'qimqam said:
Sorry to bring this up but I will never forget your Ron Dayne campaign ... so based on your track record with Denver RBs I am now very high on Knowshon.
Bring it up all you want. The front office said Dayne was the starter. I said that the starter in Denver is a fantasy stud, so if Dayne is the starter, then Dayne will be a fantasy stud. Obviously that one didn't play out the way I expected it to, but if Dayne *HAD* remained the starter, I still think he would have produced great fantasy stats (just look at what he did with the starting job in Houston back when Houston was a weaker running team than Denver). Oh well- if you take some big swings, you're going to see your share of embarrassing whiffs. The question is whether you'll hit enough home runs to compensate for your strikeouts.Of course, if you want to talk about my
track record with Denver RBs, you have to discuss my entire history of predictions on the subject, not just the one prediction that blew up in my face. As I remember it, I have made three bold calls regarding the Denver backfield. The first was to declare that Tatum Bell would never be anything more than a CoP back... back when many experts were advocating drafting him in the first two rounds (he was actually on the cover of one national fantasy magazine). The second was to say that Mike Anderson was going to win the starting RB job in 2005 and, moreover, that he would be a top 10 fantasy back... back when his ADP was in the 18th round. The third was that Ron Dayne would win the starting job in 2006 and would likewise be a top 10 fantasy back. Yeah, that third pick was a real stinker- Dayne didn't even wind up making the team- but the first two were right on the money. I said a preseason top-10 guy would be a complete afterthought, I said a preseason afterthought would be a top-10 guy, and I said a second preseason afterthought would also be a top-10 guy... and I was right on 66% of those calls. I'll take that track record to the bank and deposit it all day long.
If you want to talk about my track record, perhaps you should start with
this thread.
Over 16 games Knowshon's stats last year project to over
1400 yds and 10tds ... that includes the last 3 games which he averaged 6 touches per game.
970 yds rushing & 6 tds
457 yds receiving & 4 tds
The first 10 games of last season (minus the last 3 games which he barely played) project to
1700 yds & 13 tds over 16 games
1142 yds rushing & 8 tds
556 yds receiving & 5 tds
Where would that rank him in FF 2010? Just ahead of AP and 2nd only to Foster
'qimqam said:
DVOA ??? Holy crap I am having flashbacks ... Wasn't that the crazy stat you came up with that made Ron Dayne look like the best RB in the NFL
I didn't "come up with" DVOA, and it's not a crazy stat. It was developed by a group called Football Outsiders, and it later became so big that FO currently has a contract with ESPN. It measures a player's effectiveness compared to league average, adjusted for down, distance, situation, and quality of opposition. It's not the be-all, end-all to player evaluation (it makes no effort to tease player performance out from supporting cast), but it's a pretty good measure of how effective a player is in his specific role. Moreover, some people happen to like the advanced stats, so I provided it in addition to several other standard stats in order to reinforce a point that was already strong enough to stand on its own two feet. You can pick whatever metric you like- whether it's a standard one like YPC or an advanced one like DVOA- and they all show CBuck outperforming Moreno by a substantial margin.
'Shutout said:
-I see a lot of "stats" and numbers tossed around and direct conclusions made from them but I've watched these games in Denver the past few years and, to be simple about it, I just say the whole story isn't there in the stats. There was so much going on and maybe best described as McDaniels was trying to put circles in square holes when it came to the running game. It was just a total mismatch of skills with philosophies.
What? Knowshon Moreno was the very first draft pick Josh McDaniels ever made. He drafted Moreno very high despite having gaping holes on defense. Moreno was the player he hand-picked to run his very, very specific offensive vision. Moreno's skills were about as good of a match for McDaniels' scheme as they possibly could be. The problem wasn't that Moreno was a square peg in Josh McDaniels' "round hole offense", the problem is that Moreno's skills might have been sufficient qualitatively, but they were insufficient quantitatively. In other words, he had the correct skills, but an insufficient amount of them. Translation: he just wasn't as good as McDaniels thought he was.If anything, Fox's offense is more of a mismatch for Moreno's particular skills than McDaniels' was. Moreno lacks the power that Fox loves, while Fox has never been too keen on using his RBs in the passing game (which was a big reason why Moreno was drafted so high). Regardless, I think the shape of Moreno's skills is pretty universal- I think he'd be equally good in any offense. Or equally bad in any system, if you'd rather.
I have been saying that Moreno is getting over looked by many and is really taking an ### kicking on these boards.He is a young all purpose RB that is not in the elite tier but he has the chance to be a very solid RB going forward in the NFL and fantasy football.Way to many people have hate for a guy who has not been as bad as people make him out to be.
I like both guys this year, but McGahee a little more given his ADP. For example, I got McGahee @ pick 9.11 in a 12 team redraft. It was probably about 12 picks too soon, but I still feel like I got good value. Moreno went 3 rds earlier.
ssshhhhhh!
