Dynasty Rankings (3 Viewers)

[Instinctive]

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

I'm not sure. I bet the guys in the Assistant Coach forum know though.

 

[Sabertooth]

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

I'm not sure. I bet the guys in the Assistant Coach forum know though.

Its a perfectly valid question.

 

[mcintyre1]

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

I'm not sure. I bet the guys in the Assistant Coach forum know though.

Dude, get out of here with that. This thread has always been open to questions of value.

 

[mcintyre1]

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

At least 2 1st rounders, and then only if they're top 3 or better. If we're talking just picks, I'm not sure it'd be worth it unless you're guaranteeing yourself the top 3 picks in a draft.

 

[jonboltz]

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.

Brady at QB8 is a dynasty steal.

 

[Sabertooth]

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.

Brady at QB8 is a dynasty steal.

I've got Brady finishing as QB1 this season.

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

Where are we with Garcon? He seems to be kind of forgotten about, and his situation is sort of interesting:

Aging Manning, Wayne, Clark - All still have time left, though

Collie has all kind of problems

Garcon entering his 4th year, which has proven of recent to be a year that these small school guys break out (VJax, Austin)

SSOG and the other guy on DR.net (BTW, what is his screen name here?) Have him low. Way too low, IMO (I wanna say ~WR43) The only recent ranking F and L has is a top 200 at Rotoworld in which Garcon is, IIRC, in his top 30 WRs which seems more plausible to me.

What do you guys think of the guy at this point?

 

[joey]

Where are we with Garcon? He seems to be kind of forgotten about, and his situation is sort of interesting:Aging Manning, Wayne, Clark - All still have time left, thoughCollie has all kind of problemsGarcon entering his 4th year, which has proven of recent to be a year that these small school guys break out (VJax, Austin)SSOG and the other guy on DR.net (BTW, what is his screen name here?) Have him low. Way too low, IMO (I wanna say ~WR43) The only recent ranking F and L has is a top 200 at Rotoworld in which Garcon is, IIRC, in his top 30 WRs which seems more plausible to me.What do you guys think of the guy at this point?

Nothing to add on Garçon (sorry) but since yu mentioned F&L's rankings, are there any new-ish ranks posted somewhere on rotoworld before they locked their pay content?Anything you can share with the shark pool, F&L?..back to the Garçon question...

 

[jek187]

Where are we with Garcon? He seems to be kind of forgotten about, and his situation is sort of interesting:

Aging Manning, Wayne, Clark - All still have time left, though

Collie has all kind of problems

Garcon entering his 4th year, which has proven of recent to be a year that these small school guys break out (VJax, Austin)

SSOG and the other guy on DR.net (BTW, what is his screen name here?) Have him low. Way too low, IMO (I wanna say ~WR43) The only recent ranking F and L has is a top 200 at Rotoworld in which Garcon is, IIRC, in his top 30 WRs which seems more plausible to me.

What do you guys think of the guy at this point?

"Other guy" here.

Adam and I both have Garcon at #43, and while I can't speak for him, I'll give my rationale.

Garcon is currently the WR3 in Indy's offense, and the 4th option in the passing game. Fantasy-wise, that's good for WR35 numbers this year. To improve on that, Garcon is going to have to move up the depth chart in Indy. This could happen because of Wayne aging, but that would also likely mean Manning isn't very useful or is gone by that point, and in that case I'm not sure being the #3 option in a Curtis Painter led option is actually an improvement. Collie could get hit with another concussion that could sideline him for awhile. Outside of those two things, I don't see any other remotely predictable reason for Garcon to move up in the pecking order. I know Wayne is hugely more talented, and I think Collie is quite a bit more talented too.

From what I see of Garcon, I agree with Football Outsiders' assessment of Garcon: "Garcon remains a great story: the late-round draft pick from Mount Union rising to a starter on one of the league’s perennial contenders. But, it masks the fact that Garcon simply is not that good. He has good straightaway speed and can burn average cornerbacks. But, in two years as a starter with Peyton Manning as his quarterback, he has below-average DVOAs. He does make his share of big plays, masking the overall mediocre performance. The Colts could upgrade on the position, moving Garcon to be their fourth receiver." Basically, I don't ever see Garcon being a year-in, year-out difference maker. Maybe he's always a borderline starter, but that's not really a sought after asset.

I'd be interested to see some data though on 4th year WRs from small schools. Do you have a link to a study?

Also, regarding the F&L question, as far as I know, the only way to see his dynasty rankings is to buy RotoWorld's Draft guide: http://www.rotoworld.com/premium/draftguide/football/main_page.aspx. I prefer FBG's redraft stuff, but it could be worth a purchase for Wesseling's dynasty stuff.

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

 

[SSOG]

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.

The concept of "mileage" is largely a myth. Repetitive injuries will wear an RB down in a hurry, but there's very little evidence that workload alone (or the lack thereof) is a meaningful predictor of quality carries remaining. In fact, by many measures, there's a slightly negative effect- controlling for production, RBs who have had more carries prior to year N tend to have more carries after year N, as well.

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.

Brady at QB8 is a dynasty steal.

Possibly. As I've pointed out, though, there's only a 2-point difference between QB4 and QB8. And Brady is substantially older than any other top-10 QB except for Manning and, to a lesser extent, Brees. That doesn't just matter for performance (which could possibly give out at any time), it also matters a lot for exit value (which is a key component I use when determining value ranks). Even if Brady continues to produce, his value is certain to start declining in coming seasons. A single injury or bad season could send him plummeting through the floor in a way that guys like Rodgers or Roethlisberger don't really have to worry about.

Where are we with Garcon? He seems to be kind of forgotten about, and his situation is sort of interesting:Aging Manning, Wayne, Clark - All still have time left, thoughCollie has all kind of problemsGarcon entering his 4th year, which has proven of recent to be a year that these small school guys break out (VJax, Austin)SSOG and the other guy on DR.net (BTW, what is his screen name here?) Have him low. Way too low, IMO (I wanna say ~WR43) The only recent ranking F and L has is a top 200 at Rotoworld in which Garcon is, IIRC, in his top 30 WRs which seems more plausible to me.What do you guys think of the guy at this point?

Liked Garcon a lot going into last season. Soured on him quite a bit last year. Too inconsistent, mediocre-or-worse hands. Totally outshone by Collie. I wouldn't move him up even a single slot, since Benn and Sanders both have better pedigree, better track records (i.e. fewer strikes against them in my mind), and both play with quality QBs. Besides, the "Manning bump" given to Indy WRs is starting to get phased out of my rankings as Manning continues to age (bringing us one year closer to the time when Indy receivers are catching the ball from guys like Curtis Painter, instead).

 

[SSOG]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

 

[squistion]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

I think "ever the masochist" would be more apt. I am sorry, but I can't take Evans seriously any longer - for years we heard that this is an elite talent but doesn't produce because he doesn't have a QB who can get the ball to him and/or there is no WR #2 to draw attention from defenses to keep him from getting double teamed. Well, the Bills not only got a half-ways decent QB in Fitzpatrick, but also a capable #2 finally emerged in Stevie Johnson. And contrary to what we would have expected, Evans numbers not only didn't improve, but Johnson became the star receiving threat and enough of one to make Evans expendable. It is true Evans had injury issues, but I honestly don't think if he was completely healthy the results would have been that much different. If you want to continue to be the optimist, fine, but the Evans' glass sure looks half empty to me - I don't think Evans was ever as good as we thought he was.

 

[az_prof]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

I was thinking of the same analogy! I really do think that Evans will be resurgent in BA and he is younger than Glenn was when he finally got out of Seattle.

 

[az_prof]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

I think "ever the masochist" would be more apt. I am sorry, but I can't take Evans seriously any longer - for years we heard that this is an elite talent but doesn't produce because he doesn't have a QB who can get the ball to him and/or there is no WR #2 to draw attention from defenses to keep him from getting double teamed. Well, the Bills not only got a half-ways decent QB in Fitzpatrick, but also a capable #2 finally emerged in Stevie Johnson. And contrary to what we would have expected, Evans numbers not only didn't improve, but Johnson became the star receiving threat and enough of one to make Evans expendable. It is true Evans had injury issues, but I honestly don't think if he was completely healthy the results would have been that much different. If you want to continue to be the optimist, fine, but the Evans' glass sure looks half empty to me - I don't think Evans was ever as good as we thought he was.

The problem with this analysis is it is sloppy.First, you call Fitzpatrick a "half-ways decent QB." In reality, he is in the bottom third. He was 27th in completion %;.21st in ypa; 22 in QB rating, smack dab between Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. So....for the past four years he has had crap at QB. Instead of the 31 or 32nd worst QB he had the 22nd. That's still awful.

Second, Johnson hit it off with Fitzpatrick more than Evans. That's because Evans is a deep threat and Johnson is more of an over the middle possession WR.

Bottom line is that Buffalo never had the personnel or the strategy to take advantage of Evan's strengths. Four years of half-ways decent" production doesn't prove that he isn't talented. How do you explain the two years he has had over 1000 yards and the one year that he was a top 10 receiver? Clearly he has talent but the team didn't know how to exploit it.

The analogy with Glenn is perfect because nay sayers like you said the same thing about him. And he, like Evans, is a deep threat guy who needs a QB who can hit him on the deep patterns. Like Evans, he had had two great years interspersed with a lot of mediocre years. Then he went to a new team with an offense and QB who could use him properly, and he had two more 1000+ years. He also had gone 4 years since having had a decent year before the trade to Dallas, and he was 2 years older at the time of the trade.

 

[jek187]

Where are we with Garcon? He seems to be kind of forgotten about, and his situation is sort of interesting:

Aging Manning, Wayne, Clark - All still have time left, though

Collie has all kind of problems

Garcon entering his 4th year, which has proven of recent to be a year that these small school guys break out (VJax, Austin)

SSOG and the other guy on DR.net (BTW, what is his screen name here?) Have him low. Way too low, IMO (I wanna say ~WR43) The only recent ranking F and L has is a top 200 at Rotoworld in which Garcon is, IIRC, in his top 30 WRs which seems more plausible to me.

What do you guys think of the guy at this point?

"Other guy" here.

Adam and I both have Garcon at #43, and while I can't speak for him, I'll give my rationale.

Garcon is currently the WR3 in Indy's offense, and the 4th option in the passing game. Fantasy-wise, that's good for WR35 numbers this year. To improve on that, Garcon is going to have to move up the depth chart in Indy. This could happen because of Wayne aging, but that would also likely mean Manning isn't very useful or is gone by that point, and in that case I'm not sure being the #3 option in a Curtis Painter led option is actually an improvement. Collie could get hit with another concussion that could sideline him for awhile. Outside of those two things, I don't see any other remotely predictable reason for Garcon to move up in the pecking order. I know Wayne is hugely more talented, and I think Collie is quite a bit more talented too.

From what I see of Garcon, I agree with Football Outsiders' assessment of Garcon: "Garcon remains a great story: the late-round draft pick from Mount Union rising to a starter on one of the league’s perennial contenders. But, it masks the fact that Garcon simply is not that good. He has good straightaway speed and can burn average cornerbacks. But, in two years as a starter with Peyton Manning as his quarterback, he has below-average DVOAs. He does make his share of big plays, masking the overall mediocre performance. The Colts could upgrade on the position, moving Garcon to be their fourth receiver." Basically, I don't ever see Garcon being a year-in, year-out difference maker. Maybe he's always a borderline starter, but that's not really a sought after asset.

I'd be interested to see some data though on 4th year WRs from small schools. Do you have a link to a study?

Also, regarding the F&L question, as far as I know, the only way to see his dynasty rankings is to buy RotoWorld's Draft guide: http://www.rotoworld.com/premium/draftguide/football/main_page.aspx. I prefer FBG's redraft stuff, but it could be worth a purchase for Wesseling's dynasty stuff.

Thank you, and I apologize for calling you the 'other guy'. You have well thought out responses/thoughts and deserve better I'm not sure how DVOA is measured, but I wonder if he can find some more consistency in his game. As such making less mistakes and more big plays. I don't see the Colts play that often, but his stats certainly fell awkwardly last year. ~20 more receptions for about the same amount of yards. Not sure if that had to do with the Collie/Clark injuries or what.

I don't have data to support the the 4 year small school WR thing, I just was referencing those two because I know that's their situation. And hey, a guy can hope can't he?

I think F and L has become more dedicated to keeping his stuff at Rotoworld. I just hope he starts doing more of it because a top 200 is just 'meh', though, not unappreciated.

EDIT - One more thing to add. I don't really care much about what # passing option Garcon is currently. Wayne had the ball forced to him last year, but his stats show he is losing his step some. Clark is coming off a major injury and is also aging. In other words, if Garcon can up his game Manning will find him and that's all that matters. If he doesn't, well, then he's the 4th or worse passing option.

NP at all on calling me the "other guy". If that's the worst I get called, I can definitely work with that.

For everything you want to know about DVOA you can go here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods. From that page, here's the short version: DVOA is a method of evaluating teams, units, or players. It takes every single play during the NFL season and compares each one to a league-average baseline based on situation. DVOA measures not just yardage, but yardage towards a first down: five yards on third-and-4 are worth more than five yards on first-and-10 and much more than five yards on third-and-12. Red zone plays are worth more than other plays. Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent. DVOA is a percentage, so a team with a DVOA of 10.0% is 10 percent better than the average team, and a quarterback with a DVOA of -20.0% is 20 percent worse than the average quarterback. Because DVOA measures scoring, defenses are better when they are negative. The longer version is something like 15-20 paragraphs, but should explain everything you want to know about DVOA.

Anyways, I think we're largely in agreement about where Garcon stands for the short-term. Where we happen to disagree is his upside, and his probability of achieving it. I more or less expect Clark, Manning, and Wayne to decline at the same rate. By this I mean that if Wayne's production this year is expected to be X, and next year's to be .8*X, then for Manning I'd expect Y production this year, and .8*Y production next year. I'm by no means discounting the possibility that Wayne or Clark fall of the proverbial cliff, but that my expectation is for all of them to decline at more or less the same rate. It's a two-way street of course, as I can't discount the possibility that Manning falls of a cliff before Wayne or Clark. I bring all this up, to hopefully express why I'm not a fan of waiting for Wayne and/or Clark to lose a step for Garcon to put up better numbers. By the time they do degrade to the point where Garcon's piece of the pie is the 2nd biggest, the pie as a whole will be smaller.

All that aside, let's look at the perfect situation for Garcon. Let's say something happens to sideline one the guys in front of him for an extended period of time (a year+). There's a myriad of different things that could do that, but for the sake of this hypothetical, I'll use the most plausible scenario: Collie suffers another concussion and is out for the year, maybe forever. Garcon steps up to WR2 in the offense, and if we give him 100% of Collie's numbers, that makes him WR23, or a good WR3/poor WR2 depending on your starting lineups/number of teams in your league. While that sort of upside is definitely a bonus, it's nothing to get too excited about. I'm just not a fan of WR3/4 guys with WR2/3 upside. They're not worthless, but they're not really something that get me excited either.

There's absolutely some chance that Wayne or Clark lose a giant step this year and allow Garcon to pass them up in the offense. There's also a chance any of the Wayne/Collie/Clark trio could get hurt. But combined with the relatively unlikeliness of any of those things happening, and even if they do the modest gains it would bestow upon Garcon, it's hard to bump him up much for it. I think we mainly disagree if Garcon is good enough to pass at least one of them by naturally. I think the chance is pretty small, you think it's quite a bit more likely (maybe not >50%, but a lot bigger than my basically dismissive estimate). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, there's some potential downside with Garcon, and that's AGon. Yeah, yeah, I'll give you a moment to stop laughing. But if AGon's injuries have been a result of variance rather than a predisposition to getting hurt, and if his injuries haven't sapped his talent, I think he could surpass Garcon on the depth chart. I seem to be the only person out there that hasn't written AGon off (only one FBG staffer even ranks him, Adam and F&L don't rank him either). But the potential effect on Garcon's production is something that's also taken into account. (And yes, I know he's currently nursing a gimpy hamstring. /sigh)

Regarding F&L, I definitely wish Rotoworld would let him focus more on dynasty content. At least let him go 300 deep for dynasty rankings.

 

[SSOG]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

I think "ever the masochist" would be more apt. I am sorry, but I can't take Evans seriously any longer - for years we heard that this is an elite talent but doesn't produce because he doesn't have a QB who can get the ball to him and/or there is no WR #2 to draw attention from defenses to keep him from getting double teamed. Well, the Bills not only got a half-ways decent QB in Fitzpatrick, but also a capable #2 finally emerged in Stevie Johnson. And contrary to what we would have expected, Evans numbers not only didn't improve, but Johnson became the star receiving threat and enough of one to make Evans expendable. It is true Evans had injury issues, but I honestly don't think if he was completely healthy the results would have been that much different. If you want to continue to be the optimist, fine, but the Evans' glass sure looks half empty to me - I don't think Evans was ever as good as we thought he was.

The problem with this analysis is it is sloppy.First, you call Fitzpatrick a "half-ways decent QB." In reality, he is in the bottom third. He was 27th in completion %;.21st in ypa; 22 in QB rating, smack dab between Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. So....for the past four years he has had crap at QB. Instead of the 31 or 32nd worst QB he had the 22nd. That's still awful.

Second, Johnson hit it off with Fitzpatrick more than Evans. That's because Evans is a deep threat and Johnson is more of an over the middle possession WR.

Bottom line is that Buffalo never had the personnel or the strategy to take advantage of Evan's strengths. Four years of half-ways decent" production doesn't prove that he isn't talented. How do you explain the two years he has had over 1000 yards and the one year that he was a top 10 receiver? Clearly he has talent but the team didn't know how to exploit it.

The analogy with Glenn is perfect because nay sayers like you said the same thing about him. And he, like Evans, is a deep threat guy who needs a QB who can hit him on the deep patterns. Like Evans, he had had two great years interspersed with a lot of mediocre years. Then he went to a new team with an offense and QB who could use him properly, and he had two more 1000+ years. He also had gone 4 years since having had a decent year before the trade to Dallas, and he was 2 years older at the time of the trade.

Mind-blowing Terry Glenn stat that will blow everyone's mind: Terry Glenn ranks in the top 30 in NFL history in receiving yards per game. Seriously- I'm not making that up. I really think Glenn and Galloway are very interesting comparisons to Evans. Both Glenn and Galloway really caused me to re-evaluate when speed guys start to lose a step in the NFL. Glenn and Galloway both posted the highest YPC of their careers at age 32, and they topped 15.0 YPC a combined 7 times at age 30 or older. Galloway averaged a ridiculous 17.8 YPC (2nd highest total of his career) at age 36- in what was one of the greatest age 36 seasons of all time. Bruce kept his speed for quite a while, too.

Also, there's some potential downside with Garcon, and that's AGon. Yeah, yeah, I'll give you a moment to stop laughing. But if AGon's injuries have been a result of variance rather than a predisposition to getting hurt, and if his injuries haven't sapped his talent, I think he could surpass Garcon on the depth chart. I seem to be the only person out there that hasn't written AGon off (only one FBG staffer even ranks him, Adam and F&L don't rank him either). But the potential effect on Garcon's production is something that's also taken into account. (And yes, I know he's currently nursing a gimpy hamstring. /sigh)

Regarding F&L, I definitely wish Rotoworld would let him focus more on dynasty content. At least let him go 300 deep for dynasty rankings.

I'm actually with you on The Other Tony Gonzalez. His absence from my rankings is more glitch in the system than deliberate- he got lost as I was restacking my board, and I didn't notice it. I'd already noticed he was gone (just yesterday I was planning on posting about Gonzalez being the forgotten man), and I plan on bumping him up in my next ranking update. Probably somewhere in the 50-60 range.

 

[corpcow]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

I think "ever the masochist" would be more apt. I am sorry, but I can't take Evans seriously any longer - for years we heard that this is an elite talent but doesn't produce because he doesn't have a QB who can get the ball to him and/or there is no WR #2 to draw attention from defenses to keep him from getting double teamed. Well, the Bills not only got a half-ways decent QB in Fitzpatrick, but also a capable #2 finally emerged in Stevie Johnson. And contrary to what we would have expected, Evans numbers not only didn't improve, but Johnson became the star receiving threat and enough of one to make Evans expendable. It is true Evans had injury issues, but I honestly don't think if he was completely healthy the results would have been that much different. If you want to continue to be the optimist, fine, but the Evans' glass sure looks half empty to me - I don't think Evans was ever as good as we thought he was.

The problem with this analysis is it is sloppy.First, you call Fitzpatrick a "half-ways decent QB." In reality, he is in the bottom third. He was 27th in completion %;.21st in ypa; 22 in QB rating, smack dab between Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. So....for the past four years he has had crap at QB. Instead of the 31 or 32nd worst QB he had the 22nd. That's still awful.

Second, Johnson hit it off with Fitzpatrick more than Evans. That's because Evans is a deep threat and Johnson is more of an over the middle possession WR.

Bottom line is that Buffalo never had the personnel or the strategy to take advantage of Evan's strengths. Four years of half-ways decent" production doesn't prove that he isn't talented. How do you explain the two years he has had over 1000 yards and the one year that he was a top 10 receiver? Clearly he has talent but the team didn't know how to exploit it.

The analogy with Glenn is perfect because nay sayers like you said the same thing about him. And he, like Evans, is a deep threat guy who needs a QB who can hit him on the deep patterns. Like Evans, he had had two great years interspersed with a lot of mediocre years. Then he went to a new team with an offense and QB who could use him properly, and he had two more 1000+ years. He also had gone 4 years since having had a decent year before the trade to Dallas, and he was 2 years older at the time of the trade.

Mind-blowing Terry Glenn stat that will blow everyone's mind: Terry Glenn ranks in the top 30 in NFL history in receiving yards per game. Seriously- I'm not making that up. I really think Glenn and Galloway are very interesting comparisons to Evans. Both Glenn and Galloway really caused me to re-evaluate when speed guys start to lose a step in the NFL. Glenn and Galloway both posted the highest YPC of their careers at age 32, and they topped 15.0 YPC a combined 7 times at age 30 or older. Galloway averaged a ridiculous 17.8 YPC (2nd highest total of his career) at age 36- in what was one of the greatest age 36 seasons of all time. Bruce kept his speed for quite a while, too.

I know maybe not relevant for Glenn in this case but I do want to point out that YPC isn't the best metric for fantasy success. There have been a lot of guys with high YPC who haven't been consistent enough to be fantasy viable. The reality is some guys are deep threats who have inflated YPC as a result. There are guys who simply cannot be anything more than the big play guy and there are guys whose YPC drop significantly when/if the become integral parts of the offense (and thus are asked to do more than just stretch the field). I would go into more detail / pull stats but on my iPad right now. Point is this isn't always the best metric. YPG sure. I'd have to look at the specifics of DVOA but I'm sure like anything else it has inherent biases too.

 

[ex-ghost]

Any thoughts on Golden Tate? 2nd round pick, but now blocked by BMW and Rice.

 

[jek187]

Also, there's some potential downside with Garcon, and that's AGon. Yeah, yeah, I'll give you a moment to stop laughing. But if AGon's injuries have been a result of variance rather than a predisposition to getting hurt, and if his injuries haven't sapped his talent, I think he could surpass Garcon on the depth chart. I seem to be the only person out there that hasn't written AGon off (only one FBG staffer even ranks him, Adam and F&L don't rank him either). But the potential effect on Garcon's production is something that's also taken into account. (And yes, I know he's currently nursing a gimpy hamstring. /sigh)Regarding F&L, I definitely wish Rotoworld would let him focus more on dynasty content. At least let him go 300 deep for dynasty rankings.

I'm actually with you on The Other Tony Gonzalez. His absence from my rankings is more glitch in the system than deliberate- he got lost as I was restacking my board, and I didn't notice it. I'd already noticed he was gone (just yesterday I was planning on posting about Gonzalez being the forgotten man), and I plan on bumping him up in my next ranking update. Probably somewhere in the 50-60 range.

Awesome. I knew I liked you for a reason.

 

[jek187]

Any thoughts on Golden Tate? 2nd round pick, but now blocked by BMW and Rice.

I'm not a fan. He's got a fairly limited upside, and not only is his path blocked by BMW and Rice, but also Zach Miller. On top of that, he's been having a pretty poor preseason, so much so that Ben Obomanu could push him for the WR3 job. His value is pretty minimal in my opinion.

 

[ex-ghost]

Any thoughts on Golden Tate? 2nd round pick, but now blocked by BMW and Rice.

I'm not a fan. He's got a fairly limited upside, and not only is his path blocked by BMW and Rice, but also Zach Miller. On top of that, he's been having a pretty poor preseason, so much so that Ben Obomanu could push him for the WR3 job. His value is pretty minimal in my opinion.

Why the second round choice for a guy with limited upside? I agree with you, he has shown nothing in the preseason, actually has seemed to regress from last year. Wondering what is holding him back, I did not watch him play at ND, but people seemed to like him on draft day.

 

[jek187]

Any thoughts on Golden Tate? 2nd round pick, but now blocked by BMW and Rice.

I'm not a fan. He's got a fairly limited upside, and not only is his path blocked by BMW and Rice, but also Zach Miller. On top of that, he's been having a pretty poor preseason, so much so that Ben Obomanu could push him for the WR3 job. His value is pretty minimal in my opinion.

Why the second round choice for a guy with limited upside? I agree with you, he has shown nothing in the preseason, actually has seemed to regress from last year. Wondering what is holding him back, I did not watch him play at ND, but people seemed to like him on draft day.

Here's NFL.com's scouting report on Golden Tate (http://www.nfl.com/draft/2010/profiles/golden-tate?id=497326#tabs:tab-analysis):Strengths

Tate’s a strong receiver. Is a very sound route runner who is smooth in and out of his breaks and has experience in a pro-style system. Is dangerous after catch with a nice combination of quickness and power to break tackles. Has been highly- productive. High-character player who will always compete. Has reliable hands.

Weaknesses

His overall explosiveness is questionable. Is more of a speed-builder than a sudden guy, odd for a shorter receiver. Takes a while to eat up cushions. Top end speed is good but not elite. Can get deep on occasion but doesn’t appear to be a consistent downfield threat.

I can see why an NFL team would use a 2nd round pick on him, but the lack of explosiveness and top end speed hurts his fantasy upside. As fantasy football players, we evaluate players in different terms than NFL GMs. We're looking for difference making talent. Basically, if a WR isn't a top 30 talent, we're largely disinterested. And if a guy's not top 50, we're usually totally disinterested. But in today's NFL where 3 WR sets are common, NFL GMs can see a WR they think is a top 70 talent, and take him in the 2nd round. A top 70 talent can make a difference for their teams. For most of our fantasy teams, a top 70 talent is waiver fodder.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Why the second round choice for a guy with limited upside? I agree with you, he has shown nothing in the preseason, actually has seemed to regress from last year. Wondering what is holding him back, I did not watch him play at ND, but people seemed to like him on draft day.

He was a good enough athlete to destroy college competition, but it hasn't translated. He was also a pretty polished WR and well coached guy so the thought was he'd be able to contribute right away. But that hasn't happened.He is struggling now because they're trying to move him to the slot, which is pretty different from how he was used at ND. It's possible it could work long term. His after the catch skills are the most likely thing to translate. Current struggles could also destroy his confidence 100% and complete his transition to bust.

 

[gianmarco]

Any thoughts on Golden Tate? 2nd round pick, but now blocked by BMW and Rice.

I'm not a fan. He's got a fairly limited upside, and not only is his path blocked by BMW and Rice, but also Zach Miller. On top of that, he's been having a pretty poor preseason, so much so that Ben Obomanu could push him for the WR3 job. His value is pretty minimal in my opinion.

Why the second round choice for a guy with limited upside? I agree with you, he has shown nothing in the preseason, actually has seemed to regress from last year. Wondering what is holding him back, I did not watch him play at ND, but people seemed to like him on draft day.

Not all 2nd round picks are used on high upside guys. Look at guys like Toby Gerhart and Brian Leonard recently.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Not all 2nd round picks are used on high upside guys. Look at guys like Toby Gerhart and Brian Leonard recently.

I am not sure I understand these examples. Gerhart was taken as depth (as were Ryan Williams, Ben Tate, etc.), but he had upside (and still might). He was taken ahead of Ben Tate for a reason, because the Vikings thought he was a better RB. Leonard was taken as a FB/RB-hybrid. It turns out he's not Larry Centers, but I'm sure someone in the Rams FO was thinking he could contribute a lot to the offense in a similar sort of way. I don't think these were low upside picks. They may have been bad picks, but they weren't low upside picks.I think WRs are more likely to get a bump for being more ready to contribute now, eschewing upside to get someone who can help fill a need. Brian Robiskie is more of a posterboy for low upside picks. He was seen as a sure thing, guaranteed to contribute. Golden Tate is similar in a way.

 

[Liquid Tension]

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.

I agree! If they would have received a discount for signing DWill then that would make sense, but they paid top dollar for a 28 year old back who has been banged up of late, but is very talented. If they traded Stewart than I could understand, but they have too many other holes to have so much tied up at the RB position.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Apropos of nothing, a thought occurred to me today. You know who Flacco/Boldin/Evans kind of reminds me of? The 2006 Cowboys. You've got the young gunslinger QB (26 year old Tony Romo, who averaged 8.6 ypa). You've got two WRs on the wrong side of 30, one of whom is perhaps the most physical after-the-catch threat in the league (33 year old Terrell Owens), the other of whom is an underrated deep threat who has yet to lose a step (32 year old Terry Glenn). Please don't confuse any of this with anything remotely resembling "analysis" or "prediction", it was just an interesting comparison that struck me this morning. I actually think there's a pretty solid chance of Evans having a Glenn/Galloway type final chapter to his career, although as you all know I'm ever the optimist when it comes to Evans.

I think "ever the masochist" would be more apt. I am sorry, but I can't take Evans seriously any longer - for years we heard that this is an elite talent but doesn't produce because he doesn't have a QB who can get the ball to him and/or there is no WR #2 to draw attention from defenses to keep him from getting double teamed. Well, the Bills not only got a half-ways decent QB in Fitzpatrick, but also a capable #2 finally emerged in Stevie Johnson. And contrary to what we would have expected, Evans numbers not only didn't improve, but Johnson became the star receiving threat and enough of one to make Evans expendable. It is true Evans had injury issues, but I honestly don't think if he was completely healthy the results would have been that much different. If you want to continue to be the optimist, fine, but the Evans' glass sure looks half empty to me - I don't think Evans was ever as good as we thought he was.

The problem with this analysis is it is sloppy.First, you call Fitzpatrick a "half-ways decent QB." In reality, he is in the bottom third. He was 27th in completion %;.21st in ypa; 22 in QB rating, smack dab between Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. So....for the past four years he has had crap at QB. Instead of the 31 or 32nd worst QB he had the 22nd. That's still awful.

Second, Johnson hit it off with Fitzpatrick more than Evans. That's because Evans is a deep threat and Johnson is more of an over the middle possession WR.

Bottom line is that Buffalo never had the personnel or the strategy to take advantage of Evan's strengths. Four years of half-ways decent" production doesn't prove that he isn't talented. How do you explain the two years he has had over 1000 yards and the one year that he was a top 10 receiver? Clearly he has talent but the team didn't know how to exploit it.

The analogy with Glenn is perfect because nay sayers like you said the same thing about him. And he, like Evans, is a deep threat guy who needs a QB who can hit him on the deep patterns. Like Evans, he had had two great years interspersed with a lot of mediocre years. Then he went to a new team with an offense and QB who could use him properly, and he had two more 1000+ years. He also had gone 4 years since having had a decent year before the trade to Dallas, and he was 2 years older at the time of the trade.

Mind-blowing Terry Glenn stat that will blow everyone's mind: Terry Glenn ranks in the top 30 in NFL history in receiving yards per game. Seriously- I'm not making that up. I really think Glenn and Galloway are very interesting comparisons to Evans. Both Glenn and Galloway really caused me to re-evaluate when speed guys start to lose a step in the NFL. Glenn and Galloway both posted the highest YPC of their careers at age 32, and they topped 15.0 YPC a combined 7 times at age 30 or older. Galloway averaged a ridiculous 17.8 YPC (2nd highest total of his career) at age 36- in what was one of the greatest age 36 seasons of all time. Bruce kept his speed for quite a while, too.

I know maybe not relevant for Glenn in this case but I do want to point out that YPC isn't the best metric for fantasy success. There have been a lot of guys with high YPC who haven't been consistent enough to be fantasy viable. The reality is some guys are deep threats who have inflated YPC as a result. There are guys who simply cannot be anything more than the big play guy and there are guys whose YPC drop significantly when/if the become integral parts of the offense (and thus are asked to do more than just stretch the field). I would go into more detail / pull stats but on my iPad right now. Point is this isn't always the best metric. YPG sure. I'd have to look at the specifics of DVOA but I'm sure like anything else it has inherent biases too.

I really feel that Collie will step in and be really productive again. I think the ball will be spread around, but I think Collie and Wayne will be the top wide outs (Clark will get his).

 

[Concept Coop]

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

Nobody is getting Chris Johnson from me with draft picks. Chris Johnson is a top 5 player in dynasty formats. The 1.01 seems to be going around the 3rd/4th round in startups. You would have to give up your 2nd/3rd++ for the 1.05 in a startup draft. You would have to start the offer with 1.01/1.02/1.03 for me to listen.

 

[Sabertooth]

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

Nobody is getting Chris Johnson from me with draft picks. Chris Johnson is a top 5 player in dynasty formats. The 1.01 seems to be going around the 3rd/4th round in startups. You would have to give up your 2nd/3rd++ for the 1.05 in a startup draft. You would have to start the offer with 1.01/1.02/1.03 for me to listen.

Seriously? That seems like over valuing a kid who dropped 650 rushing yards from 2009 to 2010.

 

[Concept Coop]

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

Nobody is getting Chris Johnson from me with draft picks. Chris Johnson is a top 5 player in dynasty formats. The 1.01 seems to be going around the 3rd/4th round in startups. You would have to give up your 2nd/3rd++ for the 1.05 in a startup draft. You would have to start the offer with 1.01/1.02/1.03 for me to listen.

Seriously? That seems like over valuing a kid who dropped 650 rushing yards from 2009 to 2010.

Chris Johnson is one of, if not the most talented RB in the NFL. His team had a down season and it affected his numbers. He is still a lock for carries, TDs, receptions, et cetera. He has one of the highest floors and has already shown us that his ceiling is historic. I think it is a case of overvaluing rookies. The odds are: One of Jones/Green will be a complete bust. They are just as likely to both bust as they are to both hit. Ingram has a better chance of hitting, but he is not a McFadden/Peterson/CJ talent, in my opinion. I think his career will equate to that of Mendenhall, if he hits. If he misses, maybe a Knowshon Moreno. I am not giving up CJ for Mendenhall anda less than 50% chance at a WR1. I would trade him, in a PPR league, for Green/Ingram/Jones. But I would not trade him for 2 of the 3. Just as I would not trade the 1.05 for two 3rd round start up picks.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Why the second round choice for a guy with limited upside?

I agree with you, he has shown nothing in the preseason, actually has seemed to regress from last year. Wondering what is holding him back, I did not watch him play at ND, but people seemed to like him on draft day.

He was a good enough athlete to destroy college competition, but it hasn't translated. He was also a pretty polished WR and well coached guy so the thought was he'd be able to contribute right away. But that hasn't happened.He is struggling now because they're trying to move him to the slot, which is pretty different from how he was used at ND. It's possible it could work long term. His after the catch skills are the most likely thing to translate. Current struggles could also destroy his confidence 100% and complete his transition to bust.

As a ND fan I can say that the bolded was not the case. I argued this on these boards back when he was being drafted. Contrary to the NFL.com scouting report, Golden Tate was/is not a sound route runner and he does not have reliable hands. His lack of height combined with his body catching tendencies was one of the reasons I was a bit sour on his pro prospects.

 

[thriftyrocker]

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

Nobody is getting Chris Johnson from me with draft picks. Chris Johnson is a top 5 player in dynasty formats. The 1.01 seems to be going around the 3rd/4th round in startups. You would have to give up your 2nd/3rd++ for the 1.05 in a startup draft. You would have to start the offer with 1.01/1.02/1.03 for me to listen.

Seriously? That seems like over valuing a kid who dropped 650 rushing yards from 2009 to 2010.

Really? Please name a RB who didn't drop significantly in yardage after a 2000 yard season. Why can't he just get 2 grand each year, is that so much to ask? (Maybe for Fitzgerald money it isn't)That said if someone is offering Ingram + one of the 2 WRs, I'm definitely listening.

 

[theglorydays]

Good discussion of Chris Johnson's value. It's good for me to read because i'm new to dynasty leagues and don't have much of a guage on how to value picks/players when trying to make trades.

For the jamaal charles owners out there, what type of deal would it take for you to part ways with him?

 

[Spike]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

Randy Moss 15th? I don't think he should be 15th in redraft, let alone dynasty.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Rankings are live. Link is in my sig.

Randy Moss 15th? I don't think he should be 15th in redraft, let alone dynasty.

The link in his sig is outdated. Just go to the website manually, which is updated.

 

[Concept Coop]

Good discussion of Chris Johnson's value. It's good for me to read because i'm new to dynasty leagues and don't have much of a guage on how to value picks/players when trying to make trades.For the jamaal charles owners out there, what type of deal would it take for you to part ways with him?

The value of draft picks is something that I personally picked up by playing a couple years. I held them tight to my vest at first, and passed up deals I should have made because I didn't want to lose out. In hindsight, I should have studied start up drafts/ADP to gauge the value better. I would recommend that. For example, the first rookie is coming off the board in the 3rd round, the 6th rookie is coming off in the 8th, et cetera.One thing that I have picked up on, is that a lot of owners have a bad habit of viewing draft picks as a sure thing. I like to cash in on that. I personally view WR drafted in the first round as a 50/50 hit rate, and RBs about a 60/40. There are studies that suggest this, roughly. Because of this, I value a guy like Miles Austin much more than the 1.01 in a rookie draft. The reason being, even if I think A.J. Green is capable of putting up WR numbers (I do), I still take into account the 50% bust rate. As for Charles, like CJ, nobody is getting him from me for rookie picks, unless they are willing to make a lopsided deal. 1.01/1.02/1.03 would be needed for me to trade him for draft picks.

 

[az_prof]

About picks and Charles and Chris Johnson: I don't have those guy but I wouldn't trade them even for 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. At least not at their current ages. I might think about it for a guy like ADP who is, i think, 26. But only for multiple, high first rounders.

I like the certainy of knowing that I have a top 10 player. Rookies? I can't tell you how many times I have heard "can't miss stud," and the guy turned out to be more a turd than a stud. If you are rebuilding and you ONLY have one solid player, and the rest of the team sucks and can't compete, it might make sense to trade the stud veteran for multiple, high picks. Otherwise, keep the sure thing.

 

[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.

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.

I agree! If they would have received a discount for signing DWill then that would make sense, but they paid top dollar for a 28 year old back who has been banged up of late, but is very talented. If they traded Stewart than I could understand, but they have too many other holes to have so much tied up at the RB position.

Let's also not ignore the Achilles issues that Stewart is dealing with, in this context.

 

[geoff8695]

About picks and Charles and Chris Johnson: I don't have those guy but I wouldn't trade them even for 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. At least not at their current ages. I might think about it for a guy like ADP who is, i think, 26. But only for multiple, high first rounders. I like the certainy of knowing that I have a top 10 player. Rookies? I can't tell you how many times I have heard "can't miss stud," and the guy turned out to be more a turd than a stud. If you are rebuilding and you ONLY have one solid player, and the rest of the team sucks and can't compete, it might make sense to trade the stud veteran for multiple, high picks. Otherwise, keep the sure thing.

Don't mean to be a PITA, but Chris Johnson turns 26 next month, and is only 6 months younger than ADP. However, unless I had a terrible team, or a ridiculous surplus at RB, or could rewind the clock back to 2007 when Calvin Johnson and Peterson both entered the league, then I agree about not trading a top 5 or so dynasty RB. Top 3 draft picks aren't usually a "sure thing". Meanwhile the upper echelon RBs give you a chance to win your league in any given season in the prime of their careers. It would take a very unique circumstance to make me consider giving that up. Once potentially chronic injuries start to surface, or they approach age 28, then I start getting a little nervous.

 

[theglorydays]

Good discussion of Chris Johnson's value. It's good for me to read because i'm new to dynasty leagues and don't have much of a guage on how to value picks/players when trying to make trades.For the jamaal charles owners out there, what type of deal would it take for you to part ways with him?

The value of draft picks is something that I personally picked up by playing a couple years. I held them tight to my vest at first, and passed up deals I should have made because I didn't want to lose out. In hindsight, I should have studied start up drafts/ADP to gauge the value better. I would recommend that. For example, the first rookie is coming off the board in the 3rd round, the 6th rookie is coming off in the 8th, et cetera.One thing that I have picked up on, is that a lot of owners have a bad habit of viewing draft picks as a sure thing. I like to cash in on that. I personally view WR drafted in the first round as a 50/50 hit rate, and RBs about a 60/40. There are studies that suggest this, roughly. Because of this, I value a guy like Miles Austin much more than the 1.01 in a rookie draft. The reason being, even if I think A.J. Green is capable of putting up WR numbers (I do), I still take into account the 50% bust rate. As for Charles, like CJ, nobody is getting him from me for rookie picks, unless they are willing to make a lopsided deal. 1.01/1.02/1.03 would be needed for me to trade him for draft picks.

Thanks for the response

 

[Sabertooth]

Another aspect to consider is that running backs hold their value, even as draft picks. A player like Chris Johnson peaked in value last offseason. It literally cannot get any higher than a 2000 yard rusher that is entering the third year of play. So his value is down significantly from that level right now. But should it be?

He's coming off a top 3 season for a RB and that was considered a letdown. Expectations are off the charts for him. He's a true stud. He can be had for a lot less this season than last. I'm currently in negotiations for him and I'm giving up 1.2, 1.3 and Ryan Grant. I think I am getting an absolute steal. Grant's declining value aside (he's approaching 30, has Starks and Green in the mix, and might not be a Packer after this year), I think Johnson's value is lowered even more right now because of his holdout.

I don't feel very comfortable giving advice in this dynasty forum as I'm only entering my third year of this format. That's why I ask questions and rarely give advice. But I do feel this is the type of deal that is a no brainer. Even if Johnson holds out all season, he's still younger than Grant is now. And those pick are just hopes and dreams. 50% success at best.

 

[DoubleG]

About picks and Charles and Chris Johnson: I don't have those guy but I wouldn't trade them even for 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. At least not at their current ages. I might think about it for a guy like ADP who is, i think, 26. But only for multiple, high first rounders. I like the certainy of knowing that I have a top 10 player. Rookies? I can't tell you how many times I have heard "can't miss stud," and the guy turned out to be more a turd than a stud. If you are rebuilding and you ONLY have one solid player, and the rest of the team sucks and can't compete, it might make sense to trade the stud veteran for multiple, high picks. Otherwise, keep the sure thing.

Don't mean to be a PITA, but Chris Johnson turns 26 next month, and is only 6 months younger than ADP. Once potentially chronic injuries start to surface, or they approach age 28, then I start getting a little nervous.

 

[geoff8695]

About picks and Charles and Chris Johnson: I don't have those guy but I wouldn't trade them even for 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. At least not at their current ages. I might think about it for a guy like ADP who is, i think, 26. But only for multiple, high first rounders. I like the certainy of knowing that I have a top 10 player. Rookies? I can't tell you how many times I have heard "can't miss stud," and the guy turned out to be more a turd than a stud. If you are rebuilding and you ONLY have one solid player, and the rest of the team sucks and can't compete, it might make sense to trade the stud veteran for multiple, high picks. Otherwise, keep the sure thing.

Don't mean to be a PITA, but Chris Johnson turns 26 next month, and is only 6 months younger than ADP. Once potentially chronic injuries start to surface, or they approach age 28, then I start getting a little nervous.

Foster, CJ2K, and MJD may be within your grasp sooner than you'ld think!In a league that requires starting 2RBs, I've made a living off stockpiling young talented RBs, getting a few seasons out of them, and then trading off the, Portis, SJAX, & Michael Turner types. Finding that I can still get a bundle in trade value for a proven 27 or 28 year old RB just as long as he still holds the promise/potential of RB1 production. There are some exceptions that I might consider riding into the ground, but they are few and far between...

 

[Sabertooth]

About picks and Charles and Chris Johnson: I don't have those guy but I wouldn't trade them even for 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. At least not at their current ages. I might think about it for a guy like ADP who is, i think, 26. But only for multiple, high first rounders. I like the certainy of knowing that I have a top 10 player. Rookies? I can't tell you how many times I have heard "can't miss stud," and the guy turned out to be more a turd than a stud. If you are rebuilding and you ONLY have one solid player, and the rest of the team sucks and can't compete, it might make sense to trade the stud veteran for multiple, high picks. Otherwise, keep the sure thing.

Don't mean to be a PITA, but Chris Johnson turns 26 next month, and is only 6 months younger than ADP. Once potentially chronic injuries start to surface, or they approach age 28, then I start getting a little nervous.

Foster, CJ2K, and MJD may be within your grasp sooner than you'ld think!In a league that requires starting 2RBs, I've made a living off stockpiling young talented RBs, getting a few seasons out of them, and then trading off the, Portis, SJAX, & Michael Turner types. Finding that I can still get a bundle in trade value for a proven 27 or 28 year old RB just as long as he still holds the promise/potential of RB1 production. There are some exceptions that I might consider riding into the ground, but they are few and far between...

I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[hitchcock]

Having a hard time separating the young TEs and some "older" guys in dynasty PPR.

Hernandez, Cook and Kendricks as the young guys, and Olsen, Keller and Marcedes. They all lump together in my mind, can't decide how to tier them.

 

[jevy]

Does anyone have a link or information about guys recovering from injuries like Williams and Leshoure and what the chances are of recovery? Which one of the two would be a better guy to target?

 

[ty247]

http://www.azcentral...ntSomers/138682

From Kent Somers:

A ruptured patellar tendon is such an unusual injury that a busy orthopedic surgeon might see only a handful of them in a year.

Cardinals running back Ryan Williams suffered one in his right knee on Friday night and is expected to undergo surgery early this week, coach Ken Whisenhunt said.

I was able to reach Dr. Daniel Kharrazi, orthopedic surgeon at the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic in Los Angeles, to briefly explain the surgery and the rehab timeframe Williams faces.

"The surgery itself is not very difficult," Dr. Kharrazi said. "You basically reconstruct the mechanism that allows you to extend your leg when you run. When the tendon ruptures, it gets a little frayed. You clean up the tendon, drill holes through the patella, or the kneecap, and reattach the tendon."

The hard part comes after surgery. The leg is immobilized in a brace for a month. After the tendon has healed, usually a total of six to eight weeks after surgery, then the patient can begin rehab, Dr. Kharrazi said.

"The No. 1 thing is, when you are in a brace for that long, you have a lot of quadricep atrophy. That's what takes two to three months."

So a patient is looking at "five to six months" between surgery and the time he can return to the level of his previous activity. If all goes well, Williams should be able to return to action in 2012 with no problem, Dr. Kharrazi said.

"I don't think he'll miss a beat," he said.

 

[Concept Coop]

Having a hard time separating the young TEs and some "older" guys in dynasty PPR. Hernandez, Cook and Kendricks as the young guys, and Olsen, Keller and Marcedes. They all lump together in my mind, can't decide how to tier them.

The first guy that sticks out to me is Hernandez. I like him more than the others you listed. I think his upside is the highest. Lewis has the most re-draft value and is only 27 - that transfers nicely to dynasty formats. I have been a big Keller fan, going back to college/combine numbers/highlights, but I am slowly tempering my "ceiling" expectations. Olsen can be a weapon if used properly, I believe. But I don't see a huge resurgence in Carolina. I am not comfortable with my opinion on Cook - I haven't paid much attention to him, honestly. But he is an athlete with upside. I love Kendricks, much the way I loved Keller. He is a physical, yet smooth TE that can look like a big WR at times. HernandezLewisKendricksKeller/OlsenCook

 

[DoubleG]

Having a hard time separating the young TEs and some "older" guys in dynasty PPR. Hernandez, Cook and Kendricks as the young guys, and Olsen, Keller and Marcedes. They all lump together in my mind, can't decide how to tier them.

The first guy that sticks out to me is Hernandez. I like him more than the others you listed. I think his upside is the highest. Lewis has the most re-draft value and is only 27 - that transfers nicely to dynasty formats. I have been a big Keller fan, going back to college/combine numbers/highlights, but I am slowly tempering my "ceiling" expectations. Olsen can be a weapon if used properly, I believe. But I don't see a huge resurgence in Carolina. I am not comfortable with my opinion on Cook - I haven't paid much attention to him, honestly. But he is an athlete with upside. I love Kendricks, much the way I loved Keller. He is a physical, yet smooth TE that can look like a big WR at times. HernandezLewisKendricksKeller/OlsenCook

I would bump Keller and Olsen up and drop Hernandez a notch or two (maybe 3). My issue/concern with Hernandez is Gronk. Gronk is the better blocker of the two (read: is on the field more) and is utilized as the primary "redzone TE target". Lewis just got paid - which also indicates his team values him (meaning, they will likely continue to use him the way they did last year).