Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Michael Fox Fan

Members
  • Content Count

    7,507
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Michael Fox Fan

  1. Finishing off a bottle of wine. Still deciding whether or not to open a 2nd bottle.
  2. I think I remember something about Hams wifeSeriously though, I usually book thru disney. They usually offer the same things as any outside travel agent.Wow, this is actually good advice. I didn't expect any serious comments, this was a just a big drunken fishing expedition. Jokes about Ham's wife never fail to make me laugh.Anyway, thx for the advice. I really would like to visit Disney with kids - in a couple years.
  3. Thinking about a trip there -- first time with kids -- this winter. Really intimated by how much there is to see and do. Anybody have advice or know a travel agent/service we can work with to build a trip agenda?
  4. :lmao:This will only be more evidence that they need to spend more money.Krugman is already leading the charge for ever more spending. Unreal.
  5. I definitely saw Jacobs look sluggish and unwilling to initiate contact. On the former, it's likely due to the injury. On the latter, it's likely due to cumulative pounding on his body, IMO. Don't really think we are that far apart in our assessment of 2010 prospects though.
  6. No doubt, this generality is a fact of life in the NFL. Players -- especially running backs -- have to be able to play through minor, nagging injuries.I believe, though, that's it's important to realize all injuries do not affect players in similar ways. Some injuries do affect playing style to the point that they won't be effective again until the injury is repaired through an offseason of rest or a surgical procedure. Ask Sidney Rice about playing through a debilitating knee injury. All nagging injuries -- even all nagging knee injuries -- are not created equal. I think it's short-sighted to ignore this fact. You've written this repeatedly, and I have yet to see anyone disagree. Where we ARE disagreeing is the assertion that Jacobs' injury affected his playing style more than Bradshaw's. Your evidence is that Bradshaw produced and Jacobs did not. But the same evidence could simply indicate that Jacobs has lost something else.....that he cannot and will not recover. He's a battering ram runner, more in the mold of Earl Campbell or Christian Okoye (not perfect compares, but who is?)...it wouldn't be shocking to see a guy like that get physically beaten down eventually....to the point that he is a shell of his former self. End of the day, my hunch is that it's a combo. Jacobs will bounce back and perform better than last year, but the Jacobs of 07-08 will not be seen again.
  7. Again, you're assuming that all injuries affect all running backs in similar ways. I'm not. I saw Jacobs alter his running style after he got injured.Guess we'll see what happens. I saw a guy who was simply done and afraid to take a pounding. If you're right, then he is a great buy-low this year.Edit to add: I'm not "assuming that all injuries affect all RBs in similar ways." I'm assuming that both Jacobs and Bradshaw had serious injuries last year that impacted them.You're assuming that Jacobs drop in production was primarily due to injury. I'm not.
  8. You just answered your own question. Bradshaw's injuries did not affect his running style as much on game days. He averaged 4.8 YPC after averaging 5.3 the year before. Jacobs' injury obviously affected his running style. You could see it from his hesitation at the line of scrimmage. If you didn't watch him play, you can see it in his production. He went from 5.0 YPC and 15 TDs to 3.7 YPC and 5 TDs. Also, both players needed offseason surgery.You could just as easily use your logic above to support the idea that Bradshaw is simply a superior RB at this point. Both were injured, both needed surgery - yet Bradshaw still produced. Anyway, despite my belief that Bradshaw is the superior player at this point, there is no doubt Jacobs will be the starter in 2010. It wouldn't surprise me to see Bradshaw get 45-50% of the carries though.
  9. I do agree with this BTW. 100%. So what are we debating? That's the major issue here. I just didn't find a few of your arguments compelling (compared to your typical takes on subjects), even though the conclusion makes sense to me.
  10. All injuries are not created equal. Jacobs' knee injury obviously affected his particular running style more than Bradshaw's injuries or those of some other runners. And how do you figure Bradshaw can hold up to 250 touches? He's just as injury-prone as Jacobs, if not more so. Both players were injured last year. One of those players (Bradshaw) still performed at a high level, despite needing offseason surgery. The other (Jacobs) looked like a shell of his former self. And how do you figure that Jacobs knee injury affected his running style more? Bradshaw had surgery on both feet. It seems to me that a RB like Bradshaw relies quite a bit on....well.....his feet.
  11. I do agree with this BTW. 100%. Enough that I traded away Bradshaw in the offseason (odd league that is mix of keeper and auction league) for the equivalent of Greg Jennings and a 1st rd pick in 2011.
  12. First, the Giants gave him a contract with $13M in guaranteed money, which pays Jacobs $15M over the first 2 years. So in reality, if Jacobs can't stay healthy, this could easily end up being his last year in NY.Second, just because the Giants gave him more money doesn't mean he will be the starter. See M Lynch for an example.2010 salaries: Marshawn Lynch: $885,000Fred Jackson: $1.445 millionFor the record, $13M is quite a chunk of change for a RB. But you're right that he could be on the outs if he can't stay healthy. The same goes for impending free agent Bradshaw, who also can't stay healthy. I'm no Jacobs lover, but he's the early-down back for the New York Giants barring a significant injury in August.I think we both know, F&L, why 2010 salaries aren't exactly a good way of comparing how Lynch and Jackson are valued by their franchise.Lynch: 6 year, $18.935M rookie contractF Jackson: 4 year, $7.5M contract
  13. First, the Giants gave him a contract with $13M in guaranteed money, which pays Jacobs $15M over the first 2 years. So in reality, if Jacobs can't stay healthy, this could easily end up being his last year in NY.Second, just because the Giants gave him more money doesn't mean he will be the starter. See M Lynch for an example.
  14. Tease! Ok, no updates during the meal.It was a good burger, but not great. And despite people complaining about slow the food is, it really wasn't that bad.Only bummer was that I hoped to see a desperate 7.5 girl whose credit card wasn't working so that I could get some Friday hookup action, but no such luck.
  15. Eating a Five Guys burger for lunch in about 45 minutes. Can't wait. I'll be sure to provide updates during lunch.
  16. Chester Taylor signed with the Bears. Lots of folks here think that Taylor will not only steal carries, but get a majority of touches this year.
  17. Dude, really? A hot dog isn't "BBQ". I live in the Midwest and hear everyone talking about BBQ'ing over the weekend, and it makes me nauseous. If you "BBQ" a burger on the grill, sorry, but you ain't eating real BBQ. So while you are correct that BBQ means different things to different people, please, let's not even pretend that a hot dog = BBQ, ever ever ever.
  18. Catbird -I *usually* try to have much more concise posts initially, but stuff happens. Limited time = less opportunity to put together a perfect treatise on a given topic. As gianmarco mentioned, this thread is full of a combo of random tangents, personal 1-on-1 debates, and meandering topics. For some of us, that makes this thread fun. Thanks for the feedback though, I wasn't aware of how lengthy the back and forth was until re-reading the thread last night. Again, sometimes that happens.
  19. Fair enough. I appreciate the discussion, it's helpful to see how others gauge Spiller's likely production.
  20. So you are expecting:1. Up to 400 touches per 16 games, presumably not including any kick/punt returns he may handle?2. Up to 8 catches per game? That's 128 catches per 16 games.These are utterly ridiculous numbers IMO.I include kick/punt returns in "touches". And my expectations for carries are probably closer to 13/game than 17/game.So per game:13-14 carries3-4 catches3-5 returns=19-23 touches per game. Close enough for govt. workWhich of those assumptions do you disagree with?Edit to add: these are my long-term assumptions for Spiller. In 2010, his workload could be 60-70% of that, especially early in the season.Well, that's a lot different. Most of the time when people refer to touches for players they are not including kick and punt returns. As I stated in my first point above, I was assuming you were not including them. I will assume he plays 16 games for all of my questions and comments:1. You are expecting 48 to 80 returns per season. Are you expecting him to return both punts and kickoffs? On the low end of your projection, he might do just one or the other, but on the high end he almost certainly has to be doing both. But then that begs the question, what is Simpson doing? Initially, I expected him to be used extensively on returns, but when the Bills signed Simpson, I thought that might indicate they would preserve Spiller mostly for offense.2. I think it is fairly rare that a RB has a lot of kick/punt returns *and* 200+ combined carries and receptions. On the low end of your returns projection, Fred Jackson and Jamaal Charles were relatively close on the returns and had more than 200 offensive touches. I suppose Jackson's 2009 usage suggests that the Bills are willing to use a key RB on returns. But if you go towards the middle to high end of your returns projection range, I think it's extremely rare for a RB with that many returns to approach 200 offensive touches. No one did last year, and I'm not aware of any example from recent seasons.3. So for the above reasons, I think you are either expecting too many returns or too many offensive touches. Probably the former.4. You are expecting 208-224 carries. I think your top end is reasonable long term, assuming there is no more than one other RB on the team with a significant role (i.e., getting substantial carries). However, I'd use a lower floor... maybe 10-14 carries per game.5. You are expecting 48-80 receptions. I strongly doubt that he will ever have a season with a number of receptions in the top half of your range. The top of your range is more receptions than all Buffalo RBs combined have had in recent years. I haven't researched Gailey's history in terms of throwing to RBs, so maybe that will be a positive, I don't know. And it's true that from day one Spiller is likely the best playmaker on the offense, so I get that they will try to get him the ball in the passing game. Still, I can't see more than 60 receptions as being at all likely in any given season. And I don't think 48 is his floor, either.Perhaps you could, in addition, share your projections of his workload. Rather than just taking shots. Others might find it helpful to contrast.Edit to add: - Few RBs are considered the type of multi-purpose threat that Spiller is, so it would be weird to ignore his return "touches"- If Spiller does NOT get many touches as a returner, it's likely because he is being used more extensively as a runner/receiver- If Spiller DOES get a bunch of touches as a returner, it's still unlikely that he gets significantly fewer than a dozen carries per game plus 2-3 catches- It doesn't seem like our overall projections would be that different; you assume a floor that is below Reggie Bush, and I don't- If anything, looking over my projections now I probably OVER-estimated any likely return touches. Bush averaged 2 punt returns a game in 3 of his 4 seasons (where used as a primary punt returner). Felix Jones averaged 2 kickoff returns per game in the games he played. So my projection of 3-5 returns per game implicitly assumes that Spiller returns punts AND kicks, which seems excessive.
  21. For a guy like Spiller, "touches" has to include returns. I'm not sure how different his short-term vs long-term "touches" (whichever definition you use) will look dramatically different - maybe for 1st half 2010 vs. 2nd half 2010. But by the 2nd half of this season, we should have a solid idea whether or not Spiller is a player.
  22. So you are expecting:1. Up to 400 touches per 16 games, presumably not including any kick/punt returns he may handle?2. Up to 8 catches per game? That's 128 catches per 16 games.These are utterly ridiculous numbers IMO.I include kick/punt returns in "touches". And my expectations for carries are probably closer to 13/game than 17/game.So per game:13-14 carries3-4 catches3-5 returns=19-23 touches per game. Close enough for govt. workWhich of those assumptions do you disagree with?Edit to add: these are my long-term assumptions for Spiller. In 2010, his workload could be 60-70% of that, especially early in the season.
  23. My mistake. Agreed that it isn't reasonable to expect him to get 10 carries/game in the long-term.