Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Fear & Loathing

Dynasty Rankings

Recommended Posts

BTW, at what point do you think harrison's decline WAS due to aging, and not wayne's presence?

I'm sure Harrison's physical skills were declining for a while towards the end of his career, but the losses were small and were more than offset by any gains in "savvy" and experience. In the end, it's really hard to say when you have a QB as great as Peyton Manning throwing you the ball, how much of your statistics are the result of your own personal talent and how much is the result of simply playing with such a sublime field general. As a result, I don't think his age really had any impact on his statistics (note: I said statistics, not performance) until he fell off the cliff at 35. I think it's just a matter of anyone good enough to get targets in Peyton Manning's offense is going to produce, and how much you produce is going to be a function of how many targets you get. I think Collie/Garcon/Wayne/Clark/Gonzalez have done a good job of demonstrating that over the past two years, too. Indy and New Orleans are unique in that in those two systems, a WR's value is probably more closely related to that WR's ability to get targets than it is to that WR's innate "ability" or "talent".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surprised to not see more love for mccoy in the thread.

he looks like a lock to be westbrook's heir apparent (i think many/most would say he is already), and it could happen sooner rather than later. the eagles organizational history of prioritizing players north of 30 is ominously sparse.

i think kenny britt is the only player in the NFL younger than mccoy or beanie wells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surprised to not see more love for mccoy in the thread.he looks like a lock to be westbrook's heir apparent (i think many/most would say he is already), and it could happen sooner rather than later. the eagles organizational history of prioritizing players north of 30 is ominously sparse. i think kenny britt is the only player in the NFL younger than mccoy or beanie wells.

yes, i think he has a bright future as westbrook's replacement. yes, i think it could happen pretty much full-time next year. no, i don't think he's going to be anywhere near as good. he's not as good a runner and he's not as good a receiver. he had a couple of bad drops tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am perplexed about how to value Matt Ryan and Jason Witten moving forward.

A week or two ago I thought of both of these guys as being worthy of at least top 5-10 status amongst their positional rankings (dynasty of course). However, their respective extended runs of mediocrity has both of these guys in the mid to low teens (positional ranking wise for this season) in my league, has really got me wondering now that we are 1/2 way through the season.

Anyone have any insights as to why either of these guys are struggling, or do you think this is perhaps closer to what we can expect from them moving forward?

Edited by geoff8695

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much longer do you guys think Moss has before his production starts to drop? He's 32 and a big part of his game is speed.

Edited by GreatLakesMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am perplexed about how to value Matt Ryan and Jason Witten moving forward.A week or two ago I thought of both of these guys as being worthy of at least top 5-10 status amongst their positional rankings (dynasty of course). However, their respective extended runs of mediocrity has both of these guys in the mid to low teens (positional ranking wise for this season) in my league, has really got me wondering now that we are 1/2 way through the season.Anyone have any insights as to why either of these guys are struggling, or do you think this is perhaps closer to what we can expect from them moving forward?

I personally think Ryan has looked very good (on the whole) this year. His numbers have not always been great, but I think especially in the last few weeks the numbers don't tell the whole story. E.g., much was written about how "he was so careless with the ball" last week, but obviously one of those just a hail mary at the end of the game. And he reportedly has been a great student of the game, working hard to improve etc.So yeah, he's not putting up top 5-10 numbers RIGHT NOW, but he's also not that far off from a PPG perspective. I mean, really, I think he HAS to be a top 10 dynasty QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am perplexed about how to value Matt Ryan and Jason Witten moving forward.

If Ryan is your #1 I think you have to expect these growing pains. He is still only a 2nd year QB. The team's best chance to win is to ride Turner when he is running well. Witten is a bigger question mark. He is too young (27) to be done physically. Granted Dallas tried to be a running team for the first few games and that perhaps changed his outlook, but still Romo is not hitting him in stride over the middle of the field and he isn't barreling people over for YAC. It makes me think there's some injury being hidden - he played throw cracked ribs last year when it affected his ability to breathe let alone move, so he'd probably play through anything.Granted he's on pace for 88 catches and almost 800 yards, but obviously he's not the same guy he was even last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread people. I've read a lot on the rookie WRs but would like some opinions on Crabtree, Nicks & Maclin over the next 3 years. I've got all of them in a 4 player keeper league with salaries in the 1.5% to 3% of my total salary. I'd be looking to possibly keep 2 of the 3. Any thoughts as far as ceilings for these 3 over the next 3 seasons. Personally, with the league awarding PPR, I think Nicks & Crabtree have the more value, but Maclin is on the more explosive offense. Does anyone think Maclin could pass D Jackson as the #1 in the Eagles offense by next season? Upside for these 3 as top 20 WRs starting as early as next year? Top 15?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surprised to not see more love for mccoy in the thread.he looks like a lock to be westbrook's heir apparent (i think many/most would say he is already), and it could happen sooner rather than later. the eagles organizational history of prioritizing players north of 30 is ominously sparse. i think kenny britt is the only player in the NFL younger than mccoy or beanie wells.

yes, i think he has a bright future as westbrook's replacement. yes, i think it could happen pretty much full-time next year. no, i don't think he's going to be anywhere near as good. he's not as good a runner and he's not as good a receiver. he had a couple of bad drops tonight.
I agree with this. McCoy is good, but he isn't great. Westbrook in his prime could carry the Eagles--he quite literally accounted for 70-80% of the yards in some games. And he could score from anywhere on the field. I don't see McCoy with that game changing ability or with the ability to be the guy who carries the offense. He is the heir apparent and will do well, but not great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am perplexed about how to value Matt Ryan and Jason Witten moving forward.A week or two ago I thought of both of these guys as being worthy of at least top 5-10 status amongst their positional rankings (dynasty of course). However, their respective extended runs of mediocrity has both of these guys in the mid to low teens (positional ranking wise for this season) in my league, has really got me wondering now that we are 1/2 way through the season.Anyone have any insights as to why either of these guys are struggling, or do you think this is perhaps closer to what we can expect from them moving forward?

Honestly, I think both are experiencing a slight bump in the road for some fairly easily explained reasons. In terms of Witten - he's still easily in the top 10 in TEs in terms of targets and 2nd in receptions (only Dallas Clark has more) - he just hasn't found the endzone enough. If he had 3-4 more TDs (which are fluky) to go along with all those recpetions, he'd be in the top 5 TEs. He'll get them.In terms of Matty Ice, I think it helps if you look at some of his "bad games" individually. Starting with yesterday and working backwards - he didn't pass alot because he simply didn't have to. Turner was running the ball down the throats of the 'skins and Atlanta was up big early with the Tye Hill pick 6. His previous bad game was at New Orleans - a team that will likely be representing the NFC in the Superbowl. Also, one of the INTs Ryan threw was on the very last play of the game down 8. The Dallas game was another odd game for the Falcons, IMHO. First off, Turner wasn't able to do much (18 rushes for 50 yards) and once again, the Falcons found themselves down early on the road (17-7 at half). In the Patriots game, again, Turner was fairly ineffective 15 rushes for only 56 yards. So, for Ryan, you have a game where his team lead early (this past week) and 3 road losses - 2 of which his RB only rushed for about 50 yards. I think part of Ryan's "issues" are simply learning how to play with a new TE (incidentally, Gonzalez is used in the passing game, not to block as much, which is why I think Turner's numbers have been all over the place too), and learning to play on the road in the NFL (and @ Dallas, NO and NE aren't easy places to play). Incidentally, he's been sacked 12 times so far this season. Last year he was sacked only 17 times. I realize I like Ryan and it may seem like I'm making "excuses" for him - but really in both Witten and Ryan's cases, I think it's more a small blip, than an indicator of anything drastically wrong in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert MeachEm. Why is his the most misspelled name in fantasy football? He's consistently found the endzone over his career and he's starting to make timely catches for his team. I hope all who drafted him are still stashing and those who grabbed him from the wire are doing the same. Great lottery ticket.

I drafted him as a rookie and have hung onto him, but wondering if this may not be a good time to sell high? I am starting to believe in his talent but just not sure if he will ever be a featured element in the offense. At this point, I am leaning toward holding for another year. I wonder if he has one more year left (through 2010?) or two (2011)? I would like to see him go to an offense where he was featured more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much longer do you guys think Moss has before his production starts to drop? He's 32 and a big part of his game is speed.

I believe I saw a study once that said that a guy whose game is based on speed is more likely to play longer than a guy whose game isn't based on speed. Which does make intuitive sense- a player has to meet a certain speed threshold to play in the NFL. Nothing else you can do matters if you're running a 5.5 forty- you simply cannot play WR in the league, end of discussion. As a result, the guys who are well above the threshold (i.e. Randy Moss) can lose a step or two and still remain above the threshold (a great example of this is Joey Galloway). On the other hand, the slower WRs, the guys who are barely above the threshold to begin with, can't. As soon as they lose a single step, they're out of the league.Of course, I can't recall the exact nature of the study, so it's possible I'm misremembering, or making this up, or confusing it with a similar study in baseball. Either way, it makes intuitive sense. I don't think Moss is any more of an age-related risk than any other 32 year old WR (and he's probably significantly less of a risk than most).

Great thread people. I've read a lot on the rookie WRs but would like some opinions on Crabtree, Nicks & Maclin over the next 3 years. I've got all of them in a 4 player keeper league with salaries in the 1.5% to 3% of my total salary. I'd be looking to possibly keep 2 of the 3. Any thoughts as far as ceilings for these 3 over the next 3 seasons. Personally, with the league awarding PPR, I think Nicks & Crabtree have the more value, but Maclin is on the more explosive offense. Does anyone think Maclin could pass D Jackson as the #1 in the Eagles offense by next season? Upside for these 3 as top 20 WRs starting as early as next year? Top 15?

Maclin isn't in Crabtree or Nicks' class when it comes to talent. He's also not in Desean Jackson's class. I'd roll with Crabtree and Nicks without looking back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Washington breaks his leg - badly - and the Jets consider bringing back Jones. Why does that reaction by the Jets damn Greene in your eyes? Isnt it more likely that it reflects uncertainty about Washington's ability to recover and be productive in 2010?Jones being on the Jets next season hurts Greene's value as they both fill a similar role, but I dont think anyone expected that the Jets would make Greene their full time RB. He's going to be paired with someone, and if the Jets have doubts about Washington in 2010, why wouldnt they bring back Jones?

If Chester Taylor broke his leg, would the Vikings pay an RB $5 million a year? If Rashad Jennings broke his leg, would the Jags sign pay Greg Jones $5 million a year? More reasonably... if MeMo broke his leg, would the Steelers resign FWP for $5 million a year. If Buckhalter broke his leg, would the Broncos sign Lamont Jordan for $5 million a year? If you are confident in the back on your roster, you don't pay $5 million for the other guy. Especially when the other guy fills the same role as the guy you're supposedly confident in.
Thomas Jones led the AFC is rushing last season (with 15 total TDs) and has over 700 yards rushing and 7 TDs this season. Surely you can see a difference in paying him over the likes of Chester Taylor, Willie Parker or Lamont Jordan.The Jets were not going to bring Thomas Jones back before Washington's injury and the talk now is merely beat writer speculation - not a forgone conclusion. The staff is very impressed with Greene and have said that he was the highest rated RB on their draft board (that could be a little BS).I don't think bring Jones back reflects on Greene at all. Washington's injury was devastating and the words "career ending" were being tossed around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think bring Jones back reflects on Greene at all.

:thumbup: agree to disagree. They play the same role in the offense, so I can't see how it DOESN'T reflect on Greene. $5 million is an awful lot to spend on a backup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Washington breaks his leg - badly - and the Jets consider bringing back Jones. Why does that reaction by the Jets damn Greene in your eyes? Isnt it more likely that it reflects uncertainty about Washington's ability to recover and be productive in 2010?Jones being on the Jets next season hurts Greene's value as they both fill a similar role, but I dont think anyone expected that the Jets would make Greene their full time RB. He's going to be paired with someone, and if the Jets have doubts about Washington in 2010, why wouldnt they bring back Jones?

If Chester Taylor broke his leg, would the Vikings pay an RB $5 million a year? If Rashad Jennings broke his leg, would the Jags sign pay Greg Jones $5 million a year? More reasonably... if MeMo broke his leg, would the Steelers resign FWP for $5 million a year. If Buckhalter broke his leg, would the Broncos sign Lamont Jordan for $5 million a year? If you are confident in the back on your roster, you don't pay $5 million for the other guy. Especially when the other guy fills the same role as the guy you're supposedly confident in.
Thomas Jones led the AFC is rushing last season (with 15 total TDs) and has over 700 yards rushing and 7 TDs this season. Surely you can see a difference in paying him over the likes of Chester Taylor, Willie Parker or Lamont Jordan.The Jets were not going to bring Thomas Jones back before Washington's injury and the talk now is merely beat writer speculation - not a forgone conclusion. The staff is very impressed with Greene and have said that he was the highest rated RB on their draft board (that could be a little BS).I don't think bring Jones back reflects on Greene at all. Washington's injury was devastating and the words "career ending" were being tossed around.
Right.... SSOG, I don't really think those are great comparatives. Regardless of what you think about Green, I don't think possibly bringing back Jones next year is a condemnation of him. (That is, I think it clearly hurts his VALUE, but I don't think it is a reflection of what the coaching staff things of him). The reality is that Jones is a bit more well-rounded than Green, and they knew that. I think going in the plan was for Leon and Green, collectively, to share the load. If Leon doesn't get hurt, Jones is almost definitely gone. Now, especially given how well TJ has played, they better at least entertain the possibility of bringin him back with Leon's uncertainty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think bring Jones back reflects on Greene at all.

:thumbup: agree to disagree. They play the same role in the offense, so I can't see how it DOESN'T reflect on Greene. $5 million is an awful lot to spend on a backup.
As I said above, I think it clearly affects his VALUE, but I don't think it's a reflection that they don't trust Green... rather, it's that they don't trust Leon to recover well from the injury. And, let's be honest - at this point it's nothing more than speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surprised to not see more love for mccoy in the thread.he looks like a lock to be westbrook's heir apparent (i think many/most would say he is already), and it could happen sooner rather than later. the eagles organizational history of prioritizing players north of 30 is ominously sparse. i think kenny britt is the only player in the NFL younger than mccoy or beanie wells.

Just because you take some one's job doesn't mean you get his "production". Both are small but Westbrook has more bulk and a better balance which makes him a deceptively strong inside runner. McCoy is a weak runner and doesn't have the frame to add much bulk. As others stated or insinuated McCoy makes moves for the sake of making moves instead of just heading downfield.Also Westbrook in his prime was the only show in town (except for the TO years), so the offense ran through him. With Jackson and Maclin on the outside, the Eagles don't need to force fee McCoy the ball in the passing game like they did Westbrook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think bring Jones back reflects on Greene at all.

:shrug: agree to disagree. They play the same role in the offense, so I can't see how it DOESN'T reflect on Greene. $5 million is an awful lot to spend on a backup.
They are really not the "same" back even if we as fantasy players see them in the "same" role. Jones isn't a power runner (although he has good leg drive and strength). He can get outside and break long runs and is a far superior pass catcher to Greene (whio frnakly sucks at it right now).Jones can easily play the "Washington role" (albeit far less dynamically) in a RBBC with Greene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, yeah, well, I just wanted to reinforce that point...:bag:

Actually, since I've got you here, I'd love to hear a Charger fan's take on VJax. Does he have any character or injury concerns that a casual fan might not know about? Is he generally thought of as a high work ethic guy or a low work ethic guy?
Doesn't he have an outstanding DUI?
I believe so. Aside from that, I'm not aware of any issues. As far as I know, he's a hard worker. And I'm not aware that he has ever had injury issues. I'm in Virginia, so I may not be fully tuned in to local news, but I would think of him as a durable, high work ethic guy with good character. (I don't view one DUI with no other off field issues as equating to bad character... though I am not saying I condone his DUI.)
I agree with you. That was the only negative about him I could think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surprised to not see more love for mccoy in the thread.he looks like a lock to be westbrook's heir apparent (i think many/most would say he is already), and it could happen sooner rather than later. the eagles organizational history of prioritizing players north of 30 is ominously sparse. i think kenny britt is the only player in the NFL younger than mccoy or beanie wells.

Just because you take some one's job doesn't mean you get his "production". Both are small but Westbrook has more bulk and a better balance which makes him a deceptively strong inside runner. McCoy is a weak runner and doesn't have the frame to add much bulk. As others stated or insinuated McCoy makes moves for the sake of making moves instead of just heading downfield.Also Westbrook in his prime was the only show in town (except for the TO years), so the offense ran through him. With Jackson and Maclin on the outside, the Eagles don't need to force fee McCoy the ball in the passing game like they did Westbrook.
I agree mostly. So let's venture some guesses of what we can count on. Maybe 75% of Westbrook's peak production? If that happens McCoy still ranks as a RB1. Is 75% a safe guess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surprised to not see more love for mccoy in the thread.he looks like a lock to be westbrook's heir apparent (i think many/most would say he is already), and it could happen sooner rather than later. the eagles organizational history of prioritizing players north of 30 is ominously sparse. i think kenny britt is the only player in the NFL younger than mccoy or beanie wells.

Just because you take some one's job doesn't mean you get his "production". Both are small but Westbrook has more bulk and a better balance which makes him a deceptively strong inside runner. McCoy is a weak runner and doesn't have the frame to add much bulk. As others stated or insinuated McCoy makes moves for the sake of making moves instead of just heading downfield.Also Westbrook in his prime was the only show in town (except for the TO years), so the offense ran through him. With Jackson and Maclin on the outside, the Eagles don't need to force fee McCoy the ball in the passing game like they did Westbrook.
It's true that just because you take someone's job doesn't mean you get his "production." And its never wise to predict a players fantasy production after a season or two (how many people thought Brian Westbrook would be a stud after his rookie year season); but McCoy seems to have a lot going for him. He isn't built the same way, and I would agree that so far he's not as talented an inside runner or receiver as Westbrook is. However, I would disagree that McCoy is a weak inside runner. For a guy who's known for his jukes and spins, when he's told to pound up the middle he picks a hole and runs HARD. Against a stout Cowboys Defensive line, he was consistently running full speed ahead into the line with low pad level and gaining 3-4 yds a pop. To me, thats the most encouraging thing about McCoy this season. He hasn't been relying on his moves and dancing in the backfield. I'm loathe to predict anyone to be a top 5 fantasy player midway through their rookie season, but McCoy has all the tools and a great offense to operate in. He might not get the volume the touches that Westbrook got, but having Desean, Maclin, and Celek opening up the field for him can only help. Many people on this site predicted that in the 2-4 games that Westbrook was garunteed to miss McCoy would be a bonafide fantasy starter. He has not disappointed yet. I think if they do hand him the reigns next season he's easily a top 20 back and could threaten the top 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to Greg Jennings:

Is it time to re-rank Jennings based on this year's mediocre performance by Rodgers, Jennings, and the O-line? Jennings is vastly underperforming a 30+ years old Donald Driver and doesn't appear to be the physically-dominating type of WR that one would expect as a WR1 in dynasty. Rodgers can still gun, sure, but he kills a lot of drives by taking sacks and even when holding onto the ball doesn't seem to be able to get it to Jennings consistently. And the o-line is obviously so bad that one has to wonder how much better it will be by next year, especially considering Ted Thompson doesn't like to spend cash on free agents.

So, given these factors, Greg Jennings seems like he should more reasonably be ranked as a WR2 - WR3 in dynasty, rather than a low WR1. I say this as a Jennings owner. It's just hard to rationalize how Jennings could be ranked significantly higher than Sims-Walker, Welker, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to Greg Jennings:Is it time to re-rank Jennings based on this year's mediocre performance by Rodgers, Jennings, and the O-line? Jennings is vastly underperforming a 30+ years old Donald Driver and doesn't appear to be the physically-dominating type of WR that one would expect as a WR1 in dynasty. Rodgers can still gun, sure, but he kills a lot of drives by taking sacks and even when holding onto the ball doesn't seem to be able to get it to Jennings consistently. And the o-line is obviously so bad that one has to wonder how much better it will be by next year, especially considering Ted Thompson doesn't like to spend cash on free agents.So, given these factors, Greg Jennings seems like he should more reasonably be ranked as a WR2 - WR3 in dynasty, rather than a low WR1. I say this as a Jennings owner. It's just hard to rationalize how Jennings could be ranked significantly higher than Sims-Walker, Welker, etc.

I've had Jennings outside of my top 10 for a couple of weeks now, though I might be biased. I was never really that high on him to begin with, but his production eventually became too much to ignore, so I've sort of been looking for reasons to knock him down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to Greg Jennings:Is it time to re-rank Jennings based on this year's mediocre performance by Rodgers, Jennings, and the O-line? Jennings is vastly underperforming a 30+ years old Donald Driver and doesn't appear to be the physically-dominating type of WR that one would expect as a WR1 in dynasty. Rodgers can still gun, sure, but he kills a lot of drives by taking sacks and even when holding onto the ball doesn't seem to be able to get it to Jennings consistently. And the o-line is obviously so bad that one has to wonder how much better it will be by next year, especially considering Ted Thompson doesn't like to spend cash on free agents.So, given these factors, Greg Jennings seems like he should more reasonably be ranked as a WR2 - WR3 in dynasty, rather than a low WR1. I say this as a Jennings owner. It's just hard to rationalize how Jennings could be ranked significantly higher than Sims-Walker, Welker, etc.

"Mediocre performance by Rodgers"?? Before yesterday's game he had the highest QB Rating in the NFL. Even after it, he still is FOURTH. I agree with you that there are problems in Green Bay, but I would hardly consider Rodgers one of them. It's incredible considering that this is only his second year starting. Especially considering the state of the offensive line. And I do mean offensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much longer do you guys think Moss has before his production starts to drop? He's 32 and a big part of his game is speed.

I believe I saw a study once that said that a guy whose game is based on speed is more likely to play longer than a guy whose game isn't based on speed. Which does make intuitive sense- a player has to meet a certain speed threshold to play in the NFL. Nothing else you can do matters if you're running a 5.5 forty- you simply cannot play WR in the league, end of discussion. As a result, the guys who are well above the threshold (i.e. Randy Moss) can lose a step or two and still remain above the threshold (a great example of this is Joey Galloway). On the other hand, the slower WRs, the guys who are barely above the threshold to begin with, can't. As soon as they lose a single step, they're out of the league.Of course, I can't recall the exact nature of the study, so it's possible I'm misremembering, or making this up, or confusing it with a similar study in baseball. Either way, it makes intuitive sense. I don't think Moss is any more of an age-related risk than any other 32 year old WR (and he's probably significantly less of a risk than most).

Great thread people. I've read a lot on the rookie WRs but would like some opinions on Crabtree, Nicks & Maclin over the next 3 years. I've got all of them in a 4 player keeper league with salaries in the 1.5% to 3% of my total salary. I'd be looking to possibly keep 2 of the 3. Any thoughts as far as ceilings for these 3 over the next 3 seasons. Personally, with the league awarding PPR, I think Nicks & Crabtree have the more value, but Maclin is on the more explosive offense. Does anyone think Maclin could pass D Jackson as the #1 in the Eagles offense by next season? Upside for these 3 as top 20 WRs starting as early as next year? Top 15?

Maclin isn't in Crabtree or Nicks' class when it comes to talent. He's also not in Desean Jackson's class. I'd roll with Crabtree and Nicks without looking back.
Thanks for your thoughts on Moss. I offered a trade up for Moss before I asked that question and was curious...I haven't been able to watch Crabtree yet, but I'm curious as to why everyone keeps putting Nicks above Maclin? People keep pimping Nicks, and I think he's good, but I don't see where he's shown anything to put him over Maclin or Britt. I'm not putting Maclin above DeSean, because DeSean has actually proven he can play, but Nicks has not shown anything IMO. Edited by GreatLakesMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much longer do you guys think Moss has before his production starts to drop? He's 32 and a big part of his game is speed.

I believe I saw a study once that said that a guy whose game is based on speed is more likely to play longer than a guy whose game isn't based on speed. Which does make intuitive sense- a player has to meet a certain speed threshold to play in the NFL. Nothing else you can do matters if you're running a 5.5 forty- you simply cannot play WR in the league, end of discussion. As a result, the guys who are well above the threshold (i.e. Randy Moss) can lose a step or two and still remain above the threshold (a great example of this is Joey Galloway). On the other hand, the slower WRs, the guys who are barely above the threshold to begin with, can't. As soon as they lose a single step, they're out of the league.Of course, I can't recall the exact nature of the study, so it's possible I'm misremembering, or making this up, or confusing it with a similar study in baseball. Either way, it makes intuitive sense. I don't think Moss is any more of an age-related risk than any other 32 year old WR (and he's probably significantly less of a risk than most).

Great thread people. I've read a lot on the rookie WRs but would like some opinions on Crabtree, Nicks & Maclin over the next 3 years. I've got all of them in a 4 player keeper league with salaries in the 1.5% to 3% of my total salary. I'd be looking to possibly keep 2 of the 3. Any thoughts as far as ceilings for these 3 over the next 3 seasons. Personally, with the league awarding PPR, I think Nicks & Crabtree have the more value, but Maclin is on the more explosive offense. Does anyone think Maclin could pass D Jackson as the #1 in the Eagles offense by next season? Upside for these 3 as top 20 WRs starting as early as next year? Top 15?

Maclin isn't in Crabtree or Nicks' class when it comes to talent. He's also not in Desean Jackson's class. I'd roll with Crabtree and Nicks without looking back.
I haven't been able to watch Crabtree yet, but I'm curious as to why everyone keeps putting Nicks above Maclin? People keep pimping Nicks, and I think he's good, but I don't see where he's shown anything to put him over Maclin or Britt. I'm not putting Maclin above DeSean, because DeSean has actually proven he can play, but Nicks has not shown anything IMO.
I'm hoping that the next 8 weeks will separate the 3 players, because right now all 3 show big potential but it is inconsistently. I read a quote by one of the Eagles staff that they had Maclin as the #1 WR in the draft & thought he was a steal. Add in that Jackson just seems better suited as the big play WR 1b type, I hoped Maclin may turn into the PPR guy. Considering that it was thought that he may take awhile to develop & I'm pretty happy with where he is. At the moment I do like Nicks better, but there is concern with the logjam at Wr & I've never been sold that the Giants are at their best with Manning passing. Are there enough balls for Nicks, Smith & Manningham? Love Crabtree but it is a conservative run first offense. Best case would be they decide to align the system to Alex Smith's strengths & go to a spread type system. If I could get 2 solid #15-20 type WRs with upside, for about 4% of my salary, I'd be pretty happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to Greg Jennings:Is it time to re-rank Jennings based on this year's mediocre performance by Rodgers, Jennings, and the O-line? Jennings is vastly underperforming a 30+ years old Donald Driver and doesn't appear to be the physically-dominating type of WR that one would expect as a WR1 in dynasty. Rodgers can still gun, sure, but he kills a lot of drives by taking sacks and even when holding onto the ball doesn't seem to be able to get it to Jennings consistently. And the o-line is obviously so bad that one has to wonder how much better it will be by next year, especially considering Ted Thompson doesn't like to spend cash on free agents.So, given these factors, Greg Jennings seems like he should more reasonably be ranked as a WR2 - WR3 in dynasty, rather than a low WR1. I say this as a Jennings owner. It's just hard to rationalize how Jennings could be ranked significantly higher than Sims-Walker, Welker, etc.

I bought Jennings a few weeks ago. Thought I was buying low. Not sure what the issue is. I think he is talented and is a fantasy WR1. Though not top 5 dynasty WR1 like some thought at the beginning of the season. I wouldn't be surprised if he has some nagging injury. I still think he's worth holding on to in dynasty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much longer do you guys think Moss has before his production starts to drop? He's 32 and a big part of his game is speed.

I believe I saw a study once that said that a guy whose game is based on speed is more likely to play longer than a guy whose game isn't based on speed. Which does make intuitive sense- a player has to meet a certain speed threshold to play in the NFL. Nothing else you can do matters if you're running a 5.5 forty- you simply cannot play WR in the league, end of discussion. As a result, the guys who are well above the threshold (i.e. Randy Moss) can lose a step or two and still remain above the threshold (a great example of this is Joey Galloway). On the other hand, the slower WRs, the guys who are barely above the threshold to begin with, can't. As soon as they lose a single step, they're out of the league.Of course, I can't recall the exact nature of the study, so it's possible I'm misremembering, or making this up, or confusing it with a similar study in baseball. Either way, it makes intuitive sense. I don't think Moss is any more of an age-related risk than any other 32 year old WR (and he's probably significantly less of a risk than most).

Great thread people. I've read a lot on the rookie WRs but would like some opinions on Crabtree, Nicks & Maclin over the next 3 years. I've got all of them in a 4 player keeper league with salaries in the 1.5% to 3% of my total salary. I'd be looking to possibly keep 2 of the 3. Any thoughts as far as ceilings for these 3 over the next 3 seasons. Personally, with the league awarding PPR, I think Nicks & Crabtree have the more value, but Maclin is on the more explosive offense. Does anyone think Maclin could pass D Jackson as the #1 in the Eagles offense by next season? Upside for these 3 as top 20 WRs starting as early as next year? Top 15?

Maclin isn't in Crabtree or Nicks' class when it comes to talent. He's also not in Desean Jackson's class. I'd roll with Crabtree and Nicks without looking back.
I haven't been able to watch Crabtree yet, but I'm curious as to why everyone keeps putting Nicks above Maclin? People keep pimping Nicks, and I think he's good, but I don't see where he's shown anything to put him over Maclin or Britt. I'm not putting Maclin above DeSean, because DeSean has actually proven he can play, but Nicks has not shown anything IMO.
I'm hoping that the next 8 weeks will separate the 3 players, because right now all 3 show big potential but it is inconsistently. I read a quote by one of the Eagles staff that they had Maclin as the #1 WR in the draft & thought he was a steal. Add in that Jackson just seems better suited as the big play WR 1b type, I hoped Maclin may turn into the PPR guy. Considering that it was thought that he may take awhile to develop & I'm pretty happy with where he is. At the moment I do like Nicks better, but there is concern with the logjam at Wr & I've never been sold that the Giants are at their best with Manning passing. Are there enough balls for Nicks, Smith & Manningham? Love Crabtree but it is a conservative run first offense. Best case would be they decide to align the system to Alex Smith's strengths & go to a spread type system. If I could get 2 solid #15-20 type WRs with upside, for about 4% of my salary, I'd be pretty happy.
Yeah, I'm not even basing my question on situation. I'm not a college guy, but I've been relatively successful at identifying NFL talent, and to this point, I haven't seen much from Nicks to prove that he's better than Maclin. I'm not putting one over the other, but I just see a lot of people dismissing Maclin like he's a red-headed step child. Nicks was behind Tate in the NFL scouts eyes for the longest time.... just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been able to watch Crabtree yet, but I'm curious as to why everyone keeps putting Nicks above Maclin? People keep pimping Nicks, and I think he's good, but I don't see where he's shown anything to put him over Maclin or Britt. I'm not putting Maclin above DeSean, because DeSean has actually proven he can play, but Nicks has not shown anything IMO.

I'm putting Nicks above Maclin because I've really been impressed by Nicks and think he's a future stud.

Yeah, I'm not even basing my question on situation. I'm not a college guy, but I've been relatively successful at identifying NFL talent, and to this point, I haven't seen much from Nicks to prove that he's better than Maclin. I'm not putting one over the other, but I just see a lot of people dismissing Maclin like he's a red-headed step child. Nicks was behind Tate in the NFL scouts eyes for the longest time.... just saying.

So? I like Tate a lot, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

Look at what happened with Ray Rice this season. Going into the year people were concerned about the presence of McGahee and McClain, but Rice leapfrogged them. The same could happen with Greene if he continues to improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

I'm not letting the presence of Jones impact Greene's value, I'm letting the short term presence of Jones reaffirm my original assessment that Greene's not a special RB, which is in turn impacting Greene's value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

I'm not letting the presence of Jones impact Greene's value, I'm letting the short term presence of Jones reaffirm my original assessment that Greene's not a special RB, which is in turn impacting Greene's value.
I think that's pretty short-sighted. He doesn't need to be special to win that job. The (possible) return of Jones for another season isn't a direct indictment of Greene like you're suggesting. Did Willie Parker keep Rashard Mendenhall on the bench this season? Did Willis McGahee keep Ray Rice on the bench this season? I don't think Thomas Jones tells us anything about Shonn Greene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much longer do you guys think Moss has before his production starts to drop? He's 32 and a big part of his game is speed.

I believe I saw a study once that said that a guy whose game is based on speed is more likely to play longer than a guy whose game isn't based on speed. Which does make intuitive sense- a player has to meet a certain speed threshold to play in the NFL. Nothing else you can do matters if you're running a 5.5 forty- you simply cannot play WR in the league, end of discussion. As a result, the guys who are well above the threshold (i.e. Randy Moss) can lose a step or two and still remain above the threshold (a great example of this is Joey Galloway). On the other hand, the slower WRs, the guys who are barely above the threshold to begin with, can't. As soon as they lose a single step, they're out of the league.Of course, I can't recall the exact nature of the study, so it's possible I'm misremembering, or making this up, or confusing it with a similar study in baseball. Either way, it makes intuitive sense. I don't think Moss is any more of an age-related risk than any other 32 year old WR (and he's probably significantly less of a risk than most).

Great thread people. I've read a lot on the rookie WRs but would like some opinions on Crabtree, Nicks & Maclin over the next 3 years. I've got all of them in a 4 player keeper league with salaries in the 1.5% to 3% of my total salary. I'd be looking to possibly keep 2 of the 3. Any thoughts as far as ceilings for these 3 over the next 3 seasons. Personally, with the league awarding PPR, I think Nicks & Crabtree have the more value, but Maclin is on the more explosive offense. Does anyone think Maclin could pass D Jackson as the #1 in the Eagles offense by next season? Upside for these 3 as top 20 WRs starting as early as next year? Top 15?

Maclin isn't in Crabtree or Nicks' class when it comes to talent. He's also not in Desean Jackson's class. I'd roll with Crabtree and Nicks without looking back.
Not saying that you are referencing any thread that I have mentioned this in- but it was a Bill James theory in baseball. In the 80's/90's there was question about whether players like Ozzie Smith would have value once they lost a step. James asserted, as you suggested, that they actually aged much better than slower, savvy players- who becasme useless once they lost a baseline of required athleticism.I think the same definitely applies to rb's wr's and TE's (CB's can move to safety, outside backers can move inside, inside backers can move to running downs). I am a big believer that big power backs, physical slower wr's and TE's tend to just drive off a cliff once they lose a step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

I'm not letting the presence of Jones impact Greene's value, I'm letting the short term presence of Jones reaffirm my original assessment that Greene's not a special RB, which is in turn impacting Greene's value.
I think that's pretty short-sighted. He doesn't need to be special to win that job. The (possible) return of Jones for another season isn't a direct indictment of Greene like you're suggesting. Did Willie Parker keep Rashard Mendenhall on the bench this season? Did Willis McGahee keep Ray Rice on the bench this season? I don't think Thomas Jones tells us anything about Shonn Greene.
There is a slight difference here though. Parker and McGahee averaged under 4.0 ypc carry in 2008- so the writing was on the wall that they would be replaced if they did not improve. Jones averaged 4.5 ypc on almost 300 carries in 2008 and is averaging 4.7 this year, while carrying the ball at a similar pace. Jones won't be there forever, but he could present a small roadblock in the short -to -middle term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

I'm not letting the presence of Jones impact Greene's value, I'm letting the short term presence of Jones reaffirm my original assessment that Greene's not a special RB, which is in turn impacting Greene's value.
I think that's pretty short-sighted. He doesn't need to be special to win that job. The (possible) return of Jones for another season isn't a direct indictment of Greene like you're suggesting. Did Willie Parker keep Rashard Mendenhall on the bench this season? Did Willis McGahee keep Ray Rice on the bench this season? I don't think Thomas Jones tells us anything about Shonn Greene.
There is a slight difference here though. Parker and McGahee averaged under 4.0 ypc carry in 2008- so the writing was on the wall that they would be replaced if they did not improve. Jones averaged 4.5 ypc on almost 300 carries in 2008 and is averaging 4.7 this year, while carrying the ball at a similar pace. Jones won't be there forever, but he could present a small roadblock in the short -to -middle term.
In a sense you've just made a great argument in favor of Greene. Thomas Jones is playing great. If it ain't broke, why fix it? You can't draw any meaningful conclusions about an organization's opinion of a player simply because they're reluctant to promote him ahead of someone who's producing at a Pro Bowl level. It means nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

I'm not letting the presence of Jones impact Greene's value, I'm letting the short term presence of Jones reaffirm my original assessment that Greene's not a special RB, which is in turn impacting Greene's value.
I think that's pretty short-sighted. He doesn't need to be special to win that job. The (possible) return of Jones for another season isn't a direct indictment of Greene like you're suggesting. Did Willie Parker keep Rashard Mendenhall on the bench this season? Did Willis McGahee keep Ray Rice on the bench this season? I don't think Thomas Jones tells us anything about Shonn Greene.
There is a slight difference here though. Parker and McGahee averaged under 4.0 ypc carry in 2008- so the writing was on the wall that they would be replaced if they did not improve. Jones averaged 4.5 ypc on almost 300 carries in 2008 and is averaging 4.7 this year, while carrying the ball at a similar pace. Jones won't be there forever, but he could present a small roadblock in the short -to -middle term.
In a sense you've just made a great argument in favor of Greene. Thomas Jones is playing great. If it ain't broke, why fix it? You can't draw any meaningful conclusions about an organization's opinion of a player simply because they're reluctant to promote him ahead of someone who's producing at a Pro Bowl level. It means nothing.
I can agree with this point. I was just saying that you shouldn't anticipate Jones moving to the bench next year like Parker and McGahee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Shonn Greene, I wouldn't let the short term presence of Thomas Jones impact my take on his dynasty value. It's pretty much irrelevant. If he's a good back, he'll eventually be the starter. If not, he won't.

I'm not letting the presence of Jones impact Greene's value, I'm letting the short term presence of Jones reaffirm my original assessment that Greene's not a special RB, which is in turn impacting Greene's value.
I think that's pretty short-sighted. He doesn't need to be special to win that job. The (possible) return of Jones for another season isn't a direct indictment of Greene like you're suggesting. Did Willie Parker keep Rashard Mendenhall on the bench this season? Did Willis McGahee keep Ray Rice on the bench this season? I don't think Thomas Jones tells us anything about Shonn Greene.
Again, I'm not saying Jones is telling me something about Greene, I'm saying that Jones is reaffirming something that I already believed about Greene.If I didn't like Greene in the first place, do you think the fact that the team is unwilling to give him the reigns should be viewed as a reason to move him up my rankings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I didn't like Greene in the first place, do you think the fact that the team is unwilling to give him the reigns should be viewed as a reason to move him up my rankings?

No, there is no strong reason to move him up or down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I tried being a bit too smart for my own good not starting Mendenhall this week (Big starting roster) and went with Felix in a flex spot. Great that he showed something against a D that was suffocating the opponents running game (3.4 ypc, 86 ypg, 26 rushing attempts against per game). He didn't get the late game TD, but Denver have been even more stout in that area this year.

At least this gives an indication that people should not be too ansty about starting him vs better D's.

And I still won thankfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I tried being a bit too smart for my own good not starting Mendenhall this week (Big starting roster) and went with Felix in a flex spot. Great that he showed something against a D that was suffocating the opponents running game (3.4 ypc, 86 ypg, 26 rushing attempts against per game). He didn't get the late game TD, but Denver have been even more stout in that area this year.At least this gives an indication that people should not be too ansty about starting him vs better D's.And I still won thankfully.

As a Mendenhall owner I was pleased but still see room for improvement!He ran out of bounds when he shouldn't have.He still spins too much and that may have been a fumble in the redzone near the end of the game. As I said before the season, I think it's mental mistakes and he'll overcome those with good coaching.On the other hand, Where the heck is Moreno?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I tried being a bit too smart for my own good not starting Mendenhall this week (Big starting roster) and went with Felix in a flex spot. Great that he showed something against a D that was suffocating the opponents running game (3.4 ypc, 86 ypg, 26 rushing attempts against per game). He didn't get the late game TD, but Denver have been even more stout in that area this year.At least this gives an indication that people should not be too ansty about starting him vs better D's.And I still won thankfully.

As a Mendenhall owner I was pleased but still see room for improvement!He ran out of bounds when he shouldn't have.He still spins too much and that may have been a fumble in the redzone near the end of the game. As I said before the season, I think it's mental mistakes and he'll overcome those with good coaching.On the other hand, Where the heck is Moreno?
It wasn't a perfect performance, but I don't know how many Mendenhall owners are really expecting a perfect performance :shrug: The spin will probably be ground out of him over time (Hopefully), but as a fantasy performance, it was none too shabby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying that you are referencing any thread that I have mentioned this in- but it was a Bill James theory in baseball. In the 80's/90's there was question about whether players like Ozzie Smith would have value once they lost a step. James asserted, as you suggested, that they actually aged much better than slower, savvy players- who becasme useless once they lost a baseline of required athleticism.I think the same definitely applies to rb's wr's and TE's (CB's can move to safety, outside backers can move inside, inside backers can move to running downs). I am a big believer that big power backs, physical slower wr's and TE's tend to just drive off a cliff once they lose a step.

:whistle: Well said. Edited by Fear & Loathing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about making a move for Calvin Johnson. (ppr dynasty)

What is his dynasty value compared to Colston? I am thinking about putting a package together involving Colston+??? I have 2 1sts(an early and a middle) and a 2nd(middle) in this upcoming rookie draft and my team is in my signature below. What would be fair value and what would be too much.

Keep in mind my team is practically eliminated from playoffs and he is 1 game out of his division and tied in the wildcard.

Any info would be helpful as I work to get this trade together this week.

Edited by OnThInIcE911

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brandon Marshall with 11 catches and a 112 yards in a game that Orton didn't play well seems to be securing his old spot. He isn't going to score as much because the team doesn't throw it as deep as they did with Cutler, but he seems like a top end WR2 now. If McDaniel's tough love ends his knucklehead factor then the drop from WR1 production to solid WR2 may be worth it.

Edited by az_prof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to Greg Jennings:

Is it time to re-rank Jennings based on this year's mediocre performance by Rodgers, Jennings, and the O-line? Jennings is vastly underperforming a 30+ years old Donald Driver and doesn't appear to be the physically-dominating type of WR that one would expect as a WR1 in dynasty. Rodgers can still gun, sure, but he kills a lot of drives by taking sacks and even when holding onto the ball doesn't seem to be able to get it to Jennings consistently. And the o-line is obviously so bad that one has to wonder how much better it will be by next year, especially considering Ted Thompson doesn't like to spend cash on free agents.

So, given these factors, Greg Jennings seems like he should more reasonably be ranked as a WR2 - WR3 in dynasty, rather than a low WR1. I say this as a Jennings owner. It's just hard to rationalize how Jennings could be ranked significantly higher than Sims-Walker, Welker, etc.

I've had Jennings outside of my top 10 for a couple of weeks now, though I might be biased. I was never really that high on him to begin with, but his production eventually became too much to ignore, so I've sort of been looking for reasons to knock him down.
Bob McGinn a great writer that covers the Packers recently had a secondary coach review the game tape on Greg Jennings. The coach viewed every play of the 2nd Packers vs Vikings game and gave McGinn his review.

The basics: Jennings was shut out in the first half and had 7/81 in the second half.

"When you watch that film he's open, he runs good routes, he catches the ball, his speed was good, he will block, he runs after (the catch)," the coach said. "I couldn't mark him down for anything.

"Now do I see the tenacity of a Steve Smith (Carolina) or the athletic ability of Andre Johnson? No. I don't see the athletic cuts of an (Chad) Ochocinco. I see Santonio Holmes being more explosive.

"Is he a Pro Bowl guy? I don't know. I don't know how many times they throw him the ball. But that guy would be real nice on our team."

"Their problem is nothing that I could see other than the line," he said. "The running back is OK. The receivers are OK. The quarterback obviously can throw the ball. They just can't pass protect anybody."

Is the failure in protection more the result of players or scheme?

"Both," the coach said. "They run typical West Coast routes. Up the field, hitches. Other than their protection, they're an NFL offense. But their protection is absolutely glaring.

"That line is pathetic. They never get a chance to do anything. Shoot, those guys cannot block. Those guys block the wrong guys. They don't block guys sometimes. How can you not block Jared Allen?"

"I don't see him loafing. He gives as much effort as anybody else. I don't see him taking a play off. He blocks on runs and passes. I'm surprised he's not complaining more.

I think Jennings may be a good target to buy low this season. Both he and Rodgers will be teamed up for a long time to come. Its a good combination. The offensive line is bad this year, but that is a correctable problem. The Packers do have the pieces in place for the right side of their line. 2010 will put RT (Lang) RG (Sitton) and C (Spitz) together. That has all the appearances of being a solid side of the line. Its the left side that's the problem. So they need to find a new LT and LG. Not simple mind you, but its not like they need 5 new olineman. My guess is they'll use FA to grab a LG and the apparent relatively high 1st rounder on a LT.

Jennings isn't as talented as some of the top WRs of the game. However, he's very good, and has a young very capable QB throwing to him for the foreseeable future. I still believe he deserves to be somewhere between 6-10 in dynasty WR rankings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brandon Marshall with 11 catches and a 112 yards in a game that Orton didn't play well seems to be securing his old spot. He isn't going to score as much because the team doesn't throw it as deep as they did with Cutler, but he seems like a top end WR2 now. If McDaniel's tough love ends his knucklehead factor then the drop from WR1 production to solid WR2 may be worth it.

Knuckleheads don't pop up when you're expecting it. They pop up at the most inopportune times. You can forgive and forget if you want to, but I don't value Marshall's total package that highly ... unless I'm playing in the Colorado penal league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to Greg Jennings:

Is it time to re-rank Jennings based on this year's mediocre performance by Rodgers, Jennings, and the O-line? Jennings is vastly underperforming a 30+ years old Donald Driver and doesn't appear to be the physically-dominating type of WR that one would expect as a WR1 in dynasty. Rodgers can still gun, sure, but he kills a lot of drives by taking sacks and even when holding onto the ball doesn't seem to be able to get it to Jennings consistently. And the o-line is obviously so bad that one has to wonder how much better it will be by next year, especially considering Ted Thompson doesn't like to spend cash on free agents.

So, given these factors, Greg Jennings seems like he should more reasonably be ranked as a WR2 - WR3 in dynasty, rather than a low WR1. I say this as a Jennings owner. It's just hard to rationalize how Jennings could be ranked significantly higher than Sims-Walker, Welker, etc.

I've had Jennings outside of my top 10 for a couple of weeks now, though I might be biased. I was never really that high on him to begin with, but his production eventually became too much to ignore, so I've sort of been looking for reasons to knock him down.
Bob McGinn a great writer that covers the Packers recently had a secondary coach review the game tape on Greg Jennings. The coach viewed every play of the 2nd Packers vs Vikings game and gave McGinn his review.

The basics: Jennings was shut out in the first half and had 7/81 in the second half.

"When you watch that film he's open, he runs good routes, he catches the ball, his speed was good, he will block, he runs after (the catch)," the coach said. "I couldn't mark him down for anything.

"Now do I see the tenacity of a Steve Smith (Carolina) or the athletic ability of Andre Johnson? No. I don't see the athletic cuts of an (Chad) Ochocinco. I see Santonio Holmes being more explosive.

"Is he a Pro Bowl guy? I don't know. I don't know how many times they throw him the ball. But that guy would be real nice on our team."

"Their problem is nothing that I could see other than the line," he said. "The running back is OK. The receivers are OK. The quarterback obviously can throw the ball. They just can't pass protect anybody."

Is the failure in protection more the result of players or scheme?

"Both," the coach said. "They run typical West Coast routes. Up the field, hitches. Other than their protection, they're an NFL offense. But their protection is absolutely glaring.

"That line is pathetic. They never get a chance to do anything. Shoot, those guys cannot block. Those guys block the wrong guys. They don't block guys sometimes. How can you not block Jared Allen?"

"I don't see him loafing. He gives as much effort as anybody else. I don't see him taking a play off. He blocks on runs and passes. I'm surprised he's not complaining more.

I think Jennings may be a good target to buy low this season. Both he and Rodgers will be teamed up for a long time to come. Its a good combination. The offensive line is bad this year, but that is a correctable problem. The Packers do have the pieces in place for the right side of their line. 2010 will put RT (Lang) RG (Sitton) and C (Spitz) together. That has all the appearances of being a solid side of the line. Its the left side that's the problem. So they need to find a new LT and LG. Not simple mind you, but its not like they need 5 new olineman. My guess is they'll use FA to grab a LG and the apparent relatively high 1st rounder on a LT.

Jennings isn't as talented as some of the top WRs of the game. However, he's very good, and has a young very capable QB throwing to him for the foreseeable future. I still believe he deserves to be somewhere between 6-10 in dynasty WR rankings.

:pickle:

Thanks, Kitrick. Outstanding post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add a dyanasty question for the gurus.

PPR 2rb 3 wr 1 flex

Would you trade

I give

Slaton

Moats

for

I get

Jacobs

Sproles

I may be able to add my T edwards and his M sanchez

Edited by Colts Win

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add a dyanasty question for the gurus.PPR 2rb 3 wr 1 flexWould you trade SlatonMoats forJacobsSprolesI may be able to add my T edwards and his M sanchez

no and no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add a dyanasty question for the gurus.PPR 2rb 3 wr 1 flexWould you trade I giveSlatonMoats forI getJacobsSprolesI may be able to add my T edwards and his M sanchez

Eight days a week. Go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.