Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Liquid Tension

Members
  • Content Count

    5,112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Liquid Tension

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New Jersey

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    New York Giants
  1. I have been a subscriber for a very long time, but I may move on because the leagues I play in (semi dynasty or 9 man keeper leagues - which BTW, work great for a league) just don't get support here. The dynasty is not covered enough or in an easily accessible way. C'mon Joe and Dave, you guys need to step it up. I have never written to say this, but I think it should be said.
  2. Thanks. That is huge. I know speed is not the most important thing, but when your changeup is your best pitch it all unravels when your fastball; is 88. The part that surprised me was he didn't throw his changeup at 80 last year he was still throwing it at 85
  3. Is it true that CC hit 96 in spring training? If her can average 92-9-3 that would be huge to setup his change. Last year, his control was not as sharp but mostly his change was only a few MPH less than his fastball
  4. Your numbers are not correct. he had 13 - 36 in the 2nd half and 10 -39 in the first half, however, he did have 122 more PA's in the first half than the 2nd. more important, his OPS was .727 in the 2nd half and .671 in the first. not a huge difference in a half split % wise, but 56 points of OPS is a decent amount. A catcher who can give you .730 OPS and play good defense is not bad. His biggest split differential was home and away..784 OPS at home and .a putrid .591 away. Unlike tex, at least McCann was not afraid to lay down a bunt when the shift was on and also hit some line drives to the left side. I don't really mind letting it rip in terms of the shift, but not trying to bunt some times is just stupid (as it will not mess up your swing)
  5. This may help you see how his vision is. http://www.fakepigskin.com/2014/10/09/fantasy-football-chalk-talk-bolts-rb-branden-oliver/ I interviewed Oliver way back in February, really liked his skill set back then. I am a bit bias towards small RB btw. Otherwise I agree with everything you said. Great stuff Eric! Love that he doesn't give the defender much to hit or wrap up and the patience up the middle was good to see as many backs will bounce that. Also he had enough burst to beat (I think it was the safety) to get into the EZ
  6. First, I want to give props to EBF. He takes a lot of abuse for his stances and a lot of people poke fun at the BMI numbers, but he went out on a limb on someone nobody had even heard of (you get the point) and while this guy may be a one week wonder, he looks to be a guy who can play in this league. While his without pads numbers are not great, he is one of those guys that doesn't seem to lose any speed with pads on (still don't know why they don't run combines with standard equipment on?) and showed very good quickness along with power and "shiftiness." I was not able to get a take on his vision yet, but he did setup blocks pretty well against the Jets. Not sure how fantasy relevant he will be, but he will be able to be effective in the NFL IMO.
  7. I find these discussions interesting...as for Biabreakable's tirade, maybe I am not so insecure to think everyone is being condescending to me, but I think the responses of EBF and Adam seem to be in line. I think Adam is very fair in putting his thoughts out there and I have had some disagreements in the past; mostly about him thinking Elway was better than Marino :-), but nothing was absurd and out of line. Matt Waldman likes to let his eyes be the judge. EBF likes to look at the draft spot of a person, their BMI and then use his eyes, Adam was his own method as do I and others. I take my own eyes into account a lot, but I do use the people I just mentioned as a gauge because maybe I missed something or maybe I have a bias I am unaware of (this is the largest flaw in most scouts game). The point is to make your own mind up but don't be so "arrogant" as to think your way is the only way...shoot Dodd's was ranking Eddie Royal like Jerry Rice going into this week and I joked to my brother how people overrate the 1st few weeks of the year and I would trade Royal if I had him on my team. That isn't to say Royal won't be solid moving forward; the point was the hype was crazy because he caught 5 TD's (I know that is a lot). But I also saw him drop a perfect pass right in his hands on and out pattern...that should happen once a year at the most IMO. EBF wrote about Stephen Hill prior, but one player who may be similar to Hill that I was impressed with was Ted Ginn. Ted had weak armed QB's in his past and he is a guy you need to get deep. That would amount to a once in a blue moon TD big day. With the mobility and arm strength of Cam, the combo along with Steve Smith could give Ted some nice games and will help their NFL team by spreading the defense out. However, the reason I mention Ginn was he ran comeback route to the sideline that impressed me. With his speed if he can consistently run the CB until he turns his hips and then stop and catch the ball with his hands as he did, it will be an easy 1st down every time. I always felt he was a little underutilized as a WR and I know his hands have been inconsistent, but he has shown good hands in the past as well. Guys like that you need to limit their tree, but it can be a strong even if limited tree if done correctly. ETA: Ginn is a dynasty sleeper in a deep league that has not been on anyone's radar. Sorry to ramble on, but EBF, Adam and others, keep delivering your message, as many of us like to either confirm or challenge our own opinions with people they respect!
  8. There are no guarantees in FF. Look at Peyton last year. Any player can get injured. I'd argue that old guys with older bodies and more mileage are more likely to get hurt than youngsters. So that might actually be a point in Luck's favor. If Brees or Brady goes down with another serious injury, their trade value will absolutely plummet. If Luck goes down, he's young enough that he can bounce back and still be in his prime ala Matt Stafford. And Luck is about 6'4" 235. Bigger and stronger than Brady and Brees, for whatever that's worth. I agree that there is clear value in knowing what you get. The problem is that you usually pay a premium for security because it is overvalued. Ironically, the more "proven" a player becomes, the more of his career you have already missed out on if you waited on the sidelines scared to pull the trigger. Look at a guy like Ray Rice. When he was coming into the league, he would've cost you a middle round pick in a dynasty startup draft. Maybe a 6th-8th rounder. After his first season when he didn't get a ton of playing time, his cost would've been roughly the same. After his breakout year, his price would've jumped up into the late 1st-2nd round. And after logging two more elite seasons in 2010 and 2011, he has become widely regarded as one of the most untouchable assets in dynasty FF. The problem in all of this? The longer you wait for someone to "prove" his true value, the more you miss out on his actual career. Rice's prime is halfway over. If you waited for him to prove himself before you acquired him, you not only watched his price increase, but you also missed out on some of his best production. So if you buy Rice now, you are paying a premium based on what he has already accomplished. Yes, he is a safer pick than someone like Trent Richardson, but he is essentially "missing" three seasons from his prime. On the flipside, if you can identify these guys early and get in on the ground floor, you can often get them below their actual value and you also get to enjoy their entire career, and not just a fraction of it. The risk here is that the player in question never takes the next step. There are lots of guys like Beanie Wells, Kevin Jones, Vince Young, Matt Leinart, Jay Cutler, Braylon Edwards, Roy Williams, and Koren Robinson who never have the career that people expect. That's why I think you have to be very careful in these situations and avoid paying top dollar for prospects until they've genuinely proven themselves unless they're truly special talents. Obviously making that distinction is easier said than done. There's no magical formula that determines who's legit and who isn't. It's a judgment call. Most of the time I would never recommend taking the "next big thing" over a current superstar, but...if you're absolutely certain about someone and you make the right call, you can reap a massive gain in value. I think there are a couple guys in this class who qualify as special talents (Luck and Richardson) and I value them accordingly. I would also take a guy like Martin over more "proven" players because I think he offers more value at a lower cost. As for RGIII, I don't think he's as good as Luck and I think he's overvalued by a half notch right now. I know this was a long time in between posts, but you spent a lot of time to respond and I just read it...I understand your position and it not crazy, but I think you are not valuing the present value enough in your calculations. In your discussion about missing the good years why you wait for being proven; it is accurate, but a player may never become proven. Think about trading Ryan Leaf for Brees? Ronnie Brown as a rookie for MJD etc...You also have to remember that with a QB, being really good does not mean you post great fantasy numbers; so having a guy who is "money" does have value. While the reward IF it works out will be longer, it may not be more fruitful. There are plenty of decent guys, busts and even good ones that still may not be worth 2-3 years of top 3 QB play.
  9. I think you are dismissing the "guarantee" of elite play for 3 years compared to nothing that is guaranteed, especially with injuries sapping careers that may never become anything. There is clear value in knowing what you get. I know injuries could happen to any of them, but that actually puts more value in the guy who is there right now. Also, many FF people think RG3 will be a better fantasy QB...I assume you are not one of them?
  10. Actually, the defense was the problem along with the OL. Bradshaw and Jacobs were fineWhile the OL was a significant issue last year, Jacobs was hardly fine. He has slowed a step and has never been one to really utilize his size. He struggled last year and in short adage situations has really been sub par for a while - not just because of the OL.Plus, the OL has hardly been fully addressed in itself. That said, Wilson brings a ton more playmaking and even game breaking ability than Jacobs ever had, and moreso the last couple of years.I don't agree about Jacobs (i do agree Wilson bring playmaking ability they have not had) the short yardage situations when Jacobs was in the base formation were predictable and the OL did nothing well. It wasn't like Jacobs didn't beat a guy one on one and failed to make the first down. The OL could not block last year and combined with the poor job by Gilbride usually going from the shot gun on short yardage unless he was definitely running; none of the RB's performed well. Bradshaw had his lowest YPC and the majority was the OL fault
  11. Actually, the defense was the problem along with the OL. Bradshaw and Jacobs were fine
  12. Time to bump him; everyone knows #22 is more powerful than 34 in numerology...Netnalp is correct about the issues on the Giants line. The OL was poor at run blocking last year and probably didn;t get much better this year. The threat of the pass helped the running game. Eli was excellent last year and with Nicks, Cruz and now a better pass catching TE and Randle they are a little better after the 2 best guys. Manningham played well last year, but that was his first good year and having some TE help should aid Eli. The Giant offense is very slow; Wilson gives the Giants some burst they didn't have. Manningham was actually the guy who gave them a little burst. As for Ware being cut; he was at best a mediocre guy; nothing good about him, but he wasn't bad either. Brown outplayed him and the Giants want to give Scott another year as he has speed and the Giants don't want to give up on that yet.One more point about how bad the Giants were in short yardage. My opinion is a lot of the blame is on Gilbride. He is the one having them go for short yardage from the shot gun. Almost every time they were in short yardage in a normal formation they ran the ball; they were predictable and teams sold out to stop it. Yes, they ran from shot gun sometimes, but the Giants would have been much smarter to go with the non shot gun formation on short yardage and occasional play action from it rather than the way they do it. Gilbride also almost always runs on 2nd and 10 after they throw incomplete on 1st down. Those two bad flaws bother me about Gilbride, but the rest of his play calling is very good. If he could shore up those two areas, they would be much better.
  13. Time to bump him; everyone knows #22 is more powerful than 34 in numerology...Netnalp is correct about the issues on the Giants line. The OL was poor at run blocking last year and probably didn;t get much better this year. The threat of the pass helped the running game. Eli was excellent last year and with Nicks, Cruz and now a better pass catching TE and Randle they are a little better after the 2 best guys. Manningham played well last year, but that was his first good year and having some TE help should aid Eli. The Giant offense is very slow; Wilson gives the Giants some burst they didn't have. Manningham was actually the guy who gave them a little burst. As for Ware being cut; he was at best a mediocre guy; nothing good about him, but he wasn't bad either. Brown outplayed him and the Giants want to give Scott another year as he has speed and the Giants don't want to give up on that yet.
  14. ugh...Put him in at 19 cant believe I missed him again...to be fair I put him in at 21 in the last rankings... Just wanted to say great job on all the work!
  15. I think "ever the masochist" would be more apt. I am sorry, but I can't take Evans seriously any longer - for years we heard that this is an elite talent but doesn't produce because he doesn't have a QB who can get the ball to him and/or there is no WR #2 to draw attention from defenses to keep him from getting double teamed. Well, the Bills not only got a half-ways decent QB in Fitzpatrick, but also a capable #2 finally emerged in Stevie Johnson. And contrary to what we would have expected, Evans numbers not only didn't improve, but Johnson became the star receiving threat and enough of one to make Evans expendable. It is true Evans had injury issues, but I honestly don't think if he was completely healthy the results would have been that much different. If you want to continue to be the optimist, fine, but the Evans' glass sure looks half empty to me - I don't think Evans was ever as good as we thought he was. The problem with this analysis is it is sloppy.First, you call Fitzpatrick a "half-ways decent QB." In reality, he is in the bottom third. He was 27th in completion %;.21st in ypa; 22 in QB rating, smack dab between Alex Smith and Shaun Hill. So....for the past four years he has had crap at QB. Instead of the 31 or 32nd worst QB he had the 22nd. That's still awful. Second, Johnson hit it off with Fitzpatrick more than Evans. That's because Evans is a deep threat and Johnson is more of an over the middle possession WR. Bottom line is that Buffalo never had the personnel or the strategy to take advantage of Evan's strengths. Four years of half-ways decent" production doesn't prove that he isn't talented. How do you explain the two years he has had over 1000 yards and the one year that he was a top 10 receiver? Clearly he has talent but the team didn't know how to exploit it. The analogy with Glenn is perfect because nay sayers like you said the same thing about him. And he, like Evans, is a deep threat guy who needs a QB who can hit him on the deep patterns. Like Evans, he had had two great years interspersed with a lot of mediocre years. Then he went to a new team with an offense and QB who could use him properly, and he had two more 1000+ years. He also had gone 4 years since having had a decent year before the trade to Dallas, and he was 2 years older at the time of the trade. Mind-blowing Terry Glenn stat that will blow everyone's mind: Terry Glenn ranks in the top 30 in NFL history in receiving yards per game. Seriously- I'm not making that up. I really think Glenn and Galloway are very interesting comparisons to Evans. Both Glenn and Galloway really caused me to re-evaluate when speed guys start to lose a step in the NFL. Glenn and Galloway both posted the highest YPC of their careers at age 32, and they topped 15.0 YPC a combined 7 times at age 30 or older. Galloway averaged a ridiculous 17.8 YPC (2nd highest total of his career) at age 36- in what was one of the greatest age 36 seasons of all time. Bruce kept his speed for quite a while, too. I know maybe not relevant for Glenn in this case but I do want to point out that YPC isn't the best metric for fantasy success. There have been a lot of guys with high YPC who haven't been consistent enough to be fantasy viable. The reality is some guys are deep threats who have inflated YPC as a result. There are guys who simply cannot be anything more than the big play guy and there are guys whose YPC drop significantly when/if the become integral parts of the offense (and thus are asked to do more than just stretch the field). I would go into more detail / pull stats but on my iPad right now. Point is this isn't always the best metric. YPG sure. I'd have to look at the specifics of DVOA but I'm sure like anything else it has inherent biases too. I really feel that Collie will step in and be really productive again. I think the ball will be spread around, but I think Collie and Wayne will be the top wide outs (Clark will get his).