Mr. Irrelevant

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

568 Excellent

About Mr. Irrelevant

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Tennessee, by way of Southern Miss

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Philadelphia Eagles

Recent Profile Visitors

6,519 profile views
  1. PLAYER YTD PTS BYE DRAFTED Goff, Jared RAM QB 92.05 QB28 9.15 Luck, Andrew IND QB 448.10 QB4 3.15 Ajayi, Jay MIA RB 217.30 RB8 2.02 Cook, Dalvin ROOK RB - RB15 4.02 Crowell, Isaiah CLE RB 209.10 RB23 5.15 McKinnon, Jerick MIN RB 148.40 RB52 11.15 Rodgers, Jacquizz TBB RB 90.80 RB73 20.02 Bryant, Dez DAL WR 184.10 WR7 1.15 Bryant, Martavis PIT WR - WR43 8.02 Matthews, Rishard TEN WR 213.50 WR36 6.02 Perriman, Breshad BAL WR 101.10 WR54 10.02 Treadwell, Laquon MIN WR 2.50 WR77 15.15 White, Kevin CHI WR 38.60 WR66 12.02 Bennett, Martellus NEP TE 223.10 TE15 7.15 Higbee, Tyler RAM TE 36.50 TE30 14.02 Walford, Clive OAK TE 119.90 TE38 19.15 Sturgis, Caleb PHI PK 135.00 PK10 13.15 Zuerlein, Greg RAM PK 80.00 PK25 16.02 Browns, Cleveland CLE Def 60.00 D32 18.02 Saints, New Orleans NOS Def 82.00 D31 17.15 QB: Luck at 47th overall was the obvious BPA and IMO a steal as QB4 - on a PPG basis he hasn't finished below that in 4 years. Picking close to the turn again meant I either had to reach for a guy at 7/8 or wait and see what came back to me - in this case it was the last guy on the board with a solid hold on a Week 1 starting gig, so I've got that going for me. Don't like tying my fortunes in these leagues so closely to one guy's health, but then again I'm guessing this is how Colts fans feel pretty much every year. RB: On talent alone I'd put this group up against any other team's, but they come with obvious question marks. I wasn't an Ajayi believer last spring, but for having supposed bone-on-bone knees it's hard to argue with 261 carries at 5 yards per. Cook is the only rook RB I feel comfortable drafting at this stage - his rookie floor is probably Duke Johnson, while his ceiling is 3-down back on an above-average team. Crowell in '16 put up the quietest top-15 season in memory, and I'm comfortable saying the Browns have bigger draft fish to fry than early-round RB competition. McK and Quizz are intriguing #2s behind two guys who are likely to bolt this offseason. No sure things, but top to bottom they should be solid. WR: No reason to think Matthews will fall off the table in year 2 with a young and rapidly improving offense. And ... that's about it in terms of my floor. Somewhat by accident I built the highest-ceiling, highest-risk WR corps since BnB drafted eleventy-six rookies in last year's WSL. My last four were all in my personal top 60, but here were their stats last year: 52 catches, 699 yards, 3 TDs. For all 4. Combined. It's not hard to envision a scenario where I have six big athletic freaks taking DBs to school on RedZone on their way to 1,000-yard seasons. It's also not hard to envision a scenario where by October I have two guys injured and another one on the bench. "So why didn't you grab a WR7?" Good question. I think I'll need multiple breakouts here to win, and if I get them a WR7 is a moot point, while if I don't a 19th-rounder isn't gonna save me. At 2PPR I'd rather use the insurance policy at ... TE: Thrilled what I was able to cobble together given the price tag. If @Stinkin Ref had taken Bennett one pick ahead of me to back up Graham - and I was fully expecting him to - I had no Plan B here. As it is I got three starters, two with upside and one who can pick and choose his FA landing spot. I think they'll all finish in the 150-200 point range this season, which is only a good problem to have in the world of best-ball. ST: Straight trash. Sturgis should push for the top 5, so there's that, but Zuerlein is an inaccurate boomer on an atrocious offense, and I literally got the 31st and 32nd DSTs off the board. Has that ever even happened before? Kind of pointless to speculate this early on, but I'm lukewarm at best on this squad. Generally young with a sky-high ceiling, but without much of a floor to fall back on I'm probably sunk in a survivor format. Good luck to all.
  2. Another reason it's dangerous to rely on too many boom-or-bust guys in standard H2H leagues is that players, and situations, change dramatically from one year to the next. When you draft a bunch of guys with low signal-to-noise ratios, so to speak, it takes a lot longer to determine that there's an underlying issue that might make your guy unstartable / unrosterable. And you can't get those weeks back. Take a comparison like Vincent Jackson vs. Torrey Smith from last year - both drafted in the WR45-50 range who probably started the season in a lot of lineups. V-Jax was supposed to be the old reliable chain-moving #2 opposite Evans, but by Week 3 (4, 8, 6 points in PPR) it was easy to tell he wasn't getting the job done any more and bench / drop him. Torrey started out with weeks of 3, 14,and 6 ... but Torrey has 3-game stretches like that every season and then goes and puts up a 30-spot the next week, so too soon to cut bait, right? Nope - he averaged just 4.5 PPG the rest of the way, and cost a lot of hopeful owners who held on a couple weeks too long. Ditto similar guys like D-Jax and Fuller, though at least they gave you a couple big weeks out of the gate before they torpedoed your season. I have no problem with high-variance guys, but as you and @Hawkeye21 referenced, I want that high variance to be either (a) due to injury risk or (b) on my bench. That way, I can ride the big weeks if/when they're hot and IR/drop them when they get banged up or fail to perform.
  3. I'll take the Browns D if we want to move this along.
  4. Let's play "pick the guy who'll generate the most career VBD from today forward" from within his top 7. I'll give you your choice of any 2 and take the field at even odds. Should be easy money, right?
  5. Watkins has the higher ceiling, Hilton the higher floor. If you're in a smaller league and/or with shorter benches, it's Watkins by a fair margin. If it's a larger league and/or deeper benches, I'd probably lean Hilton. No real wrong choice between them, IMO.
  6. And then you took the Lions? I hate you both.
  7. This was the first thing I noticed as well. If I'm holding Taylor and someone offers me Wentz or Cousins straight up, I'm at serious risk of breaking my index finger clicking Accept. I'd have to think a bit about Dalton but would probably take him as well, if only because I expect CIN to get pretty bad pretty quickly, which means they should be playing from behind more often than in years past. If I squint, I can see a guy who as a FA is likely to bolt the Bills, a team that's finished 31st and 32nd in pass attempts the past two seasons. If you believe in his talent as a pure passer, almost anywhere he goes as a starter would represent a fantasy upgrade. The counterpoint is that I don't see him ever being one of the 12 best pure passers in the league, so if his rushing impact drops off you're left with, well, a poor man's Andy Dalton. I'd put him about level with Stafford, pending his near-term landing spot of course. However, I think ZWK is right about both Glennon and McCarron. The case against McCarron is the easier one, but while Glennon has the measurables, he combines scattershot accuracy (career 59% CP) with abysmal pocket presence (career 8.2% sack rate which, horrifyingly, is actually better than his career rate at NCSU). You can get away with one of those and be a successful long-term starter, but almost certainly not both.
  8. Others apparently got an e-mail notification from them (I didn't) that the site was still down and expected to be back up some time today. Based on my past experience with MFL, "some time today" might mean anywhere between "an hour from now" and "this time next week".
  9. Grabbed him with my 30th-round pick in my recent big-money dynasty startup - you could tell who was "in the know" versus the guppies by their reactions to my pick. I'm already installing the championship flag holders on my front porch. * hawkscreech *
  10. I mean, not that there's good news here, but the not-bad news is if you look into the details of their 2018 cap, they can free up literally $50M next offseason with either no or minimal cap hits: Peters and Barwin ($10.25M each), Daniel ($7M), Kelce ($6M), Celek ($4M), the list goes on. The bad news is that this will still put us below the median in terms of cap space next offseason and probably hamstring our ability to go to the well for premier FAs. In other words, Howie damn well better pull some rabbits out of his hat at the draft this year and next if he's serious about building a SB contender in the near term.
  11. Check in where? MFL still showing as down for me.
  12. I mean, you could, but I suspect there's a reason that in a quarter-century of its existence, no QB has ever received the tag in back-to-back seasons (Cousins might become the first in a few days' time). I already find it hard to believe that any team would trade franchise-changing draft capital for JG and then be unwilling to extend him. Given that the franchise tag exists largely to give owners additional leverage, I'd question the sanity of any organization that decided to forgo that leverage on an asset they paid so much to acquire in the first place.
  13. Houston took exactly that risk, and it didn't pan out. Do they get to say, "whoops!", get up, and walk away from the table? Not so much. Smack in the middle of what should be their contending window, they've tied a $19M boat anchor to their leg. As was just said, it's inconceivable that a team would trade high draft pick(s) for JG and not immediately sign him to a longer-term deal. So to pay a high 1st-rounder for him, you've got to not only believe that he's got a better chance of being a franchise guy than the best QB you could land in the draft, but that the chance is so much better that it justifies not just the picks but an additional 10%+ of your cap over the next 3 seasons. Thought experiment: Knowing only what we knew about them last April, if they would have immediately had to sign Goff and Wentz to $70M contracts, does anyone believe the Rams or Eagles would have paid the price they did to move up to #1 and #2?
  14. Interested in the rationale here only because we're pretty deep down a Maxx rabbit hole over in a Mock Drafts thread. You haven't moved him down at all even after a completely lost 2016, yet it's possible (albeit not likely IMO) that he could be a camp cut. Personally I've liked the kid since he was drafted, but I've been very underwhelmed from what little I saw on the field, and now he seems to have a balky knee on top of it. Is this just a legacy of "young plus highly-drafted", is it a bet against his competition in BAL, or do you still see a TE1 ceiling from him? Would your ranking of him and other young, unproven guys like Walford and Amaro change in a TE-premium (e.g. 1,5 PPR) setting?