Dynasty Rankings (1 Viewer)

[Ernol]

A speed back still can be a RB1 late. Tiki, Dunn, Westbrook, etc. Injury is the death knell not loss in speed. We're talking about careers ending at 30 not 35 - big difference. You don't have to be D. Green to be fast at 30. Old adage was speed backs lived forever because they could avoid getting crushed and could find 2nd life as passing down specialists. SJax's swansong is the exception not the rule.

SJax isn't an example of a slow back, anyway- he always had solid speed. Someone like Alfred Morris is a better example. If Spiller and Morris both lost a step, who do you think would still have an NFL job?

Depends on what you mean by a step, but I'd bet on Spiller that loses a step (he's got a few to burn) over a slow power back that gets even slower.

 

[thriftyrocker]

I'd have to grant you Dunn based on his listed height/weight, but he's always struck me as being stronger and more stout than his listed dimensions and he was more of a jitterbug than a pure speed back. Subjectively, Sproles reminds me more of Dunn than Spiller/Charles/Chris Johnson do.

Dunn is the Dr. J of speed backs. Broke the mold before people realized the mold could/would/should be broken. Dunn had sub-4.3 speed. He was a speed back in that he was an all pro caliber back with elite speed. He was too crazy thin to be a RB but he made it work for a long time. If you want to look back and think of great speed backs from the past like Dorsett and Dickerson (both sub-4.4 guys), there are plenty of guys with low BMI, elite speed, and long careers.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Marcus Allen was reed thin. His career turned out OK as far as longevity goes.

 

[Patoons]

Sometimes I have to remind myself that Spiller is 26 years old. He seems younger than that. He's my RB4 in dynasty, behind Martin, TRich, and McCoy (who's only 24).

If you're going to call Spiller 26 (8/87), you should consider McCoy 25 (7/88).

McCoy's age by perception definitely is a lot higher than most people acknowledge.

 

[lbouchard]

Sometimes I have to remind myself that Spiller is 26 years old. He seems younger than that. He's my RB4 in dynasty, behind Martin, TRich, and McCoy (who's only 24).

If you're going to call Spiller 26 (8/87), you should consider McCoy 25 (7/88). McCoy's age by perception definitely is a lot higher than most people acknowledge.

That's what I get for saying ages off the top of my head. You're right.

 

[Adam Harstad]

A speed back still can be a RB1 late. Tiki, Dunn, Westbrook, etc. Injury is the death knell not loss in speed. We're talking about careers ending at 30 not 35 - big difference. You don't have to be D. Green to be fast at 30.

Old adage was speed backs lived forever because they could avoid getting crushed and could find 2nd life as passing down specialists. SJax's swansong is the exception not the rule.

Westbrook and Barber wouldn't qualify as small backs based on BMI. I see Westbrook mentioned frequently as a small back, but he was almost the exact same size as Ray Rice. Short and small are two different things. 200 pounds is a high weight if you're only 5'8".

I'd have to grant you Dunn based on his listed height/weight, but he's always struck me as being stronger and more stout than his listed dimensions and he was more of a jitterbug than a pure speed back. Subjectively, Sproles reminds me more of Dunn than Spiller/Charles/Chris Johnson do.

I'd be curious to see someone look at 1000+ yard rushing seasons by a 30+ year old back in the past 10-15 years. I think Warrick Dunn would be the only representative for the sub 29 BMI crowd. On the other end you have Thomas Jones, Tiki Barber, Ricky Williams, Fred Taylor, Emmitt Smith, and Curtis Martin representing the more conventional body type. Eddie George, Willis McGahee and Corey Dillon also hit 1000+ in the season in which they turned 30, but never topped the mark again. Steven Jackson and Frank Gore will have a chance to do it this year.

What's striking looking at the numbers is how eerily consistent the dropoff age seems to be. 29-30 seems to be a pretty reliable expiration date for a RB regardless of his playing style. Even most of the great big backs faltered at that point. The best way to look at it is probably that anything you get from any RB beyond that point is a bonus. That's grim tidings for some guys like Peterson, Gore, Jackson, Chris Johnson, and MJD who are creeping up on the barrier.

There have been 43 1,000 yard seasons from a back aged 30 or older. Those 43 seasons came from 27 different RBs (about 1.6 each). Here's the complete list: Ricky Williams, Ricky Watters, Herschel Walker, Thurman Thomas, Fred Taylor, James Stuart, Lamar Smith, Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders, John Riggins, Walter Payton, Christian Okoye, Willis McGahee, Curtis Martin, Thomas Jones, John Henry Johnson, Priest Holmes, Garrison Hearts, Franco Harris, Eddie George, Warrick Dunn, Tony Dorsett, Corey Dillon, James Brooks, Rocky Bleier, Tiki Barber, Ottis Anderson, Mike Anderson.

Here's just the guys with more than one 1,000 yard season after their 30th birthday: Ricky Watters (2), Fred Taylor (2), Emmitt Smith (3), John Riggins (3), Walter Payton (3), Curtis Martin (2), Thomas Jones (2), John Henry Johnson (2), Warrick Dunn (2), Tony Dorsett (2), James Brooks (2), Tiki Barber (2)

It'll be up to you to calculate BMIs if you want them. I know offhand that a couple of those guys are going to qualify as small- Warrick Dunn, Tony Dorsett, James Brooks. John Henry Johnson might, just because he was so dang tall (6'2"). Brooks and Dunn (lol) both among the 20 RBs who have had a 1,000 yard season since 1990 (i.e. within your "10-15 year" range).

I do have to say that I think you're making the same mistake with this sample that you always make when talking about small backs. You point out that a only a very small percentage of the players who get 1,000 yards after age 30 are "small backs", but you don't provide any context for that. What's the percentage of backs who enter the league who are small backs? What's the percentage of backs who have a 1,000 yard season before age 30? If only 10% of the "1,000 yards over 30" crowd is under some arbitrary BMI baseline, it looks damning... but if only 10% of the RBs who enter the league, or 10% of the RBs with 1,000 yards before age 30 fall under that baseline, then in reality all that proves is that small backs are no more or no less likely to still be going at age 30 than any other back.

 

[Adam Harstad]

A speed back still can be a RB1 late. Tiki, Dunn, Westbrook, etc. Injury is the death knell not loss in speed. We're talking about careers ending at 30 not 35 - big difference. You don't have to be D. Green to be fast at 30. Old adage was speed backs lived forever because they could avoid getting crushed and could find 2nd life as passing down specialists. SJax's swansong is the exception not the rule.

SJax isn't an example of a slow back, anyway- he always had solid speed. Someone like Alfred Morris is a better example. If Spiller and Morris both lost a step, who do you think would still have an NFL job?

Depends on what you mean by a step, but I'd bet on Spiller that loses a step (he's got a few to burn) over a slow power back that gets even slower.

Completely agreed. That was the point I was getting at. It sounds bad to have a speed back who loses a step. It's much worse to have a slow back who loses a step. At least speedy backs have steps to lose.

 

[EBF]

I do have to say that I think you're making the same mistake with this sample that you always make when talking about small backs. You point out that a only a very small percentage of the players who get 1,000 yards after age 30 are "small backs", but you don't provide any context for that. What's the percentage of backs who enter the league who are small backs?

I looked into this a little more and some of the conclusions seem to support what I've been saying.

I went back and looked at all of the RBs picked in the first round between 1995-2004. I chose that range because it's fairly recent and most of the players in the sample are retired or irrelevant at this point. Only Steven Jackson and Willis McGahee have any real chance of additional production.

I used height/weight info to calculate the BMI for each player. I used precise measurements from NFL Draft Scout for the 1999-2005 numbers. I had to use less reliable measurements from football-reference for the other years because Draft Scout numbers aren't available for pre-1999 classes.

There were 30 backs picked in the first round between 1995-2004. The average BMI was 30.45. Five of the backs (16.7% of the overall population) had a BMI below 29:

Lawrence Phillips - 6' 212 (28.7)

John Avery - 5'9" 188 (27.8)

Napoleon Kaufman - 5'9" 185 (27.3)

Trung Canidate 5'10.5" 193 (27.3)

Warrick Dunn - 5'9" 180 (26.6)

I looked at all 30 backs in the overall sample and ranked them based on three main gauges of success: the # of 1,000+ yard seasons, the number of career touches (carries + receptions), and the peak volume season (the season in which the player had the most touches of his career). Here are the top 10 lists for each category:

MOST 1000+ YARD SEASONS

Steven Jackson (30.1) / 8

LaDainian Tomlinson (31.5) / 8

Jamal Lewis (32.9) / 7

Fred Taylor (30.9) / 7

Eddie George (29.4) / 7

Edgerrin James (29.3) / 7

Shaun Alexander (29.8) / 5

Thomas Jones (31.0) / 5

Ricky Williams (34.4) / 5

Warrick Dunn (26.6) / 5

Deuce McAllister (29.2) / 4

Willis McGahee (30.0) / 4

The average BMI for these players was 30.43. Basically identical to the average BMI of the entire group of backs. Warrick Dunn is the only small back to make the list.

MOST CAREER TOUCHES

LaDainian Tomlinson (31.5) 3798

Edgerrin James (29.3) 3461

Warrick Dunn (26.6) 3179

Thomas Jones (31.0) 2986

Eddie George (29.4) 2865

Fred Taylor (30.9) 2824

Steven Jackson (30.1) 2802

Ricky Williams (34.4) 2773

Jamal Lewis (32.9) 2763

Shaun Alexander (29.8) 2402

The average BMI for this group was 30.59. Higher than the overall average of 30.45 by a very slim margin. Once again, Dunn is the only small back to make the list.

TOP 10 VOLUME SEASONS

Larry Johnson (30.1) 457

Eddie George (29.4) 453

LaDainian Tomlinson (31.5) 451

Edgerrin James (29.3) 450

Ricky Williams (34.4) 442

Steven Jackson (30.1) 436

Deuce McAllister (29.2) 420

Jamal Lewis (32.9) 413

Fred Taylor (30.9) 393

Shaun Alexander (29.8) 385

The average BMI for this group was 30.76. Slightly higher than the overall population average of 30.45.

The high volume list shows a clear lack of small backs. You have to go down all the way to Napoleon Kaufman at #15 overall with 312 touches and Warrick Dunn at 16th overall with 309 touches to find an undersized RB. Their career bests are well below the career bests for the bigger backs. Kaufman only had two seasons of 200+ touches. Dunn had a whopping 9 seasons of 250+ touches, but never approached the staggering numbers of the best conventional backs. Tomlinson had 7 seasons of 350+ touches. Eddie George had 6. James had 6 and another with 348. Alexander had 5. Ricky Williams had 3. Steven Jackson has 3. Jamal Lewis had 2. Deuce had 2. Larry Johnson had 2.

So while BMI doesn't seem to have any significant effect on the expectation for a prospect's career 1000+ yard seasons or career workload, the numbers from this sample suggest that small backs are far less likely to have high volume seasons. Backs below the 29 BMI threshold accounted for a very small percentage of the high volume seasons yielded by this group of 30 players even though they represented almost 17% of the total population. If you set the cutoff at 350 touches, small backs account for 0% of the seasons. If you set the cutoff at 300 touches, small backs account for 4.5% (3 out of 67). You have to drop the cutoff down into Dunn's wheelhouse of 250-290 touches before small backs make any kind of a dent. Even then, they lag well behind the bigger backs.

So with very few exceptions, small backs don't have high volume seasons. That's a problem in FF because those high volume seasons are extremely valuable.

One way to look at the numbers is to balk at the sample size and say small backs are underrepresented because there simply haven't been enough of them to get the right results. There's probably some truth in that. There have been some small backs entering the league in the years since the 2004 cutoff and some of them have had success. Chris Johnson has been a groundbreaking player. He has two 350+ touch seasons despite a rail thin frame. Jahvid Best, Reggie Bush, CJ Spiller, and Darren McFadden haven't fared quite so well.

The biggest elephant in the room is Adrian Peterson, who's a small back if you go by the BMI numbers alone. Subjectively, I don't think anyone has ever cited a lack of size or power in his game. I also think there are some limitations to BMI as a gauge of size. I think overall height and weight play a role. For example, you can't convince me that Dion Lewis at 5'6.5" 193 (30.7 BMI) runs as hard as Steven Jackson at 6'1.4" 231 (30.1 BMI). My hunch is that a slightly thinner, taller back will run with equivalent power to a shorter back with a slightly higher BMI. I think that partially explains why taller and slightly thinner backs like Jackson, Peterson, and Forte are able to run with good power and handle a high volume of carries despite not scoring that high in the BMI scale.

Even if you allow Peterson in the sample, the absolute best of the objectively small backs (Peterson, Chris Johnson, Dunn) have not come close to the career bests of guys like Ricky, Edge, and Tomlinson in terms of maximum volume in a single season. I think it all points towards the conclusion that small backs can have good or even great careers, but if you're looking for someone who has 350-450 touch per season upside you're probably better off focusing on more conventional backs. Even good players like Jamaal Charles, CJ Spiller, and Reggie Bush lag behind equivalent big backs like Doug Martin, Ray Rice, and Arian Foster in terms of volume. The only way they can match their production is through a higher YPC.

If you went into this post thinking size doesn't matter at all then you probably aren't convinced otherwise, but I think there's some decent support for the idea that thinner backs (especially short and thin backs) are not as likely to yield the 350-450 touch seasons that are so crucial to getting difference-maker production at RB.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT
RB Ryan Mathews, SD
RB Montee Ball, DEN
RB Darren Sproles, NO
RB Mark Ingram, NO
RB Frank Gore, SF
RB Bernard Pierce, BAL
RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR
RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI
RB Chris Ivory, NYJ
RB Daryl Richardson, STL
RB Shane Vereen, NE
RB Ben Tate, HOU
RB Bryce Brown, PHI
RB Marcus Lattimore, SF
RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

 

[EBF]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Not a one of them.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Not a one of them.

I might take Pierce, but the others aren't in the ballpark for me.

 

[Ray Finkle]

Our old buddy F&L posted his top 30 on Twitter:

Here's the cheat sheet I would use if I was drafting Dynasty startup tonight:

1. Calvin

2. Rodgers

3. Luck

4. AJ Green

5. Julio

6. Dez

7. AP

8. T-Rich

9. Shady

10. Spiller

11. D.Martin

12. J.Graham

13. RG3

14. Demaryius

15. Fitz

16. R.Rice

17. Foster

18. Brees

19. Newton

20. Kaep

21. J.Charles

22. M.Ryan

23. D.Wilson

24. R.Wilson

25. Stafford

26. Gronk

27. Alf

28. Forte

29. Lynch

30. Lacy

Said Cobb would be next on the list.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Not a one of them.

what you wouldnt take Stewart? Color me shocked

Looks like this Michael Kid is the next over-hyped sensation

Monte ball and Leveon bell? Really you wouldnt trade Michael for them. I think you bumped your head

 

[BWill]

Our old buddy F&L posted his top 30 on Twitter:

Here's the cheat sheet I would use if I was drafting Dynasty startup tonight:

1. Calvin

2. Rodgers

3. Luck

4. AJ Green

5. Julio

6. Dez

7. AP

8. T-Rich

9. Shady

10. Spiller

11. D.Martin

12. J.Graham

13. RG3

14. Demaryius

15. Fitz

16. R.Rice

17. Foster

18. Brees

19. Newton

20. Kaep

21. J.Charles

22. M.Ryan

23. D.Wilson

24. R.Wilson

25. Stafford

26. Gronk

27. Alf

28. Forte

29. Lynch

30. Lacy

Said Cobb would be next on the list.

Trent should be the #1 player drafted in ALL Dynasty startups

 

[SayWhat?]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

 

[EBF]

Our old buddy F&L posted his top 30 on Twitter:

Here's the cheat sheet I would use if I was drafting Dynasty startup tonight:

1. Calvin

2. Rodgers

3. Luck

4. AJ Green

5. Julio

6. Dez

7. AP

8. T-Rich

9. Shady

10. Spiller

11. D.Martin

12. J.Graham

13. RG3

14. Demaryius

15. Fitz

16. R.Rice

17. Foster

18. Brees

19. Newton

20. Kaep

21. J.Charles

22. M.Ryan

23. D.Wilson

24. R.Wilson

25. Stafford

26. Gronk

27. Alf

28. Forte

29. Lynch

30. Lacy

Said Cobb would be next on the list.

Kind of a mixed bag for me. Definitely wouldn't take AP that high. He's a late 2nd-3rd rounder for me. Age 28. Riding on the crest of a career year. It's all downhill from here. People will throw out the "championship banners fly forever" mantra to justify overpaying for him, but there are other options like Cam, Graham, or Demaryius who also rank near the very top of their position and will probably sustain their value a bit better.

Demaryius = most underrated of the real elite NFL WRs at the moment. Guy is every bit the talent of Green/Julio/Dez. Possibly superior.

I'm not too crazy about most of the players ranked 20-30, but I didn't do any startups this year and thus don't really know who I'd be looking at in that range.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Our old buddy F&L posted his top 30 on Twitter:

Here's the cheat sheet I would use if I was drafting Dynasty startup tonight:

1. Calvin

2. Rodgers

3. Luck

4. AJ Green

5. Julio

6. Dez

7. AP

8. T-Rich

9. Shady

10. Spiller

11. D.Martin

12. J.Graham

13. RG3

14. Demaryius

15. Fitz

16. R.Rice

17. Foster

18. Brees

19. Newton

20. Kaep

21. J.Charles

22. M.Ryan

23. D.Wilson

24. R.Wilson

25. Stafford

26. Gronk

27. Alf

28. Forte

29. Lynch

30. Lacy

Said Cobb would be next on the list.

Trent should be the #1 player drafted in ALL Dynasty startups

why? RB shelf lives can be soooo short. Give me Megatron even at his age

 

[EBF]

what you wouldnt take Stewart? Color me shocked

Looks like this Michael Kid is the next over-hyped sensation

Monte ball and Leveon bell? Really you wouldnt trade Michael for them. I think you bumped your head

You seem to have more of a redraft win-now-at-all-costs outlook on everything. I'm sure you would've preferred Hillman and Pead over Pierce last year.

Talent wins out in the end. I'm lukewarm on Ball and downright pessimistic about Bell (even before the injury). With that being the case, give me the uber-talented backup over the mediocrities who lucked their way into short-term opportunity. I think Michael's career will be worth more when the dust settles.

 

[Casting Couch]

what you wouldnt take Stewart? Color me shocked

Looks like this Michael Kid is the next over-hyped sensation

Monte ball and Leveon bell? Really you wouldnt trade Michael for them. I think you bumped your head

You seem to have more of a redraft win-now-at-all-costs outlook on everything. I'm sure you would've preferred Hillman and Pead over Pierce last year.

Talent wins out in the end. I'm lukewarm on Ball and downright pessimistic about Bell (even before the injury). With that being the case, give me the uber-talented backup over the mediocrities who lucked their way into short-term opportunity. I think Michael's career will be worth more when the dust settles.

I'll take Michael over Ball & Bell 10 days a week, despite Michael's dismal showing last night.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

what you wouldnt take Stewart? Color me shocked

Looks like this Michael Kid is the next over-hyped sensation

Monte ball and Leveon bell? Really you wouldnt trade Michael for them. I think you bumped your head

You seem to have more of a redraft win-now-at-all-costs outlook on everything. I'm sure you would've preferred Hillman and Pead over Pierce last year.

Talent wins out in the end. I'm lukewarm on Ball and downright pessimistic about Bell (even before the injury). With that being the case, give me the uber-talented backup over the mediocrities who lucked their way into short-term opportunity. I think Michael's career will be worth more when the dust settles.

not at all, ask the MOX commish he called his leagues my ATM machines, before they imploded.

I do like to win though, cash is King IMO . While Michael might certainly be talented he has very talented competition around him. Turbin isnt chopped liver and Lycnh is still there.

I think this is a very bad over re-action to Michaels perceived talent rather than actual on the field chances of production.

I would take over half that list for him, maybe more. Dammit I wish i had him in a couple leagues to trade him to "pretty roster" type owners such as your self

 

[EBF]

I do like to win though, cash is King IMO . While Michael might certainly be talented he has very talented competition around him. Turbin isnt chopped liver and Lycnh is still there.

I think this is a very bad over re-action to Michaels perceived talent rather than actual on the field chances of production.

I would take over half that list for him, maybe more. Dammit I wish i had him in a couple leagues to trade him to "pretty roster" type owners such as your self

Michael is a better runner than Turbin. I think most Seahawks homers would back me up on that.

Talent gets a chance eventually. Look at Spiller, McCoy, Wilson, Miller, Sproles, Turner, Rice, Charles, MJD, and Ridley in recent years. With the possible exception of Spiller, none of those guys were drafted into spots where they were obviously going to walk into the starting role in year one. If you passed on them because you didn't have enough imagination to see the potential opportunity down the road, you would've missed out on a lot of value.

That's the thing about "pretty roster" players and flavors of the week. Some of them are actually every bit as good or even better than people anticipate.

 

[lyon812]

what you wouldnt take Stewart? Color me shocked

Looks like this Michael Kid is the next over-hyped sensation

Monte ball and Leveon bell? Really you wouldnt trade Michael for them. I think you bumped your head

You seem to have more of a redraft win-now-at-all-costs outlook on everything. I'm sure you would've preferred Hillman and Pead over Pierce last year.

Talent wins out in the end. I'm lukewarm on Ball and downright pessimistic about Bell (even before the injury). With that being the case, give me the uber-talented backup over the mediocrities who lucked their way into short-term opportunity. I think Michael's career will be worth more when the dust settles.

Tangentially, this sort of reminds me of a couple of years ago when people were valuing Daniel Thomas/Delone Carter highly as medium-talent/high-opportunity type backs...and we all know how that worked out.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I do like to win though, cash is King IMO . While Michael might certainly be talented he has very talented competition around him. Turbin isnt chopped liver and Lycnh is still there.

I think this is a very bad over re-action to Michaels perceived talent rather than actual on the field chances of production.

I would take over half that list for him, maybe more. Dammit I wish i had him in a couple leagues to trade him to "pretty roster" type owners such as your self

Michael is a better runner than Turbin. I think most Seahawks homers would back me up on that.

Talent gets a chance eventually. Look at Spiller, McCoy, Wilson, Miller, Sproles, Turner, Rice, Charles, MJD, and Ridley in recent years. With the possible exception of Spiller, none of those guys were drafted into spots where they were obviously going to walk into the starting role in year one. If you passed on them because you didn't have enough imagination to see the potential opportunity down the road, you would've missed out on a lot of value.

That's the thing about "pretty roster" players and flavors of the week. Some of them are actually every bit as good or even better than people anticipate.

Michael is CJ spiller and McCoy now?

Sheesh and for the record I have been in Spillers and Wiilson corner from the beginning. Check around if you want

I just dont see it with Michael and heck Carroll is just as likely to take another back next year.

If you want to lose value in trading for him (or not taking back more value for him now) be my guest

 

[EBF]

If you want to lose value in trading for him (or not taking back more value for him now) be my guest

His value is only going up. Like Wilson and Miller a year ago. The time to buy has probably come and gone, but you can still get him below what he's worth.

Buying him now doesn't even require that he eventually becomes a reliable starter. Only that he gets the opportunity. Because one thing we know with absolute certainty is that any moderately talented young RB who gets a shot to start will be highly coveted in dynasty leagues. Once again, I'd point to Miller and Wilson. Neither has proven much of anything at this level. Either one of them could be a huge flop. And yet right now you have the opportunity to trade them for almost anyone you want. I see the same thing happening with Michael. There will be a point in the not-so-distant future where he becomes a trendy player that everyone wants to buy.

Where we seem to disagree is mainly opportunity. You're taking the line that he's buried and may never get a chance, whereas I see it as a near certainty that he'll be given his shot within 1-3 years. For me, it's a "when" and not an "if." Whenever it happens, his value is going to rise. I think he's an ascending player and a great purchase at his current consensus dynasty ranking. The problem is that a lot of owners already know what they have and his actual sticker price is going to be higher than what you'd think looking at generic rankings where people like yourself who aren't invested in the player are going to stick him below guys like Ball, Ball, and Lacy because a generic 2nd rounder with opportunity is better than a generic 2nd rounder without opportunity.

 

[Donsmith753]

Yeah I'm not trading Michael for anyone on that list. Saw someone turn down Demarco Murray for him too. Which I'd also do,

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Yeah I'm not trading Michael for anyone on that list. Saw someone turn down Demarco Murray for him too. Which I'd also do,

you guys probably wont trade him for Alfred Morris either.

 

[Instinctive]

Color me amazed that I could trade Michael for Mathews. I'd take Mathews all day every day for the next 3 years, even with his crap OLine.

 

[Casting Couch]

Color me amazed that I could trade Michael for Mathews. I'd take Mathews all day every day for the next 3 years, even with his crap OLine.

Yepp.

 

[Adam Harstad]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Bell, Ball, Pierce, Tate. Maybe Brown. A couple others would be close, but I think those are the only 5 I'd say yes to.

 

[Adam Harstad]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

 

[joey]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Bell, Ball, Pierce, Tate. Maybe Brown. A couple others would be close, but I think those are the only 5 I'd say yes to.

agreed. In my 12 team, Keep 12 league where you can't hold on to many prospects, I'd throw Gore in the mix as well for a Win Now team, and *maybe* DRich.

 

[bigfow]

Great stash player for deep leagues. He's the type of player that keeps your team challenging every year.

 

[EBF]

Color me amazed that I could trade Michael for Mathews. I'd take Mathews all day every day for the next 3 years, even with his crap OLine.

I think Michael is a good example of a gap player. In other words, a player whose actual value is out of whack with his perceived value. There's a gap between what people think he's worth and what he's actually worth. I'm always on the lookout for guys like this because I think managing the gaps is a great way to build value on a dynasty roster.

Think about guys like Julio Jones and AJ Green. They're untouchable now, but there may have been a brief window where the people holding the 1.01-1.03 rookie picks in that draft weren't totally sold on them. That uncertainty cramped their perceived value in some cases and created a gap that someone with a more certain and precise understanding of their value could've exploited. While more uncertain owners were sitting on the fence thinking, 'Gee, I don't know...' true believers were paying high prices that look like a discount in hindsight.

The whole idea of the gap basically boils down to this: for every player who eventually becomes a star (even a super elite prospect) there is a window of time where the general public isn't completely sold. Sometimes it's a thin gap with players like Julio and Calvin who were highly-coveted all along. Other times it's a massive gap like with Brandon Marshall, Marques Colston, Wes Welker and other players who kinda came out of nowhere to become perennial FF starters. The general pattern is always the same though. Some people buy preemptively and others sit on the fence waiting for the prospect to prove it, which only ensures that they'll never be able to buy at anything less than a sky high price.

There's also a negative version of the gap: for every player who eventually becomes a bust or flop, there is a window of time where the general public isn't completely pessimistic. Everyone thinks Ron Dayne is crap now, but on the cusp of his rookie season you can bet that there were people lining up to add him to their dynasty rosters. Look at this current draft class. We know that 60-80% of the rookies drafted in the top 30 of rookie drafts will be garbage, but for every player going in that range right now there exists a certain population of the FF public that believes he's going to be successful. Someone in your league thinks Terrance Williams and LeVeon Bell are going to be good NFL players.

When you put these two things together, you get the ideal transaction, which I guess you could call a double gap. Trading a descending asset for an ascending asset. Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season. Trading Moss for Calvin would've been a perfect example of a double gap. Not only did you shift a player before his value tanked, but you also got a guy whose value rose dramatically after you acquired him. That is the kind of transaction that you dream of. A few of those moves and you can assemble a pretty insane dynasty roster.

As far as Christine Michael goes, I'm convinced that he's a positive gap player. He's a relatively high draft pick. He has freakish athletic tools. He has drawn consistent praise in practices. He has looked like a monster in preseason action. What else could you possibly hope for? The only thing keeping his FF value from skyrocketing is the lack of immediate opportunity/functional value. When that roadblock clears you will have a guy who's worth more than countless backs ranked ahead of him on generic dynasty rankings. I think many of the more proactive and forward-thinking owners have already realized this, and value him accordingly. Others are still playing catch up.

The quicker you get in line, the better the price you're going to get. After one big game, Cecil Shorts cost a nickel. After one big month, he cost a quarter. After one big season, he costs a dollar. After two big seasons, he'll cost a 5 spot. And so on...The longer you wait, the thinner the gap gets. That's why recognition/being an early adopter is such a critical skill for the dynasty owner. My biggest issue with generic dynasty rankings is that they're awful at this. They're always pumping the brake pedal, even when the situation calls for gas.

I think Michael is clearly a "full speed ahead" kind of guy. Naysayers will throw out names like Ben Tate and Jonathan Stewart. I'll answer that with LeSean McCoy, CJ Spiller, Frank Gore, Ray Rice, David Wilson, and Jamaal Charles. Remember when those guys weren't untouchable? That's Christine Michael right now.

 

[Steed]

Color me amazed that I could trade Michael for Mathews. I'd take Mathews all day every day for the next 3 years, even with his crap OLine.

Yepp.

Are we all talking about the same candyarse Mathews here?

 

[ZWK]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Maybe Mathews.

 

[Instinctive]

Color me amazed that I could trade Michael for Mathews. I'd take Mathews all day every day for the next 3 years, even with his crap OLine.

I think Michael is a good example of a gap player. In other words, a player whose actual value is out of whack with his perceived value. There's a gap between what people think he's worth and what he's actually worth. I'm always on the lookout for guys like this because I think managing the gaps is a great way to build value on a dynasty roster.

Think about guys like Julio Jones and AJ Green. They're untouchable now, but there may have been a brief window where the people holding the 1.01-1.03 rookie picks in that draft weren't totally sold on them. That uncertainty cramped their perceived value in some cases and created a gap that someone with a more certain and precise understanding of their value could've exploited. While more uncertain owners were sitting on the fence thinking, 'Gee, I don't know...' true believers were paying high prices that look like a discount in hindsight.

The whole idea of the gap basically boils down to this: for every player who eventually becomes a star (even a super elite prospect) there is a window of time where the general public isn't completely sold. Sometimes it's a thin gap with players like Julio and Calvin who were highly-coveted all along. Other times it's a massive gap like with Brandon Marshall, Marques Colston, Wes Welker and other players who kinda came out of nowhere to become perennial FF starters. The general pattern is always the same though. Some people buy preemptively and others sit on the fence waiting for the prospect to prove it, which only ensures that they'll never be able to buy at anything less than a sky high price.

There's also a negative version of the gap: for every player who eventually becomes a bust or flop, there is a window of time where the general public isn't completely pessimistic. Everyone thinks Ron Dayne is crap now, but on the cusp of his rookie season you can bet that there were people lining up to add him to their dynasty rosters. Look at this current draft class. We know that 60-80% of the rookies drafted in the top 30 of rookie drafts will be garbage, but for every player going in that range right now there exists a certain population of the FF public that believes he's going to be successful. Someone in your league thinks Terrance Williams and LeVeon Bell are going to be good NFL players.

When you put these two things together, you get the ideal transaction, which I guess you could call a double gap. Trading a descending asset for an ascending asset. Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season. Trading Moss for Calvin would've been a perfect example of a double gap. Not only did you shift a player before his value tanked, but you also got a guy whose value rose dramatically after you acquired him. That is the kind of transaction that you dream of. A few of those moves and you can assemble a pretty insane dynasty roster.

As far as Christine Michael goes, I'm convinced that he's a positive gap player. He's a relatively high draft pick. He has freakish athletic tools. He has drawn consistent praise in practices. He has looked like a monster in preseason action. What else could you possibly hope for? The only thing keeping his FF value from skyrocketing is the lack of immediate opportunity/functional value. When that roadblock clears you will have a guy who's worth more than countless backs ranked ahead of him on generic dynasty rankings. I think many of the more proactive and forward-thinking owners have already realized this, and value him accordingly. Others are still playing catch up.

The quicker you get in line, the better the price you're going to get. After one big game, Cecil Shorts cost a nickel. After one big month, he cost a quarter. After one big season, he costs a dollar. After two big seasons, he'll cost a 5 spot. And so on...The longer you wait, the thinner the gap gets. That's why recognition/being an early adopter is such a critical skill for the dynasty owner. My biggest issue with generic dynasty rankings is that they're awful at this. They're always pumping the brake pedal, even when the situation calls for gas.

I think Michael is clearly a "full speed ahead" kind of guy. Naysayers will throw out names like Ben Tate and Jonathan Stewart. I'll answer that with LeSean McCoy, CJ Spiller, Frank Gore, Ray Rice, David Wilson, and Jamaal Charles. Remember when those guys weren't untouchable? That's Christine Michael right now.

I'm ok with that.

I'd still rather have Mathews. In my opinion, he is far and away the single most underrated back in all of Fantasy at this moment. He is super talented, and people look at his situation and a terrible year last year and have a recency bias. Dude broke both collarbones - talk about unlucky! That OLine absolutely cannot get worse, Grantland's Bill Barnwell did a piece I can't find at the moment, but it was historically bad last year. Not just bad.

He has never played 3rd downs and still catches 3 passes a game. He's incredible. Want to talk about gaps? There are a LOT of guys I would trade for Mathews right now. One year and his value will be far higher than it is now as well.

Tl:dr - I'm commenting more that Mathews is way out of place on that list than saying Michael is too high. Mathews = criminally undervalued.

 

[thriftyrocker]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

 

[valhallan]

When you put these two things together, you get the ideal transaction, which I guess you could call a double gap. Trading a descending asset for an ascending asset. Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season. Trading Moss for Calvin would've been a perfect example of a double gap. Not only did you shift a player before his value tanked, but you also got a guy whose value rose dramatically after you acquired him. That is the kind of transaction that you dream of. A few of those moves and you can assemble a pretty insane dynasty roster.

I've seen a number of these over the years. One involved Maroney & a pick for Calvin, another involved Palmer for Brees, and another involved Selvin Young for Greg Jennings. My personal best was sending Tom Brady during his 50 TD season to a contender for rookie Marshawn Lynch (his value was high at the time) and bench-warmer Aaron Rodgers.

Big opportunities like that are hard to spot and sometimes even harder to take. You have to be willing to part with a guy at his peak and be confident it's the right move.

 

[Adam Harstad]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

Value in fantasy is a relative proposition. If everybody has an elite starting QB, then no one does

 

[EBF]

When you put these two things together, you get the ideal transaction, which I guess you could call a double gap. Trading a descending asset for an ascending asset. Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season. Trading Moss for Calvin would've been a perfect example of a double gap. Not only did you shift a player before his value tanked, but you also got a guy whose value rose dramatically after you acquired him. That is the kind of transaction that you dream of. A few of those moves and you can assemble a pretty insane dynasty roster.

I've seen a number of these over the years. One involved Maroney & a pick for Calvin, another involved Palmer for Brees, and another involved Selvin Young for Greg Jennings. My personal best was sending Tom Brady during his 50 TD season to a contender for rookie Marshawn Lynch (his value was high at the time) and bench-warmer Aaron Rodgers.

Big opportunities like that are hard to spot and sometimes even harder to take. You have to be willing to part with a guy at his peak and be confident it's the right move.

Yeah, I've had a few over the years. Some where I was on the good end and some where I was on the bad end.

In the only league I won last year, I would not have done so if I hadn't made preemptive overpays for Cecil Shorts and Demaryius Thomas as soon as they flashed. I think you have to keep an ear to the ground and pounce as soon as you get a sense that a player is primed for a value spike. The downside is that you're occasionally going to get stuck with a Jonathan Dwyer or a Jon Baldwin. Knowing when to push and when to pull is an art. I haven't mastered it, but it's something that I aim for.

There's no doubt that IF you can make the proper assessments, the inertia of the consensus is there to be exploited.

 

[duaneok66]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

Value in fantasy is a relative proposition. If everybody has an elite starting QB, then no one does

seriously - one of the best posts ever.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season.

Things have changed a lot since 2007. In fact you're underselling it and F&L had TO and Torry Holt above him in 2007. Deals like that are hard to make now. No one is taking Andre Johnson for an elite prospect. It makes it that much more important to guess right. If no one takes Moss for Mega anymore, the question becomes which producing young RB will you trade for Michael.

 

[thriftyrocker]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

Value in fantasy is a relative proposition. If everybody has an elite starting QB, then no one does

You are passing up a nonelite WR or sketchy RB to take a 2nd tier elite QB in Rd 3, but guess what's available for you in rounds 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 - even more nonelite WR and sketchy RBs. Look at the early 3rd in ADP and what do you see, Chris Johnson, Demarco Murray, Victor Cruz, Larry Fitzgerald, Roddy White. The number of elite QB may be high but the number of elite players overall is small.

 

[EBF]

Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season.

Things have changed a lot since 2007. In fact you're underselling it and F&L had TO and Torry Holt above him in 2007. Deals like that are hard to make now. No one is taking Andre Johnson for an elite prospect. It makes it that much more important to guess right. If no one takes Moss for Mega anymore, the question becomes which producing young RB will you trade for Michael.

I can kind of buy into the idea that people are a little more savvy about the value of elite youth/rookies than they used to be. I remember in my startups from 2004-2008, you could reliably get many of the first round rookies in rounds 5-8 (of 12 team leagues) and sometimes even later. Now it seems like someone always jumps at the opportunity earlier. And for a mega hyped guy like Crabtree or Green, you might need to spend a top 20-30 pick even in his rookie season.

That doesn't mean that people aren't still prone to overvaluing past production. Last time I checked, many of the FBG staff had Brandon Marshall rated ahead of Demaryius Thomas for dynasty. That is not indicative of the actual value that you'd see in a league (no DT owner will trade him for Marshall), but it does reflect a tendency towards putting an extremely high premium on proven production and track record. It's the same underlying phenomenon that had people taking Moss ahead of Calvin in 2007. The "well I know that guy is supposed to be a monster, but this guy has done it before and I want the points now" way of doing business. Right this second there are lots of people who would still take Peterson over Richardson and Martin.

It's not necessarily a horrible way to be. Guys like Fitz, Marshall, and VJax are rare. Most of these johnny-come-latelies will never hit that level. So in many ways it makes sense to take Marshall ahead of Patterson and Fitz ahead of Floyd, even though there's a lot more upside with the youth. As a general rule though, I think the average prognosticator is still slow and plodding to a point of fault. They wait, wait, and wait for young players to prove themselves, then move them up or down only when it's abundantly clear that they're a hit or a flop. That's a nice conservative approach, but it does nothing to serve an audience that's looking to seize buy low/sell high opportunities before those windows close.

Even with a super elite prospect like Julio Jones or AJ Green, there's still a gap. What round in startups did those guys go in before their rookie year? 2nd-3rd? A year later they were first round picks. This year you might see them in the top 5. So there's still a gap, even if it's slim. And that's without even mentioning guys like Jimmy Graham, Rob Gronkowski, Russell Wilson, Jamaal Charles, and Ray Rice who were never treated like future superstars until they became one, and thus provided a MASSIVE gap for people who got them for anywhere near market ADP prior to their rookie years.

The less we know about a player, the greater the uncertainty involved in gauging his value. That fogginess is always going to create gaps, both for players who are eventual stars and for top prospects who are eventual busts. None of the teams who are mega stacked in my dynasty leagues got that way by paying top dollar for established stars or using a conservative "wait and see" approach. Instead they went hard after guys like Spiller, Cruz, Green, Julio, Demaryius, Martin, and Richardson when they were relative unknowns, rookies, or even college players. That is the only way to do it because as soon as the secret is out, the player is on lockdown and you can't get him unless you pay through the nose or luck into an owner who fumbles him away.

 

[Adam Harstad]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

Value in fantasy is a relative proposition. If everybody has an elite starting QB, then no one does

You are passing up a nonelite WR or sketchy RB to take a 2nd tier elite QB in Rd 3, but guess what's available for you in rounds 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 - even more nonelite WR and sketchy RBs. Look at the early 3rd in ADP and what do you see, Chris Johnson, Demarco Murray, Victor Cruz, Larry Fitzgerald, Roddy White. The number of elite QB may be high but the number of elite players overall is small.

F&L has Colin Kaepernick, his 6th best QB, over Jamaal Charles, his 8th best RB. Is Jamaal Charles a sketchy RB? F&L has Matt Stafford over Rob Gronkowski and Randall Cobb. Are Gronkowski and Cobb nonelite?

The number of elite QBs cannot be high. The 8th best QB in the league, by the very definition of the word, cannot be an "elite" fantasy quarterback. He cannot be. He's getting outscored by two-thirds of the league. If you're starting the 8th best quarterback, you're operating at a large competitive disadvantage against more than half of the league. That's not an elite quarterback, that's a liability.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season.

Things have changed a lot since 2007. In fact you're underselling it and F&L had TO and Torry Holt above him in 2007. Deals like that are hard to make now. No one is taking Andre Johnson for an elite prospect. It makes it that much more important to guess right. If no one takes Moss for Mega anymore, the question becomes which producing young RB will you trade for Michael.

I can kind of buy into the idea that people are a little more savvy about the value of elite youth/rookies than they used to be. I remember in my startups from 2004-2008, you could reliably get many of the first round rookies in rounds 5-8 (of 12 team leagues) and sometimes even later. Now it seems like someone always jumps at the opportunity earlier. And for a mega hyped guy like Crabtree or Green, you might need to spend a top 20-30 pick even in his rookie season.

That doesn't mean that people aren't still prone to overvaluing past production. Last time I checked, many of the FBG staff had Brandon Marshall rated ahead of Demaryius Thomas for dynasty. That is not indicative of the actual value that you'd see in a league (no DT owner will trade him for Marshall), but it does reflect a tendency towards putting an extremely high premium on proven production and track record. It's the same underlying phenomenon that had people taking Moss ahead of Calvin in 2007. The "well I know that guy is supposed to be a monster, but this guy has done it before and I want the points now" way of doing business. Right this second there are lots of people who would still take Peterson over Richardson and Martin.

It's not necessarily a horrible way to be. Guys like Fitz, Marshall, and VJax are rare. Most of these johnny-come-latelies will never hit that level. So in many ways it makes sense to take Marshall ahead of Patterson and Fitz ahead of Floyd, even though there's a lot more upside with the youth. As a general rule though, I think the average prognosticator is still slow and plodding to a point of fault. They wait, wait, and wait for young players to prove themselves, then move them up or down only when it's abundantly clear that they're a hit or a flop. That's a nice conservative approach, but it does nothing to serve an audience that's looking to seize buy low/sell high opportunities before those windows close.

Even with a super elite prospect like Julio Jones or AJ Green, there's still a gap. What round in startups did those guys go in before their rookie year? 2nd-3rd? A year later they were first round picks. This year you might see them in the top 5. So there's still a gap, even if it's slim. And that's without even mentioning guys like Jimmy Graham, Rob Gronkowski, Russell Wilson, Jamaal Charles, and Ray Rice who were never treated like future superstars until they became one, and thus provided a MASSIVE gap for people who got them for anywhere near market ADP prior to their rookie years.

The less we know about a player, the greater the uncertainty involved in gauging his value. That fogginess is always going to create gaps, both for players who are eventual stars and for top prospects who are eventual busts. None of the teams who are mega stacked in my dynasty leagues got that way by paying top dollar for established stars or using a conservative "wait and see" approach. Instead they went hard after guys like Spiller, Cruz, Green, Julio, Demaryius, Martin, and Richardson when they were relative unknowns, rookies, or even college players. That is the only way to do it because as soon as the secret is out, the player is on lockdown and you can't get him unless you pay through the nose or luck into an owner who fumbles him away.

Ummm... this Demaryius Thomas owner would trade him for Brandon Marshall in a PPR league. That's why I have him ranked below Marshall in PPR. Marshall's only a year older than Calvin, the consensus #1 overall WR, and Marshall's as productive as Calvin in PPR. In his four years with Cutler, Marshall averages 18.71 points per game in PPR. Since his breakout second season, Calvin averages 18.95 points per game in PPR. Even Demaryius's best season last year falls short of Marshall's average, and I see Demaryius's numbers going down in the short term with the addition of Wes Welker and in the long term with the loss of Peyton Manning. Marshall's 3.75 years older than Demaryius, but he's going to have enough of a production advantage that I would prefer him in PPR dynasty. Non-PPR is a different story entirely.

I'd also disagree with your last paragraph. I built a powerhouse by paying top dollar for established players. I bought Fitzgerald after 2007 (when he had two top-5 finishes in the previous three years). I bought Ray Rice in 2011, coming off of back-to-back top-12 finishes. I Rob Gronkowski last offseason. I owned Demaryius Thomas and Miles Austin, traded them both away, and then payed a premium to get them back after they'd broken out. I bought high on Percy Harvin early this past season, before he got hurt. I did get Adrian Peterson and Jamaal Charles on the cheap back when they still carried an injury discount, and I drafted Cobb and Kaepernick late and held on to them while they developed, but I've got a monster core, and most of the pieces I did not draft or buy low on. I've had a lot of success buying high. If the guys you buy high are young enough, and you can get at least three stud seasons out of them, they always justify the cost. My focus, then, is on buying guys who are proven enough that I can feel confident I'll get those three stud seasons. Proven players come at a premium, but that premium exists because they're proven, and that has value. The difference between a guy with one huge season and two huge seasons is the difference between Larry Fitzgerald and Braylon Edwards, or Calvin Johnson and Roy Williams, or Arian Foster and Steve Slaton, or Matt Forte and LaMont Jordan. I'll gladly pay extra for someone who has proven it twice, just because it dramatically limits my exposure to downside risk.

 

[thriftyrocker]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

Value in fantasy is a relative proposition. If everybody has an elite starting QB, then no one does

You are passing up a nonelite WR or sketchy RB to take a 2nd tier elite QB in Rd 3, but guess what's available for you in rounds 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 - even more nonelite WR and sketchy RBs. Look at the early 3rd in ADP and what do you see, Chris Johnson, Demarco Murray, Victor Cruz, Larry Fitzgerald, Roddy White. The number of elite QB may be high but the number of elite players overall is small.

F&L has Colin Kaepernick, his 6th best QB, over Jamaal Charles, his 8th best RB. Is Jamaal Charles a sketchy RB? F&L has Matt Stafford over Rob Gronkowski and Randall Cobb. Are Gronkowski and Cobb nonelite?

The number of elite QBs cannot be high. The 8th best QB in the league, by the very definition of the word, cannot be an "elite" fantasy quarterback. He cannot be. He's getting outscored by two-thirds of the league. If you're starting the 8th best quarterback, you're operating at a large competitive disadvantage against more than half of the league. That's not an elite quarterback, that's a liability.

The RBs you'd need to add to this list to drop Kap out of the top 30 are sketchy. Having Luck 3rd or Kap over Charles is not the point I'm arguing. I'm arguing 7 of the 8 QBs listed belong in that list. Tell me you'd take Demarco Murray, DMC, or Ryan Mathews over Kap and we can go at it.

Luck, Kap and RWilson are elite dynasty QB even if they offer limited VBD short term. If you don't accept that, you are going against your own mantras of year Y+N being no less important than year Y.

If RWilson is QB8 this year, he is an appreciating asset and his career trajectory will provide more VBD than a majority of the RBs you'd have to move into the top 30 to move him out. And the EV gamble of picking your favorite sketchy RB is not worth it IMO.

 

[Biabreakable]

A once-great thread lies fallow. For the Christine Michael owners...

Which of these RBs would you accept in a straight exchange for Michael?

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB Ryan Mathews, SD

RB Montee Ball, DEN

RB Darren Sproles, NO

RB Mark Ingram, NO

RB Frank Gore, SF

RB Bernard Pierce, BAL

RB Jonathan Stewart, CAR

RB Rashard Mendenhall, ARI

RB Chris Ivory, NYJ

RB Daryl Richardson, STL

RB Shane Vereen, NE

RB Ben Tate, HOU

RB Bryce Brown, PHI

RB Marcus Lattimore, SF

RB Ahmad Bradshaw, IND

Not a one of them.

Looks like this Michael Kid is the next over-hyped sensation

Monte ball and Leveon bell? Really you wouldnt trade Michael for them. I think you bumped your head

What makes you say this?

Pre NFL draft many people including myself thought Michael was a more talented RB than Bell or Ball.

The Nfl draft showed they are not that far apart either. Bell was taken pick 48, Ball pick 58, Lacy pick 61 and Michael pick 62.

Lynch is the main thing that kept Michael from being ranked higher than these other guys early on. But after learning about Lynch facing possible suspension for DUI http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/05/still-no-trial-date-for-marshawn-lynch-dui-case/ being older and a possible future salary cap cut, as well as showing so well in pre-season, myself and I think others have come to realize that Michael was closer to starting than originally thought.

The knuckle-headedness might still be an issue. That is a concern that remains but there isn't much info on that (in regards to why Michael didn't play more and was benched for disciplinary reasons). That still bugs me a bit, because I'm guessing this is the main reason teams passed on him. When you watch him play I think it is quite obvious how talented he is.

 

[Adam Harstad]

With the amount of talent at the QB position these days, you're making a losing proposition to take any QB as high as he has them ranked. There's 8 in his top 30. I usually love what F&L does, but can't at all get on board with those QB's as high as they are.

The talent will thin out at the QB position in a couple years, once Brees, Brady, and Manning are moving out of the pool. Still, I agree that 8 in the top 30 is crazy. If I spend a top 30 pick, I want a difference maker. A guy by definition is not a "difference maker" if 2/3s of the league is also starting a difference maker at the same position. What, you're going to spend a 2nd round pick to ensure you have an advantage over a third of the league at that position?

If I spend a top 30 pick I want a player who will have strong value for a long time. Only QB that doesn't belong there is Stafford IMO.

Value in fantasy is a relative proposition. If everybody has an elite starting QB, then no one does

You are passing up a nonelite WR or sketchy RB to take a 2nd tier elite QB in Rd 3, but guess what's available for you in rounds 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 - even more nonelite WR and sketchy RBs. Look at the early 3rd in ADP and what do you see, Chris Johnson, Demarco Murray, Victor Cruz, Larry Fitzgerald, Roddy White. The number of elite QB may be high but the number of elite players overall is small.

F&L has Colin Kaepernick, his 6th best QB, over Jamaal Charles, his 8th best RB. Is Jamaal Charles a sketchy RB? F&L has Matt Stafford over Rob Gronkowski and Randall Cobb. Are Gronkowski and Cobb nonelite?

The number of elite QBs cannot be high. The 8th best QB in the league, by the very definition of the word, cannot be an "elite" fantasy quarterback. He cannot be. He's getting outscored by two-thirds of the league. If you're starting the 8th best quarterback, you're operating at a large competitive disadvantage against more than half of the league. That's not an elite quarterback, that's a liability.

The RBs you'd need to add to this list to drop Kap out of the top 30 are sketchy. Having Luck 3rd or Kap over Charles is not the point I'm arguing. I'm arguing 7 of the 8 QBs listed belong in that list. Tell me you'd take Demarco Murray, DMC, or Ryan Mathews over Kap and we can go at it.

Luck, Kap and RWilson are elite dynasty QB even if they offer limited VBD short term. If you don't accept that, you are going against your own mantras of year Y+N being no less important than year Y.

If RWilson is QB8 this year, he is an appreciating asset and his career trajectory will provide more VBD than a majority of the RBs you'd have to move into the top 30 to move him out. And the EV gamble of picking your favorite sketchy RB is not worth it IMO.

Russell Wilson may be an appreciating asset, but it doesn't matter if he doesn't appreciate faster than every other QB on that list, only one of whom is older than 30. I've got Kaep and Wilson as my QB6 and QB7 at 43rd and 44th overall. I'm not ready to enshrine either in the Hall of Fame. The truth is, they both have a half-season of elite play, and that's it. With a half season of elite play, you may very well still be a mirage. Billy Volek and Tyler Thigpen were once elite for half a season, too.

Besides, Brady, Romo, and Manning are going to age out of the pool before too long (2 years? 3? 5?), but Rodgers, Brees, Luck, Griffin, and Newton aren't going anywhere. Neither are Stafford and Ryan. And this assumes that Dalton, Freeman, Flacco, or Tannehill don't step up, or a guy like Teddy Bridgewater doesn't come in and take the league by storm, too. Wilson and Kaepernick are competing with a murderer's row of QBs just to be above-average for the next 3 years, and the competition barely eases after that. I would not bet on either putting up a half-dozen top-5 finishes, and that's really what it takes at QB to justify a top-30 selection.

Yeah, some of the RBs I'm going to take ahead of those guys will be a lot less talented, and a lot more likely to bust. That's okay, because the baseline is much, much lower at RB, because the position is inherently more value and carries more trade value, and because the upside is much higher.

I just don't see any value whatsoever at taking the 6th QB off the board in the 2nd round, or the 8th QB off the board in the 3rd. I'd rather grab Romo in the 8th or 9th, score just as many points over the next 3 or 4 seasons, and then get another fill-in on the cheap (Rodgers will probably be getting cheaper at about that point...)

Again, it's not like so many of the guys ranked ahead of Wilson are so old that you can expect him to move up in the pecking order any time soon.

 

[humpback]

When you put these two things together, you get the ideal transaction, which I guess you could call a double gap. Trading a descending asset for an ascending asset. Hard as it might be to believe right now, Randy Moss was widely ranked ahead of Calvin Johnson in dynasty drafts after the 2007 season. Trading Moss for Calvin would've been a perfect example of a double gap. Not only did you shift a player before his value tanked, but you also got a guy whose value rose dramatically after you acquired him. That is the kind of transaction that you dream of. A few of those moves and you can assemble a pretty insane dynasty roster.

I've seen a number of these over the years. One involved Maroney & a pick for Calvin, another involved Palmer for Brees, and another involved Selvin Young for Greg Jennings. My personal best was sending Tom Brady during his 50 TD season to a contender for rookie Marshawn Lynch (his value was high at the time) and bench-warmer Aaron Rodgers.

Big opportunities like that are hard to spot and sometimes even harder to take. You have to be willing to part with a guy at his peak and be confident it's the right move.

Yeah, I've had a few over the years. Some where I was on the good end and some where I was on the bad end.

In the only league I won last year, I would not have done so if I hadn't made preemptive overpays for Cecil Shorts and Demaryius Thomas as soon as they flashed. I think you have to keep an ear to the ground and pounce as soon as you get a sense that a player is primed for a value spike. The downside is that you're occasionally going to get stuck with a Jonathan Dwyer or a Jon Baldwin. Knowing when to push and when to pull is an art. I haven't mastered it, but it's something that I aim for.

There's no doubt that IF you can make the proper assessments, the inertia of the consensus is there to be exploited.

No offense, but this isn't exactly eye opening stuff. If you do a good job predicting the future, you'll do well in FF.