Biabreakable

Members
  • Content count

    14,378
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,347 Excellent

2 Followers

About Biabreakable

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

16,957 profile views
  1. It is a fairly common narrative in some circles. There may even be some truth to it. I just have not seen any example of Booker having poor vision for the zone blocking scheme. Some do seem to believe this however.
  2. Booker played just fine in a zone blocking system in Utah.
  3. Here are the RB who were drafted in the top 13 picks of the NFL draft from 1989-2014 Marshall Faulk HOF Reggie Bush Ronnie Brown Barry Sanders HOF Garrison Hearst Trent Richardson Edgerrin James Cedric Benson Darren McFadden LaDainian Tomlinson Jamal Lewis Ricky Williams Cadillac Williams Curtis Enis Lawrence Phillips Adrian Peterson Thomas Jones Tim Biakabutuka Fred Taylor C.J. Spiller Sammie Smith Jerome Bettis HOF Ron Dayne Marshawn Lynch Warrick Dunn Ryan Mathews Knowshon Moreno Jonathan Stewart 46.3% of these players performed as a top 12 RB as rookies. The average performance for RB in this group is close to 40VBD for its first seven seasons The average number of top 12 seasons for this group is 2.9 While there certainly are some busts in here and players who didn't perform up to expectations, Overall this group of players is very strong and have more successful careers on average than RB selected later than the top 13 picks do. Looking at this from a different perspective based on the positional order the players were drafted, McCaffrey was the second RB selected. 90% of these RB have provided some positive VBD over their career and has averaged 371 VBD over their careers. Thats outstanding. 47% of these RB have provided over 200 VBD careers. 37% of them provided over 400 VBD careers. You are not going to find much better odds of a player having a successful career than this.
  4. Really talented player who has produced some big games already.
  5. Here is a discussion I participated in recently where I thought keeping the draft picks (for depth) was better than consolidating the value of 3 valuable assets into one. From this example in a vacuum you may prefer the 2nd overall pick or the "stud" and in a vacuum maybe I would as well (my target would be Dalvin Cook or McCaffrey unless Corey Davis was there) but I think the overall value is on the Perkins/Coleman/20181st side of the deal. Looking at the roster in question, I recommended keeping the players and future pick. Why? Because I don't think the team had enough depth for it to be a better lineup with pick 1.02 than it would be keeping the players. I value Coleman as a potential stud. On the flip side of this, if the roster in question was stronger than it currently was, then I would likely take pick 1.02 for this as I could afford to overpay for the stud pick. What myself and BassNBrew both suggested is that if you are going to pay this price in a consolidation move, to go after a proven player instead of a rookie. That it is a high price and to target a top WR such as MIke Evans for that price instead. Or just keep what you have. So this is an example of where I would take depth over studs. At the same time with a deeper roster I would be ok with trading the depth for a stud. To me it is always a dance between these two things. You need to build depth of potential studs before you can afford to overpay with depth for a stud. It isn't really an either or situation. It depends on the current make up of your roster as well. If you keep building quality depth you will find yourself in a situation where you can overpay for a stud and still have enough depth remaining after the deal to be competitive. When your team is full of high quality depth players, that is when you should be looking for consolidation moves like this, so you can free up some roster spots to add more depth players. If your team is pretty bare bones besides one stud then I think you should move that player for quality depth and future assets. It really depends on where your teams roster is at the time of the deal as far as which is the best way to go.
  6. 41 votes in now.
  7. I think this would depend on what they got in return for the picks? If I get a deal I like in February I am not going to wait for a better deal I am going to take it. Trying to time trades perfectly is going to leave you holding the bag as often as getting a better deal. You need to strike when the fire is hot. If you wait your trade partner might just make a deal with someone else. What they are saying is good information. That does happen. You might be able to sell the picks for more by waiting. That doesn't mean it was a bad trade or that the owners are bad traders though. Depends on what you got for the picks.
  8. Eli Manning was drafted in 2004 Shockey in 2002 and Eli only started 7 games as a rookie in 2004. So the best season you are talking about was Eli's second season in the league. Eli Manning was not playing very well until his age 28 season in 2009. He was below 60% completion rate until 2008 and didn't throw for more than 4000 yards before 2009. Shockey went to the Saints in 2008. So Shockey never played with Eli passing for 4000 yards. 4,000 yards being just 100 or so passing yards over the average of the last 3 seasons (a new standard). Eli was throwing closer to 500 times per season than 600 during this time and 600 is the average number for Eli the last 3 seasons. Manning starts playing 16 games in 2005 and Shockey accounted for 22% of the targets 23.7% of his passing yards that year. Shockey had some injuries in 2006 and 2007 (missed 3 games played limited in others) if we pro rate for those missed games: 2006 (1 missed game) 123 targets 70 receptions 665 yards 7 TD 2007 (2 missed games) 106 targets 65 receptions 707 yards 3 TD Shockey's injures follow him with the Saints and he missed more games than that each year for the rest of his career. He does have some improved efficiency stats with Drew Brees because Eli isn't as good as Brees. Presuming the offense continues to throw the ball around 600 times this season, the pie is bigger than the 557 attempts in 2005 (Shockeys best year with Eli) Will Tye, Larry Donnell and Jerell Adams had 113 targets between them last season. The Giants added Rhett Ellison in free agency who can be used as a receiver, but he is more of a blocking TE and I expect will be used this way over any of the holdover TE still with the team. I can see Engram having 100 targets in 2018 in this offense. For 2017 I am not really expecting more than 80 for Engram, Mostly because rookie TE do not usually do much. So that lower expectation applies to all the rookie TE.
  9. I understand doing this for head to head match ups, although you are being generous as far as your ability to know when those players will miss games. It isn't as clear as you make it sound. This is dynasty however and I think dynasty value should be measured in terms of seasons. Not games. I have a different opinion about Wittens utility for a fantasy team than you do. He has consistently been within the top 12 TE for basically his whole career. You describe him as a TE two but realistically he is low TE one. In the case where you have no better TE than Witten available, he can hold that spot down for you and not give up too much of an advantage to the higher scoring TE. He is still over the baseline. Given the cost? Somewhere around player 200 overall by guestimation of where you have him currently ranked. That is a bargain. Because of his age you don't know how many seasons like this he has left (if any) and that is a good reason to have him lower, You have to treat him like a one year rental for the most part. However Antonio Gates and other top TE (Tony Gonzalez) have shown that they can keep performing at a high level into their late 30s. Similar to the QBs. If the TE is good teams will let them play even into their later years. It is still conceivable that Witten will be performing at a similar level in 2019 (age 37) if he wants to. Its nothing new. I have been saying that Witten is undervalued for like four years in a row now. Just one of those players whos price does not meet their production.
  10. He seems like a solid all around prospect (like Witten) but the outlook is longer and the upside more limited imo. I guess the difference is our evaluation of the player. Maybe I am missing something.
  11. Witten is one of the few TE who does not regularly miss games, so that calculation will disadvantage him somewhat. Here is Witten in pretty typical scoring format. TE 9 in total points in 2014. TE 10 in 2015. TE 11 in 2016 this is for weeks 1-17. Witten had one of his best games against Green Bay in the playoffs last year, which I considered worth noting because Dak Prescott was a rookie..
  12. Why? What makes Butt special?
  13. 28 votes in now.
  14. Jason Witten may be a bit less valuable in .5 PPR but he was TE 9 in PPR scoring last season (including playoff games). He was TE 14 in standard, so that is below the starter baseline in most leagues in that format. He just turned 35 years old so fair to question how much longer he can perform at this level. However he played with a rookie QB last season, I think there are reasons to expect Wittens opportunities might be more effective with Prescott now having a year of experience. Witten has been a starting TE for fantasy for a long time and he was still a viable option last season as well. I would take Witten over any of the other tier 7 TE on your list and also over several of the tier 6 TE which is where I guess I think Witten should be.