Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

cdubz

Members
  • Content Count

    750
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cdubz

  1. 255.80 and 16th this week. I suppose this is a good sign that the squad has upside, but the extra points don't count yet! Survive and advance. Given week 1 results, a couple of potential regrets: Thought there were going to be too many mouths to feed in TB and faded Godwin. He should be a super value at $6. Ryan (and consequently Hooper) are looking sketchy - think my potential Ryan swaps were Big Ben or Stafford, so not sure those would be better decisions with what we know now.
  2. Prior to seeing pricing, my biases were to target 23-25 players and try to go light on RBs. Final roster hit the high end of the # of players, but spent more on RB then I planned on. It looks like I have 12 of top 18 most commonly owned players, so took value where I though it made sense and then built around it. Matt Ryan $13 8.75% Patrick Mahomes II $11 28.07% Andy Dalton $6 19.60% Dalton is a screaming value to me. I had various iterations without him though since I didn't know if it made sense with ideal roster construction. For example, had Roethlisberger and Ryan only for a while. Hesitated on Mahomes given playoff schedule, but rostering 3 QBs made that more palatable. David Johnson $34 12.40% Mark Ingram $20 4.50% Peyton Barber $8 41.12% Matt Breida $8 26.99% James Conner $4 35.84% Rod Smith $3 1.98% Surprised Ingram didn't get more love. The first few weeks *should* be relatively easy to get through and his pricing seems relatively attractive compared to other comparable PPG RBs. Wasn't necessarily planning on a top-end RB, but DJ's projected points per $ seemed like a better bet than slightly cheaper options. More generally, didn't like the value proposition of RBs in the 20s and high-teens. I don't love Breida and Barber, but thought I better have them in case they blow up and should provide decent baseline production to hold me over for Ingram and bye weeks. Was planning on Conner even before Bell didn't report, so think I would have preferred Bell to show up - basically a potential injury play for late in the year. Similar rationale on Rod Smith. Julio Jones $32 3.70% Tyreek Hill $23 18.50% Keelan Cole $7 36.48% Michael Gallup $6 15.09% John Brown $6 21.05% John Ross $5 24.43% Jeremy Kerley $2 0.97% Started with the cheap guys then picked a couple higher priced guys that should provide some consistency/upside. There seemed to be a lot of good value propositions in <$10 range this year so was hard to trim that list. I like the ownership % on Julio. Rob Gronkowski $26 15.43% Jared Cook $8 4.63% Austin Hooper $8 9.80% Played around with various iterations here. Originally was going to go 4 TEs in the sub-$15 range. Figured I might have more weekly upside (and downside) if I went with a top-3 guy and 2 mid-range guys. Surprised on Kelce's ownership relative to Gronk - might have swapped them if I knew those figures. Ryan Succop $4 2.54% Adam Vinatieri $3 16.65% Kaimi Fairbairn $2 18.33% Wanted to go cheap here and largely succeeded. Ironically, the 4 AFC south kickers were my top 4 candidates. Chicago Bears $5 26.26% Tennessee Titans $4 5.07% Cleveland Browns $2 22.17% Bit on the Bears after the Mack trade, Browns are obvious cheap play. Titans seemed like a decent dart throw. QB $30 RB $77 WR $81 TE $42 K $9 D $11
  3. From the 3 hole tonight. Complete opposite of WR heavy draft room from last night. Wilson (6) Freeman (2), Hill (7), Henry (10), J. Allen (12), T. West(17), J. Williams (19) OBJ (1), Cooks (3), Fitz (4), Jo. Brown (8), Diggs (9), Sanu (13), D. Adams (15) Walker (5), Clay (11), M. Williams (14), J. James (16) Giants (18) Some Kicker (20)
  4. First FPC draft of the year. From the 10 hole last night. Have historically had good success with WR heavy teams, but felt like that was virtually everyone's strategy so often didn't like WR value. Wilson (6) Zeke (1), L. Miller (2), Hyde (5), J. White (11), McKinnon (12), J. Allen (13), K. Dixon (14) Maclin (3), Moncrief (4), C. Coleman (9), R. Matthews (10), Pryor (15), D. Adams (16), Agholor (17) Gates (7), Bennett (8), Hooper (19) Vikings (18) Given the WR weakness, I don't dislike it. Will be interesting to see how this squad fares.
  5. Because if you pick a random point in his career, you're almost guaranteed to have ended up with a point in which he was awful. But we're not doing that. We're picking him right now in his career. You can't compare his 2014 to his 2015 as it's essentially a brand new team (coaching staff, QB, WR, defense). The team looks be built around running the ball and defense. They are one of the few teams rushing (31.5 per game) more than they are passing (29 per game) - and winning. I'm not saying the guy is top 10 by any teams, but I think a solid #2 type isn't out of the question. Possible solid #2 in re-draft? He is already 27, so a solid #2 in re-draft should be lower down in dynasty rankings. I could quibble with certain players ahead of him, but could also say that for certain players behind him. Think ZWK has him in the right range. I don't think he has shown that he is awful at any random point in his career, I think he has shown that he is injured/more banged up than average at any random point in his career. I would like to see him go a long stretch without any apparent injury troubles. Reports are that his groin was "very sore" after Monday's game. Over/under to next missed game? Week 5?
  6. 2 other teams with Romo/Miller/Julio/Calvin/Gronk 1 other team with Stafford/Miller/Julio/Calvin/Gronk Each is <20 players. Uniqueness shouldn't be an issue if I am still alive late.
  7. Ended up with a 27 man roster. Didn't seriously consider anything less than 23 and floated between 25-28 for the most part this year. 2 QB - $32 7 RB - $61 8 WR - $79 4 TE - $48 3 D - $19 3 K - $11 Tony Romo $17 Matthew Stafford $15 Brady was on virtually all of my rosters up until last couple of days. Might be a mistake particularly with rostering Gronk, but thought this might give me some more uniqueness if I make it to final 250. I'm not all that confident in Stafford, but if he blows up along with Calvin - will like that stack. Lamar Miller $24 Isaiah Crowell $13 Ryan Mathews $8 Matt Jones $8 Christine Michael $3 Juwaun Thompson $3 Mike Tolbert $3 Strategy here was to skimp and hope for the best in weeks 14-16 if I make it that far. I had very good success several years ago with a similar strategy, and given the pricey-ness of RB points - thought it was a decent strategy this year as well. Had Miller/Abdullah/Martin for the longest time, but wanted to re-direct some $ to a 2nd stud WR. Julio $26 Calvin $25 Davante Adams $9 Phillip Dorsett $5 Eddie Royal $4 Donte Moncrief $4 Tyler Lockett $3 Danny Amendola $3 Julio if not on all of my iterations was on 95%+ of them. Calvin was a late add, but should be a bargain if he reverts to his old form. I actually love the IND WR3 and WR4 for $9, should provide some sporadic good games and could be huge if Andre or Hilton go down with an injury. Thought about trying to fade Adams, but the value is too good to pass up. Because I have Adams, didn't like the versions of my roster with Cobb as well. Gronk $33 Reed $7 Richard Rodgers $5 Jeff Cumberland $3 To Gronk or not to Gronk? That is the question. I think certain stud WRs are better pt/$ plays - but hard to pass up the points in the TE column when I have more quantity in WR. Thought about Gates briefly when taking Gronk out. Reed with Paul out was a lock for me. Injuries are obviously a question, but complete value at $7 when healthy. Bailey $5 Prater $4 Scobee $2 Cardinals $7 Dolphins $7 Colts $5 This more aggressive pricing on K/DEF is no bueno, forces some hard decisions. I started off with the cheapest options here and kept creeping up when I had extra $ and was comfortable with my offensive positions.
  8. Well, the best value in the contest is now out for the season...
  9. He went straight up for 1.4 in our FFPC 2500 dynasty league a couple weeks ago. It's like a mad crowd clamoring for tulips. Maybe I should dangle Kelce to see what I can get. I might be pleasantly surprised. Maybe, maybe not. I have Kelce on both of my FFPC leagues and the only interest I have gotten this off-season was from 1 owner and what I would consider low-ball offers. Not knocking the guy for trying, but nothing close to 1.4 value in my mind. But the hype train is certainly heating up, so could be good chance to get a price check. In 1 PPR, I think that may be a bit rich for him; but if so, not by much. Just based on positional value and longevity could understand rookie WRs #3-#5 being preferable in most situations due to higher ceiling. Though in those cases, you have bust risk that you don't have with Kelce.
  10. 3.5 in FFPC (12 team FA/Rookie draft with 3 veterans ahead of him, so 3.2 equivalent). Next rookie WRs off the board were Justin Hardy and Tre McBride. Basically, this guy is getting zero respect. I don't have high hopes, but just think his draft position dictates taking a shot where he is often going in drafts.
  11. I'm not saying you are wrong on your Jace Amaro ranking, just saying that I would like to cash out my shares at that implied price if there are buyers. Good list overall, though.
  12. If you need RB a pretty easy choice, if you need WR Perriman Agholor DGB. I would put Abdullah behind only Perriman over all. I passed on Abdullah. I am not sold on him as being a bell cow back. His smallish stature reminds me too much of Davante Freeman, Ellington, and Gio B. All 3 look to have had bigger backs brought in behind them. 2 of these 3 had significantly worse NFL draft position, so not surprising that they have devoted more resources to the position. In Gio's case, they brought in a new OC that installed a power run scheme. But the concerns are valid. I will say that personally, I think he can be FF relevant even if he isn't the bell cow. Lombardi seems to be modeling the Det offense off of the historical NO scheme, and they have been able to turn out multiple FF relevant backs on a yearly basis.
  13. Bell seems to be insinuating that he loves the weed. Is the implicit concern here that you think he is at risk for being a repeat offender? Given what we just went through with Gordon/Blackmon and all of the things they said after getting in trouble, it's a little troubling. Reminds too much of Blackmon's "I'm done drinking...for now". I hear you, especially given the minuscule thresholds we are dealing with respect to THC levels. I doubt he has a weed problem in the traditional sense, but now that he has been popped for it - testing is going to be a #####.
  14. Bell seems to be insinuating that he loves the weed. Is the implicit concern here that you think he is at risk for being a repeat offender?
  15. I agree. He may be solid, but saying he has that level of talent and that it is just the off the field issues is overstating it. I don't think he is as good as DT if he stays clean. That's a huge assumption.I don't think he's the athlete DT is, but it's realistic he can develop into a Burress, VJax, or Marshall type of player. And that type of upside is well worth the pick he has been going at in most leagues. If someone thought he had that Calvin/Moss upside, even discounted for the knucklehead factor - shouldn't he be going top 3?
  16. https://twitter.com/PRichJr10/status/598186835869716480 Paul RichardsonVerified account‏@PRichJr10Gonna be longer than I thought.. Relevant?
  17. Is anyone familiar with the bolded? I had assumed Wallace was going to be the X. Not sure Wallace is worth much as the Z in that offense.
  18. Starpoints are actually more valuable than 1 cent per point, which is what most airline miles are worth. http://thepointsguy.com/2015/03/what-are-points-miles-worth-march-monthly-valuations/ This is a prominent blogger and he is pegging them at 2.4 cents per point. That valuation sounds reasonable to me. Alternatively, you could look up the room rate of what you are using the points for and take a small discount off of the list price you didn't have to pay.
  19. 10% per year for 35 years? Yeah, good luck with thatIts actually been 11.9% over the past 35. I know, I know, its all doom and gloom from here on out. Just saying. I am coming up with 10.3% over the past 35 when looking at Vanguard's S&P 500 index fund, but this still supports your point. However, the big difference is market valuation at the starting point. Shiller's PE ratio (P/E using 10 year average earnings) was 8.85 in 1980 and 27.38 at the start of this year. Effectively, a slightly more apples-to-apples comparison might mean inflating the starting point by a factor of 3. In which case, that >10% growth over the past 35 years drops to <7%. Bottom line, I don't think 10% annual growth is completely unrealistic over the next 35 years. But I do think that it is on the very high-end of the range of outcomes. You including dividends? I used this calculator. I really have no idea about the future. I'll just continue to max out 401k and Roth and see what happens. I was using adjusted closes from yahoo finance, so that should include the impact of dividends as opposed to if I was just using nominal amounts. I think differences between the 2 calculations are probably attributable to 1) you can't directly invest in S&P 500 and indices attempting to replicate it have to pay S&P 500 bump premium when companies come into the index and 2) fees for the management of the index. I picked Vanguard because they have had the lowest fees to my knowledge, but still cuts into returns. I'm with you on not knowing about the future, maxing out tax-advantaged accounts is my play at the moment as well. Simply maxing out those 2 puts you ahead of the vast majority of people.
  20. 10% per year for 35 years? Yeah, good luck with thatIts actually been 11.9% over the past 35. I know, I know, its all doom and gloom from here on out. Just saying. I am coming up with 10.3% over the past 35 when looking at Vanguard's S&P 500 index fund, but this still supports your point. However, the big difference is market valuation at the starting point. Shiller's PE ratio (P/E using 10 year average earnings) was 8.85 in 1980 and 27.38 at the start of this year. Effectively, a slightly more apples-to-apples comparison might mean inflating the starting point by a factor of 3. In which case, that >10% growth over the past 35 years drops to <7%. Bottom line, I don't think 10% annual growth is completely unrealistic over the next 35 years. But I do think that it is on the very high-end of the range of outcomes.
  21. with respect to emergency fund....is your job at any risk? you married? if so, does your wife work too? So right now I'm thinking of the following: 1) Max out HSA 2) Max out Roth 3) Dump an extra amount into mortgage that will get me rid of PMI sometime in 2016 4) Pump up 401k to half of the max 5) Rest goes to emergency fund Anything wrong with this train of thought? Personally, I'd max the Roth before I max the HSA. I get that the HSA is the ultimate tax-free tool, but the flexibility of the Roth (being able to use it for anything, not just medical) outweighs the HSA tax treatment. It is probably a little bit more nuanced than this, but that flexibility has to be taken into consideration. Hopefully, OP is able to hit #1 and #2 so you don't have to decide between them. Remember that HSAs can be taxed at ordinary income and used for any purpose after 65 (at this point - who knows if this is true in the future). Whereas with a Roth you can pull out $ amount up to aggregate contribution level at any point. With regard to #3-#4, I might be missing something but think 401k might be better option in a lot of scenarios. In order to make that decision I would model out how many fewer months you would be paying PMI and multiply by monthly PMI, divide that by extra money money you would need to throw in to get out of PMI territory sooner. Once you have calculated that figure, compare to your marginal tax rate. In a lot of cases, think the marginal tax rate is going to be higher and funding the 401k would make more sense. Depending on how you define emergency fund and your personal preferences, this might be priority #1 or #5. Think Dave Ramsey for example would say 3-6 month emergency fund would be more important than steps #1-#4. I would probably agree, but I am a huge fan of liquidity and the peace of mind of having readily available cash. But in terms of the mathematically correct answer, you might want to take advantage of tax savings rather than build this up. One advantage of the Roth is that you can use it as a de facto emergency fund since you can withdraw up to contribution level with no penalties - though you are subject to volatility of underlying investments. If you anticipate your income increasing above Roth threshold in the near future, one option could be to fund Roth and invest in mundane items now to use as de facto emergency fund but then switch over to more aggressive investments once you have a separate emergency fund.
  22. any chance you could translate that for anyone who hasn't taken their series 7s, etc? If you are a fiduciary, you need to act in the best interest of your client at all times. If you are not a fiduciary, then there is a suitability test. That you only have to make sure investments you put client into are suitable for them, even if there are theoretically better options available. Why would someone invest a clients' money in a sub-optimal investment? Fees. The advisor often gets a cut for steering that money in the right direction. Good overview: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/professionaleducation/11/suitability-fiduciary-standards.asp Popular coverage of a relevant example of the nuances: http://fortune.com/2014/08/13/jp-morgan-chase-indianapolis-church-lawsuit/ ETA: 2nd link
  23. Weird club experience indeed. Below the top level, you are generally looking for a d4 defense that will give you active play and chances to play for the win. Usually easier said than done. Semi-slav and King's Indian are the 2 defenses that I feel give right mix of established theory and creative chances at the intermediate level. Grunfeld might also be a consideration, but I personally have never been a huge fan.
  24. Tactics puzzles can be a great tool to increase your rating, especially in the 1200-2000 USCF range. That said, exclusively endgame puzzles is probably not a great recipe. Middle-game puzzles have to be a large component. CT-ART is a good software option. http://www.amazon.com/1001-Winning-Chess-Sacrifices-Combinations/dp/0879801115 is a good basic tactics book. http://www.amazon.com/John-Nunns-Chess-Puzzle-Book/dp/1906454035/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1419411207&sr=1-1&keywords=john+nunn%27s+chess+puzzle+book is really good, but generally much more advanced.
  25. Sorry if this has already been posted. Looks like this link lists Zangrilli as a staff member at FBG at some point - http://apps.footballguys.com/staff.htm. Does that increase the chance he is a real person and not an alias?