• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

976 Excellent

About Hankmoody

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team

Recent Profile Visitors

6,450 profile views
  1. Isn't that a blanket rule tho?
  2. Yep that's a nickname I am sticking with.
  3. Bingo. Branch would be more interesting if he were any good, but I'm not sure he gets enough snaps to be relevant any more. He hasn't been over 35 solo tackles since 2008.
  4. Fair enough. I just sim'd this out of curiosity. Going from 2 per tackle, 2 per TO, 3 per sack to 1/3/3 saw the following: Khalil Mack goes from LB38 at 12.7 per game to LB10 at 9.2. Kuechley was #1 with 19.8 vs. 11.4. Von Miller goes from LB39 to LB20 So I tend to agree with you, it's more balanced and mine would be considered more "tackle heavy" for sure.
  5. At what opportunity cost? What do you gain by cutting him in May? If you are talking about post-rookie draft free agents, I would just as soon hold out and see if his pedigree can surface rather than grabbing someone like Eric Saubert
  6. Say what now? 1 point per tackle and 3 per sack is a very significant big play scoring system, my leagues are all 2 per tackle and all turnovers and 3 per sack. Chopping tackle scoring in half would be a huge impact on those 3 down LB types. Watt's only question in this or any scoring system is his back. If he were fully healthy I'd use a 1st on him in a startup with no hesitation. His back calls into question not only his immediate production but also his longevity. How long will he be willing to endure that pain and risk, and how long will he physically hold up? I don't think I can take him before the 7th/8th round or so, there are just too many other solid options. Gimmie a couple RB, WR, and safe/solid IDP first. After that I'll roll the dice on his upside before I'd take a guy like Martavis Bryant etc because the scoring delta he can provide vs. the rest of the position is absolutely broken.
  7. How ignorant of them. Tom House worked wonders with Blake Bortles in his only season he looked like a true NFL QB.
  8. Well all my 16 man leagues are IDP so that puts a bit more value on 1.16. But under normal circumstances no - it would have to be an extreme situation. 2 years is a long time. I have turned multiple teams around from garbage to playoffs in 2 years and have seen it done by others often enough not to bank on it. And adding 1.16 this year for free only helps that cause thus making 2019 later. I'd rather take my shot at Perine or Zones or Hunt. They will all go for more than a 2019 1st as long as they don't Treadwell it up. Last year would have been much more likely, that's a different draft. 1.16 for a 2018 1st would also be much more likely, I'd have to see the full roster, but still not anywhere near 1.05 in any event.
  9. Whoops getting my trades mixed up. Bell was 1.03, 1.07, and 2018 1st.
  10. wut no I wouldn't take a 2019 1st for 1.16. Waiting two years for a pick that might not even be earlier? That's horrible return. You're talking about Dalvin Cook now to wait two years and get what could be 1.12? That's nutty. I think it's good return for Bell. I traded him earlier for 1.03, 1.07, and 2018 1st and I'd do it again. Awful orphan team, full rebuild, and contract issues retaining Bell helped, but I have to assume this guy giving up Bell is going full rebuild too. Bell carries a lot of future risk with the lack of long term commitment from PIT, his status in the drug program, and his injury history. He's very easy to bail out on if you are two years from legit contention. Same with Murray. I have leagues where I'd take either side of this trade and not think twice. If I'm contending I'd happily give all those picks for the now power in that trade and if I'm stripping it down to the primer I'd take those picks for the guys that are currently at the highest value they'll ever see again.
  11. I think I see the problem. Far riskier leaving Cook on the board than Williams, although it's unlikely he'd be there either. He should have attempted to swap 1.07 for 1.06 before picking (Cook). Don't like the end result. Lynch wasn't enough for 1.07 -> 1.11 and getting two 2nd's for 2.01 is poor return as well. Samuel feels early at 1.12 but that's personal preference and if it had been Zones or JJSS I'd be ok with that. Team A gave Michael Thomas, Ameer Abdullah, Chris Hogan Team A got Mike Williams, Marshawn Lynch, Chris Samuel, 2018 2nd, 2018 2nd, 2018 4th. Yuck.
  12. Yeah they took a lot of steps, they also added a very good veteran LT also in Whitworth, so really there aren't many excuses left. There was a big focus on how antiquated/conservative Fisher required his former OC's to be, and it really handcuffed them, so it limited who was willing to go work for him and they didn't get any true coaching talent as a result. I am not going to say 2k or bust, but marked improvement is definitely expected.
  13. I'd take Mariota unless my team had a 2-year window. If I had all older players, I'd probably take Brady and worry about rebuilding later. I'm the opposite. For less than 2% of the cap gimmie the elite scorer. In a 1 QB league I'll worry about getting a long term answer later, it's too easy to find a stopgap if necessary.
  14. I think the answer is in the last statement of the post above you. Otherwise, it will be time to trust what Gurley shows on Sundays over those scouting reports from the 2015 draft season. We've seen both head of this monster. His rookie year he looked great despite the dumpster fire around him. Last year he contributed to the fire. Could just be that he checked out (moderate concern), could be that the blocking was so bad he just lost all confidence and got the yips trying to just not get killed (moderate concern), could be he's just not as good as we thought (disaster). I tend to think the latter isn't the case, because he did look so good as a rookie. Unlike Richardson that never looked good once he hit the NFL, Gurley totally looked the part as a rookie. Richardson also had a lot more help in terms of blocking and scheme creating opportunities that he just failed to capitalize on. Gurley's rookie year he took advantage of those chances much better. 2017 is definitely make or break for him (and us owners). I tend to believe. I was offered Melvin Gordon and 1.14 in a 16 man and declined because what we saw his rookie year is the kind of upside you can't replace. I'll gamble on that every time. If McVey can being even a portion of the improvement WAS had to LAR Gurley will be just fine. People forget that Gurley was a functional RB2 last year as-is. Yes, at his price we expected far more, but at the same price Richardson was far less, as has been Watkins and so many more. If RB2 is the floor for him in a trainwreck year, I'm still in.
  15. You used two, both from a reply I gave to the guy discussing his 10 man league. I don't play in 10 man leagues. I specifically said I am in multiple 16 man leagues and proceeded to name about 10 different guys I myself have gotten off waivers in those leagues. You didn't reply to a single one of those. Tartt was available on waivers in two of my leagues, and was used as a comparison of the talent a 16 man league might see vs. a 10 man league seeing Cravens. If he or Killebrew were on waivers there is a lot less compelling reason to grab them vs. holding onto a rookie stash and hitting waivers for any of the half dozen+ guys I named. I'm not even getting into the "We have 14 good owners" comment.