The Upside of Danger (1 Viewer)

[Lambert]

Great article by Colin Dowling about going for high risk / high reward players over other safer picks of equal value ... I won't get into subscriber content here by talking about Colin's specific player picks, but who are YOUR picks for high risk / high reward players that you are considering targeting in your draft?

Here are a couple of mine:

Travis Henry - even before his knee injury in the most recent preseason game, he's one of those guys who is valued around the same level as a Rudi Johnson (for non-PPR leagues). Rudi is clearly the safer pick -- minimal injury risk, solid consistent performer -- pretty unlikely he will finish much higher OR LOWER than his projections. Travis Henry on the other hand is a big injury risk (as recently demonstrated), but has a running style well-suited to the Denver offense and has the clear potential imho to finish top-3 for RBs.

Calvin Johnson - Anytime you go with a rookie WR, the "high risk" side goes without saying, but high reward? The guy has size, speed, and tremendous skills, and is playing in the Martz offense with Kitna, who will likely be throwing a lot again this season. There are a lot of other safer WRs in the 40s or 50s with equal value, but Johnson has the potential to be this year's Marques Colston.

What dangerous players are you targeting and why?

 

[bentley]

I disagree with Henry being "dangerous" at all. He's recognized as a top 10 back from most sources.

LaMont Jordan was my gamble. He was a huge commodity before last year. Even though the Raiders were dreadful in the OL, there's some talent there that could click. If Jordan can get it going, he should be in good shape to hang onto his job when Rhodes comes back. I think he's got RB2 potential.

 

[RalphMouth]

Kitna- if he didn't throw so many darn interceptions he would be drafted a few rounds higher. Should break 4000 yds passing easy w/25+ TD's.

C Benson- the starting job is his (no RBBC), gets a great O-line to run behind, will be playing against easy run defenses, Chicago defense will put

him in great field position-

S Moss- I think he could overtake Hines Ward as the Steelers #1 WR

Bo Scaife- playing for a lousy offense but Vince Young will rely on a safety valve as I bet WR's will find getting open difficult.

Young has already 'targeted' Scaife several times in the pre-season. He's not being drafted in most mocks but

will probably end the year top 6 tight end.

 

[Lambert]

I disagree with Henry being "dangerous" at all. He's recognized as a top 10 back from most sources.

I agree with you that Henry is recognized as a top 10 back generally, but I think you may be missing my point somewhat. Back "A" may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts may think he is high risk/high reward -- i.e., while A's "expected" value is 9th, he could easily finish #2 or #22. Back "B" on the other hand, may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts would be very surprised to see him finish more than two or three spots higher or lower than this ranking -- thus a "safer" pick.

 

[bentley]

I disagree with Henry being "dangerous" at all. He's recognized as a top 10 back from most sources.LaMont Jordan was my gamble. He was a huge commodity before last year. Even though the Raiders were dreadful in the OL, there's some talent there that could click. If Jordan can get it going, he should be in good shape to hang onto his job when Rhodes comes back. I think he's got RB2 potential.

I agree with you that Henry is recognized as a top 10 back generally, but I think you may be missing my point somewhat. Back "A" may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts may think he is high risk/high reward -- i.e., while A's "expected" value is 9th, he could easily finish #2 or #22. Back "B" on the other hand, may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts would be very surprised to see him finish more than two or three spots higher or lower than this ranking -- thus a "safer" pick.

Maybe I was missing the point of your original post. Does this mean that you'd make Henry one of the first five backs off the board? My impression of the article was that if a guy is projected at RB9 and you draft him at RB9, you're not taking a risk. However, you would be if you're rolling the dice and picking him in the top five.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Kitna- if he didn't throw so many darn interceptions he would be drafted a few rounds higher. Should break 4000 yds passing easy w/25+ TD's.

C Benson- the starting job is his (no RBBC), gets a great O-line to run behind, will be playing against easy run defenses, Chicago defense will put

him in great field position-

S Moss- I think he could overtake Hines Ward as the Steelers #1 WR

Bo Scaife- playing for a lousy offense but Vince Young will rely on a safety valve as I bet WR's will find getting open difficult.

Young has already 'targeted' Scaife several times in the pre-season. He's not being drafted in most mocks but

will probably end the year top 6 tight end.

that's quite a limb you're going out on there.

 

[gman8343]

Portis.

 

[Lambert]

I disagree with Henry being "dangerous" at all. He's recognized as a top 10 back from most sources.LaMont Jordan was my gamble. He was a huge commodity before last year. Even though the Raiders were dreadful in the OL, there's some talent there that could click. If Jordan can get it going, he should be in good shape to hang onto his job when Rhodes comes back. I think he's got RB2 potential.

I agree with you that Henry is recognized as a top 10 back generally, but I think you may be missing my point somewhat. Back "A" may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts may think he is high risk/high reward -- i.e., while A's "expected" value is 9th, he could easily finish #2 or #22. Back "B" on the other hand, may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts would be very surprised to see him finish more than two or three spots higher or lower than this ranking -- thus a "safer" pick.

Maybe I was missing the point of your original post. Does this mean that you'd make Henry one of the first five backs off the board? My impression of the article was that if a guy is projected at RB9 and you draft him at RB9, you're not taking a risk. However, you would be if you're rolling the dice and picking him in the top five.

I'm not talking about taking my RB9 guy at the fifth pick. What I was getting at is that if you have TWO RBs both roughly projected at the same level -- let's say both at approximately RB9, you might go with the guy who has higher risk/reward that could finish #2 even though he could also end up #22 ... instead of the "safer pick whose likely finish is hypothetically no higher than 7th but no lower than 11th. Sorry if I didn't explain myself better earlier.

 

[bentley]

I disagree with Henry being "dangerous" at all. He's recognized as a top 10 back from most sources.LaMont Jordan was my gamble. He was a huge commodity before last year. Even though the Raiders were dreadful in the OL, there's some talent there that could click. If Jordan can get it going, he should be in good shape to hang onto his job when Rhodes comes back. I think he's got RB2 potential.

I agree with you that Henry is recognized as a top 10 back generally, but I think you may be missing my point somewhat. Back "A" may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts may think he is high risk/high reward -- i.e., while A's "expected" value is 9th, he could easily finish #2 or #22. Back "B" on the other hand, may be ranked roughly 9th overall, but experts would be very surprised to see him finish more than two or three spots higher or lower than this ranking -- thus a "safer" pick.

Maybe I was missing the point of your original post. Does this mean that you'd make Henry one of the first five backs off the board? My impression of the article was that if a guy is projected at RB9 and you draft him at RB9, you're not taking a risk. However, you would be if you're rolling the dice and picking him in the top five.

I'm not talking about taking my RB9 guy at the fifth pick. What I was getting at is that if you have TWO RBs both roughly projected at the same level -- let's say both at approximately RB9, you might go with the guy who has higher risk/reward that could finish #2 even though he could also end up #22 ... instead of the "safer pick whose likely finish is hypothetically no higher than 7th but no lower than 11th. Sorry if I didn't explain myself better earlier.

It's OK. I went to public school in Texas, so sometimes you have to explain things slowly to me.

 

[barndog]

Bobby Wade, and to a lesser extent Troy Williamson

Chester Taylor (lots of Vikes, it seems)

Kevin Jones

I've been getting his WR choice late in every draft. Gotta love WR1s in the 15th rd or later.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Thanks for the props. I'll be checking in tomorrow with some of my own suggestoins that aren't in the article. Glad you enjoyed it.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Raiders. Period.

Porter is good for #3 or outstanding #4 WR. Curry could match Porter's #s. Zach Miller will be a good TE prospect for dynasty and much better when he learns to run block. Jordan looked great last nite to me, but Rhodes should cut into his carries quite a bit. Still could be a flex starter for you. Since most everyone is avoiding these guys like the plague, you can probably get them for good value. FWIW, I got Porter in the 2nd round of my keep 14 league rookie draft. After J.Hill, S.Rice, T.Hunt, etc.

 

[tamales]

Maybe I am missing the point of this thread but where is the danger in drafting Bo Scaife, "S Moss" AKA Santonio Holmes, Troy Williamson, or Bobby Wade late?

 

[Colin Dowling]

Maybe I am missing the point of this thread but where is the danger in drafting Bo Scaife, "S Moss" AKA Santonio Holmes, Troy Williamson, or Bobby Wade late?

The more extended idea is that some players shouldn't be waited for because the upside is just too great to let them end up on someone else's team. For example (as it's the best one I have), I reached for Clinton Portis by 2 or 3 rounds in every league I was in when he was a rookie. Could I have gotten him later? Maybe, probably. But I thought his blow-upability was so good that if I'd waited to round 6 or 7 and NOT gotten him, I would have been pretty disappointed in myself. For the guys mentioned in the article, Benson is a similar example. His ADP has him in the mid-late 20's. In every draft I am in - excluding the recent Survivor staff draft where I tried to get too cute with the #2 pick - I will be selecting Benson in round 2, regardless of whether that is pick 13 or pick 24.

 

[Jeff Haseley]

Great article and good post.

Here's my list of 3.

1. Eric Moulds - 75.3 recs/year average in his last 3 years. I think Vince Young is going to go his way often, especially because Moulds is a great over the middle receiver and Tennessee has plenty of plays designed for just that.

2. David Boston - The epitome of high risk, high reward. Boston is only 29 years old and he is having a great camp. Tampa Bay has no clear cut WR2 at all. In fact, that role may go to Boston. If you like to gamble, Boston is a great late-round pick.

3. Kevin Jones - If Kevin Jones can play week 1 (which is unclear at this point) he's an absolute steal. He had 9 games of 5 receptions or more last year, which is tops among all RBs (tied with Reggie Bush & Steven Jackson). Martz's offense has always featured plenty of receiving opportunities for RBs. If Jones is healthy, he'll be the main back in that offense, IMO. I don't think we'll see a RBBC. Not to mention, Jones is a great pick in the middle to late rounds, depending on his health, for those in keeper leagues that keep players based on what round they are picked.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Boston was in the article and then I cut him out. As recently as two seasons ago, I had him ranked in the top-10 of WRs based on the fact that he is SO talented that if he could just get his head on straight, get on a team with a decent QB, and get the roids out of his body, he could be an great grab on draft day.

 

[Fighting Noles]

I really like Portis as a "danger" pick this year & Kevin Jones in a PPR format could reap real benefits for where he has fallen to lately IMO...Crumpler is going after Dallas Clark & Heath Miller "types" in some of my recent drafts & I think he could be good there as well.

 

[Gr00vus]

For the guys mentioned in the article, Benson is a similar example. His ADP has him in the mid-late 20's.

This guy keeps landing right up there in round two in the DD after I do my projections - I think his position is the most surprising to me. In the 2nd round I'd take Jones-Drew over him, and at this point it'd be a toss up between him an Portis. Has Benson's ADP been creeping up lately?ETA: You're a clown for turning your back on Moe Dowling!

 

[fantasyplayer]

Boston was in the article and then I cut him out. As recently as two seasons ago, I had him ranked in the top-10 of WRs based on the fact that he is SO talented that if he could just get his head on straight, get on a team with a decent QB, and get the roids out of his body, he could be an great grab on draft day.

What is the name of the article? I can't find it...

 

[Lambert]

Boston was in the article and then I cut him out. As recently as two seasons ago, I had him ranked in the top-10 of WRs based on the fact that he is SO talented that if he could just get his head on straight, get on a team with a decent QB, and get the roids out of his body, he could be an great grab on draft day.

What is the name of the article? I can't find it...

The name of the article is Upside of Danger.

 

[crimsonrebel]

Does TO count? You have to grab him in the second, but he could very well be the best reciever in the league or get thrown off the team. i also see Caddy as one. He could be a bum, or a borderline #2 rb if the Bucs O improves.

 

[Nigel Tufnel]

Bo Scaife- playing for a lousy offense but Vince Young will rely on a safety valve as I bet WR's will find getting open difficult. Young has already 'targeted' Scaife several times in the pre-season. He's not being drafted in most mocks but will probably end the year top 6 tight end.

It's possible he's high reward, but there's little to no risk here.

 

[Jeff Haseley]

Boston was in the article and then I cut him out. As recently as two seasons ago, I had him ranked in the top-10 of WRs based on the fact that he is SO talented that if he could just get his head on straight, get on a team with a decent QB, and get the roids out of his body, he could be an great grab on draft day.

What is the name of the article? I can't find it...

The name of the article is Upside of Danger.

It's not on the article page yet, but it is on the home page if you click there.

 

[Brewzers]

This is easily Vince Young for me. His potential is a top 5 FF QB this year, yet he will be available with the likes of Romo, Hasselbeck, Rivers and Big Ben (around QB 10). If he plays to his potential, VY is a much more dominating FF player than any of the other 4 mentioned.

 

[benbadman]

Thanks for the props. I'll be checking in tomorrow with some of my own suggestoins that aren't in the article. Glad you enjoyed it.

Two WRs that fit the mold of your article come to mind for me, and they both happen to have the same surname:WR16 Randy Moss -- I actually do NOT like Smoothie King this year. Still I realize he does have like a 25% chance of posting 12 TDs if he stays healthy the whole season. If Randy Moss puts up yards & TDs like he did in Minnesota he's easily a top7 WR.WR20 Santana Moss -- Colin, you wrote about his QB being a potential breakthrough player (maybe a top8-12 QB pts season?), well if Campbell is going to go off this year, it follows that someone has to catch those passes. And it suren't wont be Brandon Lloyd LOL-- Ok so Santana Moss, as far as I'm concerned, is still a solid WR2 in fantasy and a steal as a WR3 (especially in a start 2 WR league). Seeing Santana in the bottom of the top 8-10 fantasy WR wouldn't really surprise me this year.

 

[BGP]

Great article by Colin Dowling about going for high risk / high reward players over other safer picks of equal value

Ok, I'm going to try to wrap my mind around this, since I can't see the article. + "Of equal value". So we are starting from the premise that the two players being discussed have equal value when everything is added up. I don't know -- there can't be very many of those types, are there?+ given two players of equal value, should one select a high-risk / high-reward type of person or a safer pick?Well you can apply dungeons and dragons principles here. (Yah I know some will scoff that the thought but its true, you are playing DnD when you venture onto this topic).Givens:the Gleaming Steel Broadsword: 8d1 damagethe Two-Handed Death Axe: 1d16 damageNow, what does 8d1 and 1d16 mean? 8d1 means "roll a 1-sided die 8 times". 1d16 means "roll a 16-sided die 1 time". Both have "equal value" in that the average damage is 8. The Axe offers a lower min and a higher max. So which is better? Gamers decided long ago that you must always select the 8d1 Broadsword here, because the average damage is the same and you can remove the "random chance" factor. With the Broadsword, you ALWAYS swing for 8 damage. Guaranteed. You want reliability and consistency when all things are equal, so that you can plan ahead. You can enter a fight and know it will take you x swings to kill the monster.So given two players of equal value, avoid high-risk/high-reward players. Always.In fantasy football terms, the reliable player is someone whom you can count on for x production, which allows you to plan ahead and build your team around that given, which is a good thing.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Daunte Culpepper. He's like a lottery ticket. If he doesn't work out then no big deal. But if he does then you get paid. You get paid.

 

[SigEp316]

Brandon Jacobs...has potential to be huge this year, but there are still a lot of question marks on the kid and many don't think he's ready for the load. Then there's the Droughn's factor

 

[az_prof]

Great article by Colin Dowling about going for high risk / high reward players over other safer picks of equal value

Ok, I'm going to try to wrap my mind around this, since I can't see the article. + "Of equal value". So we are starting from the premise that the two players being discussed have equal value when everything is added up. I don't know -- there can't be very many of those types, are there?+ given two players of equal value, should one select a high-risk / high-reward type of person or a safer pick?Well you can apply dungeons and dragons principles here. (Yah I know some will scoff that the thought but its true, you are playing DnD when you venture onto this topic).Givens:the Gleaming Steel Broadsword: 8d1 damagethe Two-Handed Death Axe: 1d16 damageNow, what does 8d1 and 1d16 mean? 8d1 means "roll a 1-sided die 8 times". 1d16 means "roll a 16-sided die 1 time". Both have "equal value" in that the average damage is 8. The Axe offers a lower min and a higher max. So which is better? Gamers decided long ago that you must always select the 8d1 Broadsword here, because the average damage is the same and you can remove the "random chance" factor. With the Broadsword, you ALWAYS swing for 8 damage. Guaranteed. You want reliability and consistency when all things are equal, so that you can plan ahead. You can enter a fight and know it will take you x swings to kill the monster.So given two players of equal value, avoid high-risk/high-reward players. Always.In fantasy football terms, the reliable player is someone whom you can count on for x production, which allows you to plan ahead and build your team around that given, which is a good thing.

In my experience, reliability will get you into the playoffs, but won't win you many championships. To win the championship you have to take some risks on high reward/high risk players.

 

[whodeywhodey]

This is easily Vince Young for me. His potential is a top 5 FF QB this year, yet he will be available with the likes of Romo, Hasselbeck, Rivers and Big Ben (around QB 10). If he plays to his potential, VY is a much more dominating FF player than any of the other 4 mentioned.

Yuck. If he had any weapons at all on that offense I would agree. But no way I take him before Romo.

 

[Lambert]

Great article by Colin Dowling about going for high risk / high reward players over other safer picks of equal value

Ok, I'm going to try to wrap my mind around this, since I can't see the article. + "Of equal value". So we are starting from the premise that the two players being discussed have equal value when everything is added up. I don't know -- there can't be very many of those types, are there?+ given two players of equal value, should one select a high-risk / high-reward type of person or a safer pick?Well you can apply dungeons and dragons principles here. (Yah I know some will scoff that the thought but its true, you are playing DnD when you venture onto this topic).Givens:the Gleaming Steel Broadsword: 8d1 damagethe Two-Handed Death Axe: 1d16 damageNow, what does 8d1 and 1d16 mean? 8d1 means "roll a 1-sided die 8 times". 1d16 means "roll a 16-sided die 1 time". Both have "equal value" in that the average damage is 8. The Axe offers a lower min and a higher max. So which is better? Gamers decided long ago that you must always select the 8d1 Broadsword here, because the average damage is the same and you can remove the "random chance" factor. With the Broadsword, you ALWAYS swing for 8 damage. Guaranteed. You want reliability and consistency when all things are equal, so that you can plan ahead. You can enter a fight and know it will take you x swings to kill the monster.So given two players of equal value, avoid high-risk/high-reward players. Always.In fantasy football terms, the reliable player is someone whom you can count on for x production, which allows you to plan ahead and build your team around that given, which is a good thing.

Alright, I'm not a D&D guru, so if I butcher the analogy, forgive me ... but I think the problem with your analysis is that the goals are not the same. In D&D, I'm assuming the goal is to kill the monster without letting him do too much damage to you. It's not worth risking getting your game player killed off (using the death axe) simply to have a chance at killing the monster more quickly. As you say, reliability and consistency are important. However, if your goal in fantasy football is to win, and for those leagues in which you don't win, you don't care that much whether you finish 3rd or 9th, we have to change your D&D analysis. What we should be looking at is 12 players all competing against each other to see who can kill his monster first. If you don't win, it doesn't really matter if you're 3rd or 9th. So, in that situation, I'd rather take the death axe -- I've got a shot at the 16. I have a better chance of coming in 1st and coming in last, but if 1st is my goal, a better chance of 1st is the important thing.

 

[Gopher State]

Late round WR risksover "safer guys like,I. Bruce, Ron Curry, i.e.

Jacoby Jones WR Houston, very good shot at being #2 WR in Texans system, leads team in rec in preseason, I know pre-season, but has two rushing attempts also, and has returned a kick for 80 yard td. I like the lack of talent on his side of the field. Maybe, just maybe this years Colston?

James Jones WR GB the kid has about won the #3 WR job in packer land. If Driver or Jennings get hurt the kid is gold, or if Jennings has a slump Jones will get his chance. Packers are improved on D, but they will run enought 3 set WR formations, that he could have some very nice upside.

Of course like most risk takers David Boston, taken with your last pick, nothing but upside.

 

[Willowdoc]

Maybe I am missing the point of this thread but where is the danger in drafting Bo Scaife, "S Moss" AKA Santonio Holmes, Troy Williamson, or Bobby Wade late?

The more extended idea is that some players shouldn't be waited for because the upside is just too great to let them end up on someone else's team. For example (as it's the best one I have), I reached for Clinton Portis by 2 or 3 rounds in every league I was in when he was a rookie. Could I have gotten him later? Maybe, probably. But I thought his blow-upability was so good that if I'd waited to round 6 or 7 and NOT gotten him, I would have been pretty disappointed in myself. For the guys mentioned in the article, Benson is a similar example. His ADP has him in the mid-late 20's. In every draft I am in - excluding the recent Survivor staff draft where I tried to get too cute with the #2 pick - I will be selecting Benson in round 2, regardless of whether that is pick 13 or pick 24.

Is it my imagination or is the Adrian Peterson story almost exactly the Clinton portis story? Highly talented rookie with a questionable injury history delaying his start. Drafted by a team with a starter who had over 1000 yards the year before (Mike Anderson) who is good but no where near as good as the rookie. With an excellent run blocking line? Plan is to ease the rookie in (Portis didn't start until game 4 if I remember correctly). But eventually the talent won out and I don't think Brad Childress is anywhere near the RBBC coach Shanahan is. The biggest difference would be the threat of passing in Denver was greater than in Minnesota, but in raw talent Peterson may be better. Portis worked out rather well that year.

 

[Willowdoc]

For the guys mentioned in the article, Benson is a similar example. His ADP has him in the mid-late 20's.

This guy keeps landing right up there in round two in the DD after I do my projections - I think his position is the most surprising to me. In the 2nd round I'd take Jones-Drew over him, and at this point it'd be a toss up between him an Portis. Has Benson's ADP been creeping up lately?ETA: You're a clown for turning your back on Moe Dowling!

I just don't get this. What numbers are you projecting for Drew? Now Drew won me alot of money last year, but thats because I handcuffed him to Taylor. I just can't believe that Jax gave Taylor a contract extension of that magnitude not to be the starter. I understand Drew could be very high reward (if Taylor was out he'd be a top 5 pick), but Benson has a floor of 1200 yards, 12 TDs. What if he is actually good? Then you are looking at 1600, 16. Drew may have a slightly higher ceiling (2000 TY, 18TD?), but he certainly has a dramatically lower floor. I understand thats the definition of high risk/high reward, but I worry about Drew's real opportunity.

 

[Brewzers]

This is easily Vince Young for me. His potential is a top 5 FF QB this year, yet he will be available with the likes of Romo, Hasselbeck, Rivers and Big Ben (around QB 10). If he plays to his potential, VY is a much more dominating FF player than any of the other 4 mentioned.

Yuck. If he had any weapons at all on that offense I would agree. But no way I take him before Romo.

Thats the high risk of course. The high reward is the Titans play from behind (boost passing & running stats). If you can imagine VY with 180/1 passing and 40/.5 running per game....thats top 5. Romo would need to average close to 300 passing and 1.5 TDs per game to equal that production. Too many people are discounting the TEN WR situation and VY's running stats, but thats OK with me come draft day.

 

[whodeywhodey]

This is easily Vince Young for me. His potential is a top 5 FF QB this year, yet he will be available with the likes of Romo, Hasselbeck, Rivers and Big Ben (around QB 10). If he plays to his potential, VY is a much more dominating FF player than any of the other 4 mentioned.

Yuck. If he had any weapons at all on that offense I would agree. But no way I take him before Romo.

Thats the high risk of course. The high reward is the Titans play from behind (boost passing & running stats). If you can imagine VY with 180/1 passing and 40/.5 running per game....thats top 5. Romo would need to average close to 300 passing and 1.5 TDs per game to equal that production. Too many people are discounting the TEN WR situation and VY's running stats, but thats OK with me come draft day.

Another reason I prefer Romo over Young is that I think that Romo will be much more consistent. Sure, Young may get his monster days but he'll also have some really bad days (and I mean reeeeeeally bad).

 

[Gr00vus]

For the guys mentioned in the article, Benson is a similar example. His ADP has him in the mid-late 20's.

This guy keeps landing right up there in round two in the DD after I do my projections - I think his position is the most surprising to me. In the 2nd round I'd take Jones-Drew over him, and at this point it'd be a toss up between him an Portis. Has Benson's ADP been creeping up lately?ETA: You're a clown for turning your back on Moe Dowling!

I just don't get this. What numbers are you projecting for Drew? Now Drew won me alot of money last year, but thats because I handcuffed him to Taylor. I just can't believe that Jax gave Taylor a contract extension of that magnitude not to be the starter. I understand Drew could be very high reward (if Taylor was out he'd be a top 5 pick), but Benson has a floor of 1200 yards, 12 TDs. What if he is actually good? Then you are looking at 1600, 16. Drew may have a slightly higher ceiling (2000 TY, 18TD?), but he certainly has a dramatically lower floor. I understand thats the definition of high risk/high reward, but I worry about Drew's real opportunity.

I don't want to hijack, so I'll refer you to this thread which goes into this at length and includes my Jones-Drew projections.For Benson, I like him, but honestly I think that offense overachieved last year, I think Grossman is awful and teams are going to make stopping the run priority 1 and 2 against the Bears in hopes Rexy will continue to be an interception/bad decision machine. Therefore i think your floor for Benson is high, particularly the TDs.

 

[podunker]

Waiting on a QB and taking Grossman late to be your starter. I've taken him late in a lot of drafts. (Big Ben also)

I agree with Scaife, think a lot of people will regret taking a TE early, when you can get him late.

Fred Taylor is way undervalued and will be on some championship teams as a RB3, putting up RB2+ numbers.

Tatum Bell- another guy that is gradually moving up draft boards now, but was a steal early in the month.

If you take these guys late, you can draft a high end WR corp early and dominate a league. This is the year to draft WR early in my book. Take a RB in the first and then go WR, WR, WR the next three rounds.

 

[Brewzers]

This is easily Vince Young for me. His potential is a top 5 FF QB this year, yet he will be available with the likes of Romo, Hasselbeck, Rivers and Big Ben (around QB 10). If he plays to his potential, VY is a much more dominating FF player than any of the other 4 mentioned.

Yuck. If he had any weapons at all on that offense I would agree. But no way I take him before Romo.

Thats the high risk of course. The high reward is the Titans play from behind (boost passing & running stats). If you can imagine VY with 180/1 passing and 40/.5 running per game....thats top 5. Romo would need to average close to 300 passing and 1.5 TDs per game to equal that production. Too many people are discounting the TEN WR situation and VY's running stats, but thats OK with me come draft day.

Another reason I prefer Romo over Young is that I think that Romo will be much more consistent. Sure, Young may get his monster days but he'll also have some really bad days (and I mean reeeeeeally bad).

I thought this was an Upside of Danger discussion, not a lets choose the most consistent performer thread. My point is Vince is a classic high risk/high reward choice (versus a safer one at the same draft spot) that could pay huge dividends and potentially help dominate your league (which was the gist of Colin's article). The potential downside to selecting Vince Young is obvious.

 

[salmonstud]

In a redraft league drafted over the 4th of July...I fielded a team loaded with high risk players. Players changing teams or players with competition at their position. I somewhat regret the approach....but my thinking when I drafted that if 1/2 my players perform higher than their ADP...even with the rest bombing and giving me little if no production....I could live with the approach.

High Upside/some risk: RB's selected:

Jones-Drew (If Fred goes down again...top 10 RB easily)

Jacobs (If Droughns is a mere 3rd down back...Jacobs puts up #2 RB numbers)

D-Williams (May be starter from week 1)

Gore (1 no risk player - pre broken hand)

High upsdide/some risk WR's selected:

WR's

Calvin Johnson (Top 20 potential)

D.Jax (If healthy could put up top 12 numbers for cost of a #2 or #3 WR)

B.Marshall (Big Upside)

Hackett (Potential to be top WR in Seattle)

K.Curtis (Could be great #2, weak #1 WR)

I Drafted all 3 Rams WR's to give me some stability at WR (Holt, Bennett, Bruce). Could always start top 2 Rams WR's if I somehow missed on all my risky WR picks.

TE:

V.Davis (Athletic TE with top 3 potential)

B.Watson (Athletic TE with top 5 potential)

 

[tombonneau]

Reggie Bush is my Upside of Danger guy. I was able to draft him at value (1.13 in 14-team), but in reality I would have taken him as high as #6.

Vernon Davis is another U of D guy for me. To the article's point, I wish I had reached for him a round earlier as he went 4 spots before I was going to take him. So to that end, I think the article has a good thesis in that if you think these guys are special and you really want them, pay the cost to secure them.

 

[Colin Dowling]

I think Davis and Watson are guys worth targeting earlier then necessary at TE for sure.

Another QB I really would like to have on my teams is JP Losman. Grnated, he'll likely go as a QB1 in most leagues (top 12), but I think his play at the end of last year really showed that he's on the cusp of great things.

 

[Willowdoc]

I think Davis and Watson are guys worth targeting earlier then necessary at TE for sure.Another QB I really would like to have on my teams is JP Losman. Grnated, he'll likely go as a QB1 in most leagues (top 12), but I think his play at the end of last year really showed that he's on the cusp of great things.

JP has an ADP of 11.8 and is the 19th QB taken. I haven't seen one website put him in the top 15. I do think he is high risk/high reward QB - though I put Grossman (ADP 13.06 -23rd QB taken) as a better bet in that category.

 

[Colin Dowling]

I think Davis and Watson are guys worth targeting earlier then necessary at TE for sure.Another QB I really would like to have on my teams is JP Losman. Grnated, he'll likely go as a QB1 in most leagues (top 12), but I think his play at the end of last year really showed that he's on the cusp of great things.

JP has an ADP of 11.8 and is the 19th QB taken. I haven't seen one website put him in the top 15. I do think he is high risk/high reward QB - though I put Grossman (ADP 13.06 -23rd QB taken) as a better bet in that category.

Really? Interesting. I'd like to take a look at their too schedules and see if there is a super late QBBC value there. Losman is interesting to me b/c he still has the stigma of "he sucks" from two years ago but really played nicely as 06 progressed. Add in Lynch and another year of Jauron's system and he could really do good things. I'd be very comfortable w/ Losman as my starter as long as I had him backed up w/ someone like Campbell.

 

[Sabertooth]

High Risk High Reward -

Look no further than the Philadelphia Eagles. Westbrook and McNabb fit this profile perfectly.

Javon Walker is another guy.

 

[BGP]

Great article by Colin Dowling about going for high risk / high reward players over other safer picks of equal value

Ok, I'm going to try to wrap my mind around this, since I can't see the article. + "Of equal value". So we are starting from the premise that the two players being discussed have equal value when everything is added up. I don't know -- there can't be very many of those types, are there?+ given two players of equal value, should one select a high-risk / high-reward type of person or a safer pick?Well you can apply dungeons and dragons principles here. (Yah I know some will scoff that the thought but its true, you are playing DnD when you venture onto this topic).Givens:the Gleaming Steel Broadsword: 8d1 damagethe Two-Handed Death Axe: 1d16 damageNow, what does 8d1 and 1d16 mean? 8d1 means "roll a 1-sided die 8 times". 1d16 means "roll a 16-sided die 1 time". Both have "equal value" in that the average damage is 8. The Axe offers a lower min and a higher max. So which is better? Gamers decided long ago that you must always select the 8d1 Broadsword here, because the average damage is the same and you can remove the "random chance" factor. With the Broadsword, you ALWAYS swing for 8 damage. Guaranteed. You want reliability and consistency when all things are equal, so that you can plan ahead. You can enter a fight and know it will take you x swings to kill the monster.So given two players of equal value, avoid high-risk/high-reward players. Always.In fantasy football terms, the reliable player is someone whom you can count on for x production, which allows you to plan ahead and build your team around that given, which is a good thing.

In my experience, reliability will get you into the playoffs, but won't win you many championships. To win the championship you have to take some risks on high reward/high risk players.

Well I didn't say one should avoid taking risks on high risk/high reward players. The precise situation that was presented was given two players of "equal value", you should choose reliability. Certainly one could choose a risky player if his value is greater than the safe pick.