Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
There are guy who play in 8 team leagues, how much fun can that be? I played in a 10 team league once, it was stupid, i will never play less than 12.... you guys play in too many 10 and 12 team leaguesMost of my leagues are 16 teams - so a WR2 in the top 20 is effectively a WR1
I don't think he's going to sit out the entire season.I have two concerns with VJax.
My favorite league is an 8-teamer. It all depends on the other owners.
Yeah, i suppose if you had good owners, it could be fun. It just seems to take any skill away with everyones rosters full of studs.
It emphasizes different skills. Guys who are great at weekly projections and who dominate WDIS decisions do better in smaller leagues. So do guys who are really flexible and able to think critically, able to determine what kind of impact different settings will have on player values (for instance, QBs are more valuable in small leagues and RBs are less valuable). If anything, I think big leagues de-emphasize skill to a much greater degree than smaller leagues, because you're much more at the mercy of injuries. In a league where everyone has 1 stud, if your guy gets injured then your season is over. In a league where everyone has 3 studs, if one of them gets injured you've still got a chance. You might have to work some magic to get him replaced, or you might have to rely on your quality depth to keep you afloat, but it's still possible to remain competitive. You're never just one torn ACL away from being completely out of it.At the end of the day, any discussion of how much "skill" a certain format takes is silly. If everyone threw darts at a dartboard for every decision, then everyone in the league would have a 1-in-N chance of winning (where N is the number of people in the league). If you are better than your leaguemates, you'll have better odds of winning. If you're worse than your leaguemates, you'll have worse odds of winning. It'd be easier to win a 12-team league full of idiots and new players than it would be to win an 8-team league full of competitive and experienced owners. Skill level isn't determined by league format, it's determined by the skill level of the people in the league.
One of my favorite leagues ever was a 10 team redraft league. Great owners who knew their ####. It seemed like every year there were 8 to 9 teams in the playoff hunt right up to the final week . 9 - 4 was a phenomenal season, and 8 - 5 usually won the division.How are you sure it's going to be four games? Has it been announced yet?
I was thinking about this a bit earlier today. Possession receivers never get much love unless they produce amazing stats or have a great combination of size/speed. I think this has a lot to do with the fantasy football obsession with upside. Players with the skill set that make up great WR2/slot tend to be quick not fast and have a knack for being open underneath. This tends to limit their immediate upside but grant them the ability to have longer careers than those that rely more on raw speed. This is especially true in PPR. If you don't feel like your getting fair market value for guys like Smith than you probably aren't. His ceiling is probably no higher than last season but players like him who develop great rapport with franchise QB's and find ways to get open have high floors, which is very important. He is a guy you can plug in as a WR2-3 for the next 5+ years and get production every game. Moral of the story is downside is as important as upside when evaluating fantasy relevant players even if it isn't as sexy. When considering players who are not relevant (like say Josh Reed) it doesn't matter if they consistently suck because they don't have the upside to help your team.
Other than the lack of upside, I heavily disagree with this assessment of Smith. He has all kinds of up and coming competition at WR and the Giants' passing numbers as a whole will likely regress back closer to their mean.Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Steve Smith is a complete fantasy afterthought in a couple years. That's a heck of a floor.
I don't really see how increased WR competition points to a regression in NYG passing game. Seems contradictory and I don't agree with the sentiment at all. I'm really high on Nicks but I don't see him taking too many targets from Smith and I also don't think Manningham is talented enough to replace Smith in the starting lineup. I guess if you do see a situation where he gets taken out of the starting lineup by another player than you should be down on him but I don't think thats too realistic looking at Smiths production last year and improvement over his career.
Smith won't be taken out of the starting lineup, but how can you not see the possibility of Nicks taking targets from Smith? If Nicks progresses the way many think he will, he will become a dominant WR in this league within the next year or two. He should easily see more targets this season starting a full year - a few of them will probably be from Smith. I don't think Smith will be a 100+ catch WR once Nicks is fully up to speed, I think he'll be around 80-90 for the next few seasons, which is pretty darn great in itself.
Because Eli Manning had a career year last year and could easily regress back to his career averages like many other quarterbacks do. It's entirely possible for a team to re-arrange it's depth chart at WR and still see their overall passing numbers go down. Eli Manning threw for 800 less yards and 5+ fewer TDs several times back when he had Burress/Toomer, who were better than what the Giants had at WR last year. Likewise, Peyton put up better numbers this year with Garcon/Wayne than he did with Harrison/Wayne most years.
Won't comment on Smith - I am a HUGE Nicks fan - but I do think it's silly to say that NYG passing game is going to "regress back to their mean". A few years ago, the Giants were a running team with a a great defense. With Eli's maturation and a YOUNG up-and-coming receiving corps and a declining defense, I think they're going to be more and more of a passing team going forward.As OnThinIce said, if you're down on Steve Smith, that's fine - but to say that you're down on him because the NYG passing game is "going to regress" then you're not paying attention, IMO. It wouldn't surprise me to see Eli be considered a borderline top 7 QB by year's end, and I personally think this trio is going to cement themselves as one of the better young receiving corps out there.
First off, "exactly 1 top 10 WR finish" is a good example of gerrymandering. Jackson has finished 12th and 10th in the last two years... so yeah, he's only got that one top-10 finish, but he has TWO top-12 finishes. The "5 years of experience with top tier QB play" is also misleading. VJax was drafted out of Northern Colorado, a division 2 school in the Big Sky Conference. He was widely considered a project when he was drafted, and he was playing a position that is famous for the "3rd year breakout". Vincent Jackson had 0 starts his first year (was only active for 7 games) and 7 starts his second, so it doesn't really matter how good the QB play was. In year 3 he finally earned the starting job, but despite your claims that he played with top-tier QB play every year, San Diego was 26th in the NFL in passing yardage that year. Year 4 he was WR12, and year 5 he was WR10. Seems like a very solid, reasonable, and respectable progression to me.I read those as two separate points. Point #1 = Eli Manning was playing over his head and the passing game is going to regress. In the three years before last year, Manning averaged 3272 yards passing. Last year, he had 4021 yards passing. Point #2 = Nicks and Manningham are both talented and are going to eat into Smith's targets. Nicks was a rookie last year- his targets are almost certain to increase.In other words, the Giants are likely to have a smaller passing pie, and Smith is likely to get a smaller piece of said pie. I still think he's a pretty high-floor, reliable player (sort of a poor man's Derrick Mason), but I can see how someone would disagree.
I think there's a lot of truth in this line of criticism, and I say that as a Smith owner and fan. There are very few true possession receivers who put up numbers like Smith did for the long term. There are some, for sure- Rod Smith (at least in his later years) comes to mind. On the other hand, there are plenty of similar guys who've had excellent fantasy seasons, but never really re-captured their lofty stats in the long-term.
Anyway, it's looking more and more like Devin Hester is definitely the #1 WR in a Mike Martz passing offense... and yet his ADP puts him at WR38, and he's usually going in the 12th round. FBG staffers are a little bit more bullish on him, but even they have him at WR30. The only two Mike Martz WR1s to finish outside of the top 20 are Shaun McDonald and a 36-year old Isaac Bruce in San Francisco... and both of them were still top 25.Not to pick on F&L, but he's got Hester at dynasty WR48, behind both Knox (WR38) and Devin Aromatherapy (WR39). Personally, I'd rate Hester alongside guys like Maclin, Wallace, and Sims-Walker somewhere in the 20s. I still think he's a fantastic upside play, a great guy to acquire on the super-cheap as a fantastic dynasty WR3 with high-end WR2 upside. It's crazy how unbelievably low his value is right now in dynasty leagues. I've had guys in my league who have told me they weren't even interested in him as a throw-in (those same guys, though, were rabidly pursuing Mike Sims-Walker). And I play in a yardage-heavy league that counts punt return yards the same as receiving yards (which essentially gives Hester an extra 250 yards a year). Insane.
I have to agree with F&L on this one. Hester is going to be 28 this season, and to this point has never looked like a top 2 NFL WR. I think his skills are best suited for the slot/returner. He may a decent bye week filler, but i certainly wouldnt want to count on him on a weely basis. I prefer DA and especially Johnny Knox. Both those guys have shown flashes of ability to be starting WR's, and are still young.
Devin Aromatherapy is 26 to start the season. I absolutely agree that he's "still young". Of course, Devin Hester is... 27. He's just as young.Devin Aromatherapy has 31/394 in his entire NFL career. Devin Hester had 51/665 in his first season as a WR and has 1721 receiving yards in the 3 years since he first started dabbling at WR. Devin Aromatherapy had a great stretch to close the season, posting 22/282 over a 4-week span. If that qualifies as "flashes of ability to be a starting WR", then what was it when Devin Hester posted 27/359 in the four weeks from week 5 to week 8?I can get liking Johnny Knox, although personally I'm with the guy who had 230 more yards in 2 fewer games, the guy who the coaches can't stop raving about, and the guy who actually has some career starts to his name.As someone who counted on Hester on a weekly basis last season, I would have no problem at all doing the same next year. Outside of his 1/2/0 game (where he was injured early in the 2nd quarter), Hester's PPG average would rank him 28th in non-PPR leagues. That's a solid WR3 even before the addition of Martz.Edit: In my league (which, as I said, includes punt return yardage with the receiving totals), Hester ranked 24th in PPG last season (16th if you toss out the 1/2/0 game). If Hester's a complete afterthought even in that super-friendly format, I shudder to think at how cheaply he could be acquired in a more traditional league. I mean, at this point, I wouldn't be shocked to see people giving him up for a rookie 3rd round pick.
I was basing that more on watching them play than actual numbers. Hester kind of reminds me of Roy Williams, not a natural WR, but gets by on his athletisism.
Been saying this all off-season to anyone who cared to listen, but not too loudly because I liked picking him up so cheap everywhere. I see his floor as a solid fantasy WR3 for years to come with low end WR1 upside. Right now, I have him just (barely) out of my top 25. People forget that he never played WR before the NFL, yet has improved dramaticly at the postion every year since he's been drafted.
In Hester's first season at WR he had 20/299/2.I don't understand the hype around him....he failed to find a position at Miami. Then struggled in the NFL until now he posts back to back 51/665/3 and 57/757/3 season's and now he is a #1???Last season he was competing with
A(who u stated had basically no stats and was an after thought) and was a former 7th round pick.Knox a rookie 5th round pick from a small school.Bennett a 3rd round pick going into his second season.Iglesius a rookie 3rd round pick.Not a ton of competition b/c they were all so young. But you don't view all of those WR's to be better this season vs last season? The biggest jump for WR's has been from rookie to 2nd year and 2nd year to 3rd year....the Bears have 3 candidates in those areas. On top of that....the biggest size WR is DA....was on fire at the end of the season and reminded people of the Cutler to Marshall connection.On top of all of that....Hester disappointed last season....did you watch the SF game? Hester fell down on an out pattern that cost Cutler an INT....as well as...stopped on a crossing pattern that cost Cutler another INT. They were horrible plays to watch.The full time Hester at WR....has less TD's catching the football vs returning....and he hasn't returned one for a TD in two years.Hester is what he is....a return man that can play some spot duty at WR. He is the oldest of the WR group(meaning his body is physically done developing....his abilities probably won't improve much), he is the least experienced out of the group(in terms of playing WR in his life), and has shown he can't put up the #1 numbers (failing to do that vs Brandon Lloyd and Marty Booker for competition and last season with a bunch of young guys).Being a Bears fan...I expect Hester to be a WR3 or worse moving forward and in one of my dynasty leagues traded him straight up for Eric Decker.
IMO this fact isn't very meaningful when you consider the context during his years as OC or HC.From 1999 to 2005, he had Bruce and/or Holt in their primes. Two HOF candidates. I don't think Hester compares to either of them in terms of talent or playing style. So throw out those years for comparison purposes.In 2006, he had Roy Williams, who had his one good season, so that is perhaps a credit to Martz. But in 2007, McDonald was the leading WR, despite the fact that Martz had Calvin Johnson, who as a rookie had just 48/756/4, then exploded the next season with Martz gone. IMO both Williams and Johnson are more talented WRs than Hester; one succeeded and the other didn't under Martz. In 2008, he had lousy WRs in San Francisco, so it's hard to judge.IMO the WRs Martz had with the Lions and 49ers were much more comparable to the group he has with the Bears than the group he had with the Rams. So those three seasons seem to be more valid for predictive purposes than his years with the Rams. Plus, they are his most recent seasons as OC. And he had just 1 top 20 WR out of those 3 years.Not compelling.
In Hester's first season at WR he had 20/299/2.I don't understand the hype around him....he failed to find a position at Miami. Then struggled in the NFL until now he posts back to back 51/665/3 and 57/757/3 season's and now he is a #1???Last season he was competing with
I usually agree....but if you are in a win now mode why wouldn't you give up close to nothing for him and have him as a WR3/4?
Well giving up next to nothing for him is fine, but the Hester conversation was started by talking about "Dynasty buzz" and a lot of points on why he was a great WR in dynasty. Hester to me was a joke as WR1. I loved it when the guy in my league played him every single week despite his other WR's matchups just because Hester was "a number 1 WR". To me Hester has little to no Dynasty value. Maybe redraft value this year but not dynasty value. I'd much rather have a ton of other young WR's that are currently doing nothing much but could breakout than a guy who I already know what I have and am not impressed with. Plus, going by SSOG's own system of dumping a guy before he loses all value then Hester is one to dump and dump quick not hold due to dynasty buzz. I love SSOG but he may have his fan goggles on for this one. We all have players we personally like, but they are not all great dynasty guys to own.Fodasme69 said:
SSOG said:
I've tried to move Mike Sims-Walker all off-season, and the #1 reason owners are not interested in Sims-Walker is because he faded down the stretch.
I don't think it can be Aromashodu. Aroma doesn't fit Martz's scheme well, Aroma isn't running with the 1s (and nobody with the Bears has suggested that he might start), and Aroma didn't put up ANY numbers last year until both Hester and Knox were hurt. I get that Cutler likes Aromatherapy. Cutler had a huge man-crush on Tony Scheffler, too... but he was still the #3 option behind both Marshall and Royal in '08. I really think it's either Hester or Knox, with Hester out to a sizable lead.wdcrob said:
First off, I'd hardly call 48/756/4 in 15 games (10 starts) a "failure" for a rookie. That's actually a very solid rookie season. Roy Williams finished 10th in his first season with Martz, and while he missed 4 games in year 2, his pro-rated stats would have ranked him 15th. In addition, Shaun McDonald was WR23 despite getting just 7 starts, and Mike Furrey was WR19. Isaac Bruce was then WR25 despite being d-o-n-e done. So... Martz got two top-20 caliber seasons out of Roy Williams, who has otherwise been a huge bust in every other year of his career. He got a 23rd place finish out of Shaun McDonald in a season where McDonald was primarily a backup. He got a 19th place finish out of Mike Furrey in Furrey's FIRST YEAR AT WR AFTER CONVERTING FROM SAFETY. The worst WR1 he had during his career on the worst passing offense he coached during his career still finished as WR25. There's plenty of evidence that Hester's floor for next year is still a top-25 WR. Maybe that's not particularly compelling for you, but when a guy is being drafted or valued as a WR4 or even a WR5, but he's almost guaranteed to give WR2 production with upside, then I think that's extremely compelling. Say what you want about Devin Hester's talent (and obviously we disagree on that point), but you certainly have to admit that Devin Hester is a better WR than Mike Furrey, Shaun McDonald, and a 36-year old Isaac Bruce. And Jay Cutler is a better QB than Jon Kitna or Alex Smith.Just Win Baby said:
The thing is, I think people are selling his talent short. His coaches absolutely *LOVE* him. They universally agree that he's the best return man in the league (perhaps the best return man in history), yet they are so enamored with his talent and potential at WR that they're refusing to let him handle half of the returns. He was on pace for 1200 yards through 8 games last year despite being so raw at receiver (and that was without Mike Martz). I think Hester is an example of underrated talent meeting underrated opportunity, leading to a doubly-underrated dynasty asset.BuckeyeArt said:
What? That's not even close to what my system is. I've frequently held players as their value diminished or gone out of my way to acquire expiring assets.My system is to account for likely changes in a player's perceived value over a certain window... but how does that system look negatively on Hester? First off, it mostly looks strictly at age (since that's the only predictable variable in the player value equation). Second off... right now you could acquire him for a penny. If he does nothing, then next year his value will be 0 cents... so you will have lost a penny. On the other hand, if he does well (perhaps gets 1000+ yards receiving), then his value will be $.50. His value is more likely to go up than down, and the magnitude of the potential increase is exponentially larger than the magnitude of a potential decrease. Hester is exactly the player that people who run their team like a stock market (i.e. try and predict fluctuations in player value due to variables other than age) should be trying to buy.
All I can go off of is my experiences and what I see on the board, and it seems like there's a very vocal faction supporting Sims-Walker. In my league, there was a virtual feeding frenzy of people trying to acquire him. I had 5 people either make offers for MSW at the core, or else make offers for other players and then try to weasel MSW into the trade, too. I wound up with offers on the table of MSW/Moreno for Romo, MSW/Moreno/Tomlinson for Marshall, and MSW/Cowboys for Flacco/Finley. I tried convincing each of the trade partners that Hester or Wallace were of comparable value and offering them instead of MSW (with another minor asset of their choice to make up the difference), and I got laughed at by all three owners (as well as the two other owners who were interested in Sims-Walker). I've never seen such a feeding frenzy over a single player. Hell, even Larry Fitzgerald hasn't drawn as much attention this offseason as Sims-Walker has.I've tried to move Mike Sims-Walker all off-season, and the #1 reason owners are not interested in Sims-Walker is because he faded down the stretch.
It's different for sure, but in some ways, it takes more skill. I play in one 8-team redraft. Yes, everybody has studs everywhere. And that's the problem - WDIS becomes a huge deal. One mistake, or one bad game/matchup, and you lose. Picking a lineup is way easier in my 12 team dynasty leagues, because generally 80% of my starters are a given.Going from memory, but here are the notable guys from my team in that 8-teamer last year:
The first two of those deals give little value to MSW. It looks like he is a throwin to make up for negligible difference between Moreno and the other piece. The last one (the one you accepted) is a great deal. Few would trade Finley for MSW, let alone give up a young QB with him.
It may look to you like MSW was just a throw-in in the first two trades, but I assure you he was a cornerstone of the negotiations. As I said, I tried replacing MSW with Wallace+ (Wallace+Lee Evans, Wallace+Chad Henne, Wallace+pick 2.06, etc) and in each case the owner rejected the deal outright rather than even trying to further close the gap. They told me that without MSW I wasn't even close.
lol.. the guy hasn't been traded in any of my 4 leagues. This board is so big that every player is hyped up or down to the extreme. I'm sure there is a vocal faction that supports Sims-Walker, but the same could be said for a number of players (Massaquoi, Jones/Nelson, etc.). Well.... I'm not really adding much to the thread, so I won't say anymore. One of us is in Bizarro world. I'm not sure if it's you or me.All I can go off of is my experiences and what I see on the board, and it seems like there's a very vocal faction supporting Sims-Walker. In my league, there was a virtual feeding frenzy of people trying to acquire him. I had 5 people either make offers for MSW at the core, or else make offers for other players and then try to weasel MSW into the trade, too. I wound up with offers on the table of MSW/Moreno for Romo, MSW/Moreno/Tomlinson for Marshall, and MSW/Cowboys for Flacco/Finley. I tried convincing each of the trade partners that Hester or Wallace were of comparable value and offering them instead of MSW (with another minor asset of their choice to make up the difference), and I got laughed at by all three owners (as well as the two other owners who were interested in Sims-Walker). I've never seen such a feeding frenzy over a single player. Hell, even Larry Fitzgerald hasn't drawn as much attention this offseason as Sims-Walker has.
I have no problem with 8 team leagues, but if you're arguing in favor of them this isn't really a good argument.Anything can happen in any given week. Picking one starter over another is much more luck driven than picking one player over another for a whole season, where you have 17 weeks for the outliers to balance themselves out. Everyone knows how to look at matchups and often guys go nuts in matchups where they shouldn't, and guys get shutdown in matchups where they should explode.
Me either, and I'd be very curious to find out.Actually, I went into the Dynasty Trades thread just to see what he's been fetching this offseason. I found the following trades involving MSW (note: I left out the massive blockbuster trades, since it's impossible to get any sort of individual player valuations from those. I also left out any trades involving developmental players still in college):MSW for Aroma+CollieMSW for 2011 firstMSW for Felix JonesMSW/VD/Schilens for Roddy/Greg OlsenMSW/Nicks/VYoung for Finley/Evans/DelhommeMSW/2.03 for Slaton/2.01MSW for Donald BrownMSW/Portis/Ward for 1.09/2.07MSW/2011 2nd for Jacobs/1.07MSW/Britt/1.08 for FitzgeraldMSW/Gates for Finley/1.05/2011 2ndMSW/2.07 for Anquan BoldinMSW/2011 (late) first for GatesMSW/1.08 for Randy Moss/1.12MSW/1.03/1.09 for DeAngelo WilliamsMSW/Britt for Colston/Slaton/Moats/2.06MSW/Donald Brown for 1.04/2.12MSW/Ronnie/2.02 for Benson/Bryant/Evans/VYoungMSW/1.09/2011 1st for DeAngelo/Royal/Donald BrownMSW/James Starks for Derek Anderson/Lynch/2011 2ndMSW/2012 2nd for 1.11/2011 1stSeems like everyone's in bizarro world. Judging from that sample, Sims-Walker's value is all over the map, ranging from Felix Jones, Donald Brown, Randy Moss, or a Rookie 1st all the way down to Steve Slaton, Aroma/Collie, or about the equivalent of a 2nd rounder in picks.One of us is in Bizarro world. I'm not sure if it's you or me.
At the end of the day, "WDIS" and "WDID" ("who do I draft?") are both skills. Above average is above average. 90th percentile is 90th percentile. A guy who is 90th percentile in WDIS and 50th percentile in WDID will do better in smaller leagues. Someone who is 90th in WDID and 50th in WDIS will do better in larger leagues. I don't think that means smaller leagues take "more luck" so much as it means they take "different skill".The only thing that I'd say makes smaller leagues less luck-driven is the fact that they weather injuries better, since injuries are really the only variables out of a fantasy football owner's "control". If you start a guy and he puts up a dud, that was a bad call on your part. If you draft a guy and he gets injured early, that's not a bad call on your part... that's a bad break on your part. Other than that, as I said, the skill level required is determined by the skill levels of the other guys in your league.
I don't think it's any more or less luck-driven. I was responding to the assumption that small leagues do not require as much skill as larger leagues. I disagree with that. They're just different. I feel smaller leagues are generally harder in week to week in lineup decisions as a whole. And larger leagues depend a little more on drafting and astute ww pickups than smaller leagues do. This isn't to say that drafting doesn't matter in smaller leagues, or lineup decisions don't matter in larger leagues, but it's generally easier to pick two starting RB's when your RB's are MJD, Gore, R Bush and McFadden than if they were MJD, Gore, Stew, and R Rice. For example, in most of my 12-teamers, I can look at my rosters right now and predict my starters over the season, and likely have most (but not all) of those predictions come true. Thinking of one 12-team league now - Unless he gets injured, Fitz starts every week. That's because I have Fitz, Crabby, and then it drops way down to Cotchery and Avery.
I have to disagree with this. People here have been telling me that im taking a huge risk in taking Felix Jones this year with his injury history. So if i do, and he gets hurt, was that just bad luck for me? Also, if i start Adrian Peterson home against the Lions instead of Willis Mcgahee against the Steelers and Mcgahee goes off for 100 yards and 3 TD's. and AD puts up 40 yards and 0 TD's, was that a bad call, or a bad break?
I got yer back on this one bro...but honestly, I'm also A-OK with the ability to keep picking him up cheap.
Which would be a very compelling point if you just made a single WDIS decision and it decided your whole season. Outside of the playoffs, that's not the case. WDIS decisions are iterated 13 times in the regular season, which is enough iterations for the most skilled to overcome random chance.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that, except in a few of the most extreme cases, "injury risk" is a non-factor. Or, rather, it's a factor... but not in terms of how likely a player is to be injured. It's a factor in how likely coaches are to give him a big workload. Data suggests that coaches only give large workloads to players who are more resistant to injury. The result is that everyone winds up being a roughly equal injury risk at their given workload, but where that workload falls depends on their injury resistance. As a result, if Felix Jones is a greater injury risk, that's going to be reflected in his production, not in whether he actually gets injured or not. Actually injuries themselves are almost entirely just bad luck.
Not all injuries are created equal. Poor conditioning can play a role. A reckless playing style (players who like to leave their feet for instance) can play a role. Some guys are just "wound tight". Injuries can also beget more injuries. a player stresses out a body part compensating for another injured body part or otherwise doing something that isn't natural because of an existing injury. Concussions make a player more likely to suffer additional concussions. Needless to say, I think only a subset of injuries are truly "almost entirely bad luck" - I don't know what that number is - say somewhere from 20-50% - but I think some players have an injury history that is 100% "bad luck", and some have an injury history that is 100% due to factors that are within their control, or at least known and not chalked up to random chance. Teams don't ignore injury history when they draft players, why should we?
I agree 100% with this, and most of your post for that matter.I just happen to think picking a starting lineup is mostly luck too.
If injuries were not mostly bad luck, they would be easier to predict. I agree that guys like AD or Marion Barber are more likely to get hurt due to their running style, but ultimately it still is impossible to predict with any sort of accuracy.
People predict every year that Bob Sanders will get hurt, and he does. I think some players have enough high risk factors that you can at least price in injury risk in a way that does accurately reflect the rough probability of injury for that player. Teams do this every year in the draft. It's why Jahvid Best was a late first round pick and CJ Spiller was a top ten pick even though they are players of similar talent.
