Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dave Stauff

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About Dave Stauff

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/27/1949

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Salem, OR

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    All Teams

Recent Profile Visitors

3,688 profile views
  1. I might agree if this were PPR and the WR's had the opportunity to make up lost TD ground on the RB's via catches, but that's not the case here. The question is not about positional scarcity, but about "value". No doubt in my mind that the RB increases in value here.
  2. Thielen! Way too much target uncertainty around Allison, even if you do get two years to let it settle out. Green Bay's got like 5 potential WR2's ATM. Training camp will help sort it out, along with the assessment of a new head coach
  3. I think this format - one that allows the starting of 3 RB's - causes the RB position to increase in value over your prior format. Startable RB's are a scarce commodity and score TD's at a more predictable (albeit sometimes inconsistent) rate than WR's or TE's. I agree the QB position is not really affected.
  4. Assuming this is dynasty, I believe your focus should be on cornerstone players. QB's and WR's have a longer shelf life than RB's. I'm not overly enthralled with any WR this year in the top two picks, but feel you might want to consider Murray at QB at 1.02. If he hits, the AZ offense is gonna be prolific. Worth the risk to stabilize that position on your roster for years to come. Personally, I would not do your 1.01 trade - I'd take Jacobs as a potential three down back (something you're never going to find at 1.06 or higher without getting awfully lucky some year). Pair him with Freeman and you've got a couple startable RB's. Your WR corps is adequate, as is your TE corps. There are some expendables on both, but also some youth yet to develop. If you could somehow use your 1.07 and another pick to acquire another startable RB, you're in the playoff discussion this year (again assuming Murray is all that). Hope this helps . . . good luck.
  5. Personally, I might drift into the Kelce and Mahomes choice. Two players ranked #1 at their position heading into the season. I do like Evans but feel I can find my WR's later.
  6. If this were dynasty, I'd say Luck. But in a one player keeper league, you almost have to go with a productive RB to avoid being behind the eight ball heading into your draft. You'd need your late 1st or early 2nd to draft Conner, so you're gaining a full round of draft position by keeping him . . . be confident and grab your stud QB whenever your draft moves you to do so . . .
  7. Important to know scoring system to evaluate this, PPR? .5 PPR? Basic? Other?
  8. Something wrong with a dyno when two of the top three rookie picks go unclaimed . . . just sayin'
  9. Still looking . . . a bit of a rebuild but this team made our playoffs each of the past three years . . . - the 4th Chicago roster is the one we're moving. If you think you know what you're doing in dynasty, this leagues for you as the competition is stiff - we've had 8 different league champions in the past 9 years.
  10. PDFFL is a 24 team dynasty league established in 2003. Many of our original owners remain and turnover each year is minimal. Annual fees are $75 and all fees are paid out as prize money. 30 man rosters. If you are interested in joining us, please email me at with a little info about yourself.
  11. Heard some analyst say Ingram really wanted to stay but they only offered him 4.5M/yr. If true, they obviously valued Murray as an upgrade.
  12. You made this bed by allowing trades during your playoffs. The only thing unusual about this year is that it's a contending team instead of a "bottom team" maximizing player value. Nothing to see here - let it ride.
  13. Derrick Henry . . . but still time to change my mind . . .
  14. 24 team (12 per conference - one copy of each player per conference) - play, including playoffs, remains in conference until the championship game. When this all started in 2003, I worried that there would be too many of the same players facing each other in the championship, but this has not proven to be the case.