing up on him.

After all, remember what happened to David Carr when the Texans just rolled him out there his rookie season? He got killed, and it was obvious for the rest of his career that his mental timer was two ticks too fast. I don't know if he would have developed into a good QB if he'd gone to a quality organization like the Steelers (who put on a clinic on how to develop rookie QBs when they surrounded Ben in bubble wrap and let him hand off on 2/3s of the plays). I do think that he almost certainly would have turned out far better.

Don't think of Williams as an 8-figure old RB, think of him as an 8-figure insurance policy on Carolina's single biggest investment in franchise history.

But yeah, as an owner of both Stewart and Williams, it pisses me off to no end.

 

[Eastwood]

we all wanted to see Stewart and D-Will on different teams, but you also have to realize D-Will has as little wear as a 28 year old RB could. Its not like they rode him hard and into the ground the way Portis, S-Jax, etc. were going into their late 20s. I think DeAngelo has AT LEAST 3 peak years left, at least. So I don't think they blew their money signing him, he has a lot of great football left. They just blew our chances to see Stewart be at top 5 RB.

 

[Sabertooth]

What is Chris Johnson's value in terms of draft picks?