SSOG
Moderator
I would gladly take your Pierres and your Barbers. Both are starting RBs. Both will be starting for the same team next season, too.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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.
Dynasty Rankings (10 Viewers)
- Thread starter Fear & Loathing
- Start date
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
2012? His longterm upside is top 10 QB but we're a few years away from that point.If they trade Leinart, I think they'll also scrap heap somebody like Sage, Thigpen, or Troy Smith to try and get a solid #2. All the Leinart to Seattle rumors are just rumors at this point.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
All indications out of Arizona suggest we'll see Max Hall before John Skelton. I'd rather own Hall at this point.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
It sounds like they'll release Leinart, not trade him.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
I'd rather stash Williams.I'll go with the devil I don't know over the injury-plagued devil I do know.J-Dawg said:
whodeywhodey
Footballguy
What's your thought on Boldin and Bradshaw in dynasty?
I was offered Bradshaw for my Boldin and I think I am going to decline.
My other WRs are Colston, SSmith (CAR), Evans, Knox and DDrvier.
I am weak at RB having RBush, Jacobs, Hightower and BScott.
What do you think?
I was offered Bradshaw for my Boldin and I think I am going to decline.
My other WRs are Colston, SSmith (CAR), Evans, Knox and DDrvier.
I am weak at RB having RBush, Jacobs, Hightower and BScott.
What do you think?
SSOG
Moderator
Boldin can still play, there's no question about it. The biggest knock against Boldin is whether or not he can stay healthy. Why then would I want to trade him for an unproven player with the same injury concerns?
SSOG
Moderator
I would love to see Thigpen get another shot in Arizona, but I question how much impact any QB the Cards could acquire at this point would possibly have. He will have already missed all of TCs and the preseason, which won't really leave him enough time to learn the playbook. Of course, that'd probably be great news for Fitzgerald owners- if I were QB and I didn't know the play, I'd just chuck it in Fitzgerald's direction and let him make me look good.
This is the ADp of 60 Zealots rookie drafts. The drafts took place in May, so take it for what its worth.OnThInIcE911 said:
http://www.zealotsfield.com/adp/2010_adp.htm
We're talking 2 guys in the top 6 according to F&L's rankings, not just top 10, and dynasty, not redraft. If Boldin was ever considered top 6, it wasn't for more than 1 season. Marvin and Wayne had maybe 1 season together as top 6. Housh never close, Welker either in non-ppr. Issac Bruce was great, but he only had maybe 1 season where he was considered top 6 with Holt (2000).It's extremely rare for any 2 teamates to be considered top 6 dynasty WRs at the same time, and it's never happened for any length of time. I don't expect Austin and Dez to be the first.
EBF
Footballguy
I think I agree with this.I've dogged Torain on these boards, but I was surprised at how good he looked during the first preseason game. I think the Skins have done a good job of identifying two guys who have NFL ability and I wouldn't be surprised to see both of them on NFL rosters even if one of them gets cut. Having said that, is there anything special about either player that makes you think he'll be anything more than a career backup? Not really.
EBF
Footballguy
I'd say he's more likely to become Troy Smith or Colt Brennan than "the answer" for Arizona. Just because a team invests a late pick in a QB doesn't mean he's the future. If Leinart/Anderson crash and burn (very likely IMO) then my guess is that you'll see Arizona make a move for a veteran QB in the offseason or draft an elite prospect like Jake Locker or Christian Ponder.
SSOG
Moderator
The difference between top 10 and top 6 is mostly semantic. If it's possible for two teammates to be top 10, then isn't it possible for them to both be top 9? And if top 9 is possible, then what about top 8? I think we're better off discussing whether the concept is sound (whether two teammates can both be elite) than quibbling over the exact specifics, especially since the Austin/Bryant situation is such a rare one with no great parallels.
EBF
Footballguy
Again, I think this can be explained by simple mathematics.Elite WRs are very scarce. With 30 teams in the league and only 6-8 elite receivers playing at any given time, what are the odds that two of those guys are going to be on the same roster? It's not like the Vikings or 49ers had any brilliant talents going overlooked because Randy Moss and Terrell Owens were stealing their catches. All the other guys on the roster were pretty much garbage (excluding Carter and Rice at the tail end of their careers). The very simple explanation for why you can't think of many examples of elite WRs scoring tons of points while playing on the same team as a second elite WR is because elite WRs are almost never on the same team. It just doesn't happen very often. It's a simple matter of probability. Even so there are plenty of examples of guys like Jennings/Driver, Ward/Burress, Ward/Holmes, Boldin/Fitzgerald, Holt/Bruce, and Wayne/Harrison who have thrived as tandems. And as for this line...
He may or may not have been "considered top 6," but there's no disputing that he put up a ####load of points alongside Fitz. Both receivers had four 1000+ yard seasons and were among the very best WRs in FF in terms of ppg during their six years together.
Last edited by a moderator:
OnThInIcE911
Footballguy
Thanks for that but I was looking for previous years ADP. Anyone else have any idea?
BeTheMatch
Footballguy
Regarding the James Jones/Jordy Nelson battle for No. 3 WR job, all indications tonight sure seemed to point to Jones as the guy. He was out there FAR more than Nelson, at least by my viewing of the first half.
Oops, let me see if i can dig up the last couple years Zealots ADP.
PranksterJD
Footballguy
Zealots ADP for the past 5 years. I'll have it up in similar format to Go Deep's link later, but it should be good enough for your purposes at the moment.
OnThInIcE911
Footballguy
Awesome guys thanks for the help. If I find anything interesting I'll post it here first.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Yeah, I think it is Jones. I've been saying that for a couple of years though now, and he has yet to emerge into a viable fantasy option. Donald Driver looks great yet again.
Part of it is semantics I guess, but there's no doubt that there is some difference between top 6 and top 10. We're talking a whole different tier in a lot of people's rankings (including yours SSOG), maybe even two. It can be the difference between "elite" and "very good".
It's extremely rare, and the odds of it happening in this case are very low, that's my point. I'm not saying they can't put up good numbers on the same team, but to be considered top 6 dynasty WRs they have to put up more than good numbers, they have to put up great/elite numbers. I'm not disputing that Boldin put up good numbers, but a big part of the reason why he wasn't considered top 6 is because he rarely stays healthy. There's a reason why most people don't value guys soley on PPG.
Didn't mean to derail the thread, it's not a big deal, I just think both guys are a bit high in those rankings. Having 1 guy on a team in the top 6 is hard enough- having 2 is much more difficult. Carry on.
It's extremely rare, and the odds of it happening in this case are very low, that's my point. I'm not saying they can't put up good numbers on the same team, but to be considered top 6 dynasty WRs they have to put up more than good numbers, they have to put up great/elite numbers. I'm not disputing that Boldin put up good numbers, but a big part of the reason why he wasn't considered top 6 is because he rarely stays healthy. There's a reason why most people don't value guys soley on PPG.
Didn't mean to derail the thread, it's not a big deal, I just think both guys are a bit high in those rankings. Having 1 guy on a team in the top 6 is hard enough- having 2 is much more difficult. Carry on.
Sebowski
Footballguy
What's so rare about it? The only rare thing I see is the hype for a pair of guys with one good season under their belt, one of whom has no pedigree, and the other hasn't played football in a year and has struggled to stay healthy since being drafted. How can anyone mention this tandem in the same breath as Moss/Carter, Moss/Welker, Fitz/Boldin, Marv/Wayne, or Holt/Bruce?
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
Because we deal in foresight and anticipation in Dynasty leagues rather than living in the past.
az_prof
Footballguy
We do deal in projecting the future and not being stuck in the past, but past production is a major data point for projecting the future. Personally, I would never consider any WR elite the way that Moss, Carter, Fitz, Harrison, Holt, Bruce were/are until they had produced two years of consecutive top 10 production. That's me. The cost of acquiring a top 10 WR is such that I want to be as confident as possible that the player is going to continue to be an elite WR for the next three years or more.If Austin has another year like last year then he would be in that category--regardless of his draft pedigree. In the case of Bryant, he has proven nothing in the NFL. I have seen far too many players who were hyped just like him who failed in the NFL.
To their credit, both players have an above average (although not HOF quality) QB. On the other hand, they are in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed.
SSOG
Moderator
If Boldin had stayed healthy, then would Fitz/Boldin have both justified top-6 dynasty rankings? And if so, are you really saying that you have trouble ranking Austin/Bryant in the top 6 because Anquan Boldin has difficulty staying healthy?
It's rare for a team with a top-4 dynasty WR to draft a Calvin/Fitzgerald level prospect. The only time I can think of it happening was Arizona with Boldin and Fitz- and that wound up working out pretty well for Arizona (and for Boldin and Fitz owners).You can disagree with someone calling Austin a top-4 dynasy WR, and you can disagree with someone calling Dez a Calvin/Fitzgerald level talent, but if someone believed that Austin was a top-4 dynasty WR, and if someone believed that Bryant was a Calvin/Fitz level talent, then I have no problem whatsoever with that person both ranking them in the top 10, or the top 8, or the top 6, or the top whatever. I do not think that the presence of one will materially harm the production of the other, as evidenced by zillions of elite WR tandems in years past.
SSOG
Moderator
You know what I really love? At this point, people seem to have no problem whatsoever with the idea that two RB teammates can both be top 10, but they seem to be struggling with the idea that two WR teammates can both be top 10. Seriously? There are 2 WRs on the field with every snap, but only 1 RB. Plenty of teams have produced two stud WRs, but no team has ever produced two top-12 fantasy RBs (as far as I can recall, at least). And yet people have no problem with both Stewart and DWill ranking in the top 10, but they can't imagine two WR teammates possibly justifying such lofty expectations? What?
It seems to me that people either don't like Austin or they don't like Bryant and they think that one of those individually shouldn't be on the top 10, so in search for a reason, they latch on to the "they're teammates" thing. It's fine if you don't want to put one or the other in the top 10, but "they're teammates" is a poor reason to do so. Bust potential, lack of track record, character concerns, lack of pedigree, etc... these are all decent reasons to keep one or the other down. "They're teammates", in my opinion, is not a decent reason.
It seems to me that people either don't like Austin or they don't like Bryant and they think that one of those individually shouldn't be on the top 10, so in search for a reason, they latch on to the "they're teammates" thing. It's fine if you don't want to put one or the other in the top 10, but "they're teammates" is a poor reason to do so. Bust potential, lack of track record, character concerns, lack of pedigree, etc... these are all decent reasons to keep one or the other down. "They're teammates", in my opinion, is not a decent reason.
OnThInIcE911
Footballguy
I don't even understand why people are arguing that it couldn't happen.
If they both have the talent to be in the top 10 their, than QB can certainly get them the ball well enough for them to produce.
I have no problem ranking teammates highly because in some situations having a talented player across the field increases overall production for both. Look at TJ and Chad in Cincy. If the QB and the offense can support them than worring about this is pointless.
Edit: Long story short there are situations players could be in where you lower them in your rankings. This is not one of them.
If they both have the talent to be in the top 10 their, than QB can certainly get them the ball well enough for them to produce.
I have no problem ranking teammates highly because in some situations having a talented player across the field increases overall production for both. Look at TJ and Chad in Cincy. If the QB and the offense can support them than worring about this is pointless.
Edit: Long story short there are situations players could be in where you lower them in your rankings. This is not one of them.
Last edited by a moderator:
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
Part of that is they expect DeAngelo to be on another team in 2011. The fact that both WRs are on the field at the same time makes it more likely a team will try to retain both long term.
Anthony Borbely
Footballguy
Regarding the bolded....if you have to wait for proof, the cost will be much higher and you will miss on many of them. As far as Bryant, of course he has proven nothing...he is a rookie. But for me personally, I think the guy has top 10 (or higher) stud written all over him and I'm valuing him as such. Over the summer I drafted him with the 3.02 pick in a 16 team dynasty league and by next summer I'm convinced that will be considered a steal. If I am wrong, so be it.az_prof said:Sebowski said:We do deal in projecting the future and not being stuck in the past, but past production is a major data point for projecting the future. Personally, I would never consider any WR elite the way that Moss, Carter, Fitz, Harrison, Holt, Bruce were/are until they had produced two years of consecutive top 10 production. That's me. The cost of acquiring a top 10 WR is such that I want to be as confident as possible that the player is going to continue to be an elite WR for the next three years or more.
If Austin has another year like last year then he would be in that category--regardless of his draft pedigree. In the case of Bryant, he has proven nothing in the NFL. I have seen far too many players who were hyped just like him who failed in the NFL.
To their credit, both players have an above average (although not HOF quality) QB. On the other hand, they are in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed.
FUBAR
Footballguy
I don't think anyone is saying that just because they took Skelton in the 5th round that he is the future, but it's not unreasonable to think he could follow the Tony Romo path (among others), small school QB with talent to be very good but not refined enough to go higher, develops for a few years and takes over around year 3. Sure the odds are against it, but frankly I prefer Skelton (followed quickly by LaFevour) at his ADP vs any other rookie QB. I was hoping Leinart or Anderson would show enough to keep the job for a couple years but with them completely blowing it, you may be right. I think they'd be more likely to go after an older QB but I'm not sure who that is right now. The situation has enhanced Skelton's value some, but many of us have liked him for awhile.
FUBAR
Footballguy
If he only has top 10 potential, and you took him at pick #34, are you really getting enough potential value for the risk? Depends on your draft I suppose, but at least according to the FBG rankings, you probably took him over Crabtree and Nicks, two guys who I view as in my top 10 and have shown something. I don't disagree with the pick, but unless you're talking about top 10 overall, you didn't get a "steal".Regarding the bolded....if you have to wait for proof, the cost will be much higher and you will miss on many of them. As far as Bryant, of course he has proven nothing...he is a rookie. But for me personally, I think the guy has top 10 (or higher) stud written all over him and I'm valuing him as such. Over the summer I drafted him with the 3.02 pick in a 16 team dynasty league and by next summer I'm convinced that will be considered a steal. If I am wrong, so be it.az_prof said:Sebowski said:We do deal in projecting the future and not being stuck in the past, but past production is a major data point for projecting the future. Personally, I would never consider any WR elite the way that Moss, Carter, Fitz, Harrison, Holt, Bruce were/are until they had produced two years of consecutive top 10 production. That's me. The cost of acquiring a top 10 WR is such that I want to be as confident as possible that the player is going to continue to be an elite WR for the next three years or more.
If Austin has another year like last year then he would be in that category--regardless of his draft pedigree. In the case of Bryant, he has proven nothing in the NFL. I have seen far too many players who were hyped just like him who failed in the NFL.
To their credit, both players have an above average (although not HOF quality) QB. On the other hand, they are in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed.
Hoot&HoLLer
Footballguy
Chris, just wondering if you have anything updated that you can share. Thanks.
I agree with SSOG on this part- there are plenty of reasons to not rank either in the top 6, however I do think that being teammates is a valid one as well. I'm not saying that alone should knock them down 10 spots in your rankings, but I do believe it should be considered. I think your "evidence" actually works against you here- "as evidenced by zillions of elite WR tandems in years past". If there have been "zillions" of elite WR tandems in years past, how come so few (if any) have been elite (or top 6) FF WR tandems? I think it's because they do cannibalize each other's stats somewhat. Do you think that if Miles Austin was on Houston last year, or AJ was on Dallas, both AJ and Austin would have matched the production they put up as #1 WRs on separate teams? I think it's highly unlikely that the pair would have combined for 182 cathces, 2889 yds. and 20 TDs if they had been playing together. Likewise, if you played a season with Austin as the #1 with no Dez, then played the same exact season with Dez as the #1 with no Austin, my guess is they would put up better combined numbers than if they played that same season together as #1 and #2 (or #1a and #1b). There is only so much production to go around on any 1 team. Just a theory, we can't prove or disprove it obviously, but it seems to have merit. The law of diminishing returns has to kick in at some point, I happen to think it starts to apply at having 2 elite WRs on the same team.
I hate to keep bringing it up, but there IS a difference between top 6 and top 10 as well. Using your thought process, if it's possible for two teammates to be top 10, then it's possible to be top 9, etc, all the way up to top 2? I understand you don't want to quabble over specifics because it doesn't help your side, but there's no denying that 2 in the top 6 is harder to achieve than 2 in the top 10.
As for the Carolina RBs, I'm assuming the reason why some people have them both ranked top 10 is because they're banking on Williams being elsewhere next year. If he re-signs in Carolina, my guess is they won't both be top 10 anymore, for many of the same reasons.
I hate to keep bringing it up, but there IS a difference between top 6 and top 10 as well. Using your thought process, if it's possible for two teammates to be top 10, then it's possible to be top 9, etc, all the way up to top 2? I understand you don't want to quabble over specifics because it doesn't help your side, but there's no denying that 2 in the top 6 is harder to achieve than 2 in the top 10.
As for the Carolina RBs, I'm assuming the reason why some people have them both ranked top 10 is because they're banking on Williams being elsewhere next year. If he re-signs in Carolina, my guess is they won't both be top 10 anymore, for many of the same reasons.
DevilDog919
Footballguy
If a team has two very talented WR's like that, then the team would likely throw alot more. I'd bet the QB throws for 4000+, so why is it hard to believe that two of his WR's may total 1300-1500 yards each and 10 TDs each? That leaves 1000-2000 more yards to be spread to the other options on the team.ETA:In one of my laegues (Non PPR), two WR's from the same team have finished in the top 6 together 3 of the last 4 seasons actually. In 2006, Harrison was WR1 and Wayne WR4. In 2008, Fitz was WR2 and Boldin WR5. 2009, Moss was WR2 and Welker WR4.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hoot&HoLLer
Footballguy
Reading that Seattle Mike Williams looks to be turning things around. At this point, would he put worth rostering on 25 man rosters in a 12 team PPR over guys like Early Doucet or Devin Thomas?
TitanicHornet
Footballguy
May I ask why you have Harvin above Nicks? I know its only 1 spot but interested in seeing why you believe Harvin is a better pickup than Nicks. Given the most likely ? next year at QB and Harvins migraine problems, I cant see the reasoning.
Sorry if this has been asked before but I went straight to the last post.
Sorry if this has been asked before but I went straight to the last post.
Anthony Borbely
Footballguy
He was the 15th WR taken in our draft. I have him ranked 10th in dynasty. His ceiling is huge. I have Dez 10th, Crabtree 11th, and Nicks 12th in dynasty. Although they are numerically close, I think Dez and Crabtree are a half tier higher than Nicks. Dez has huge upside to me and I honestly think he has a chance to be the next elite stud WR in the category of Calvin, Fitz, and Andre. I do think this pick will turn out to be a steal because of the huge ceiling that Dez has. Obviously, he is a rookie and some are more conservative with rookies (show me something, etc.). Obviously, that's always the tough part of dynasty rankings.If he only has top 10 potential, and you took him at pick #34, are you really getting enough potential value for the risk? Depends on your draft I suppose, but at least according to the FBG rankings, you probably took him over Crabtree and Nicks, two guys who I view as in my top 10 and have shown something. I don't disagree with the pick, but unless you're talking about top 10 overall, you didn't get a "steal".Regarding the bolded....if you have to wait for proof, the cost will be much higher and you will miss on many of them. As far as Bryant, of course he has proven nothing...he is a rookie. But for me personally, I think the guy has top 10 (or higher) stud written all over him and I'm valuing him as such. Over the summer I drafted him with the 3.02 pick in a 16 team dynasty league and by next summer I'm convinced that will be considered a steal. If I am wrong, so be it.az_prof said:Sebowski said:We do deal in projecting the future and not being stuck in the past, but past production is a major data point for projecting the future. Personally, I would never consider any WR elite the way that Moss, Carter, Fitz, Harrison, Holt, Bruce were/are until they had produced two years of consecutive top 10 production. That's me. The cost of acquiring a top 10 WR is such that I want to be as confident as possible that the player is going to continue to be an elite WR for the next three years or more.
If Austin has another year like last year then he would be in that category--regardless of his draft pedigree. In the case of Bryant, he has proven nothing in the NFL. I have seen far too many players who were hyped just like him who failed in the NFL.
To their credit, both players have an above average (although not HOF quality) QB. On the other hand, they are in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed.
Not sure what the scoring is like in your league, but in standard scoring non-ppr leagues, Welker has never finished in the top 10, nevermind 4th. Fitz was #1 and Boldin was #7 in 2008. Marvin and Wayne were #1 and #3, so that's your best case, but as I point out below, it wasn't even one of Marvin's top 4 statistical seasons. Even if they did finish in those spots in your league, do you notice that it was never the same WR tandem? Were any of those pairs both considered top 6 dynasty WRs in your league together for any length of time?I'm not saying it's impossible, but history doesn't support it. Issac Bruce's best season by far came before Holt came along (Holt always played with Bruce in his prime, so we can't compare that). Marvin Harrison's 4 best statistical seasons came prior to Wayne being a factor (2 before he was in the league and his first two seasons). Wayne's best season came when Marvin got injured and missed 11 games. Fitz and Boldin are hard to compare because Boldin has missed so much time, but if you look at the one game Boldin missed last year, Fitzgerald had his best statistical game of the season. Fitz scored 6 TDs in the 4 games Boldin missed in 2008 and 6 TDs in the 12 games they played together.
Now there could be other factors at play and it all could be a coincidence, and this doesn't prove anything, but the evidence is there- elite WRs have tended to put up better statistical numbers when not paired with another elite WR than when they have been.
Last edited by a moderator:
az_prof
Footballguy
SSOG, Speaking only for myself, it isn't that I can't imagine two WRs in top 10, but I know it isn't common and it only happens when you have two WRs who are close to HOF talent with a HOF type QB and a pass happy offense. The reason why I am suspect of Bryant and Austin is simply that the two WRs haven't proven to me yet that they are HOF type talent--really, between them they have one season that would qualify as HOF quality. Also, they play on a team where there are three very good RBs and a great TE, who all will demand some looks and carries.SSOG said:
az_prof
Footballguy
Not necessarily. I got Roddy White last off season by trading Pierre Thomas for him when there was all that talk about how Thomas was going to be NO featured back. I am not saying don't ever trade valuable players or high draft picks for a top end Wr, but you better be darn sure he actually is going to produce like an elite WR. I was confident that Roddy White would; I would not at all be sure that Austin or Bryant will. Plus, you assume that somehow you can get Austin or Bryant on the cheap now. You can't. If you could get them for the cost of a 10-15 ranked WR, then I might consider it. But people want top 10 or top 5 value for them. Where's the value in that? I guess what I am saying isn't that they aren't good or can't be elite Wrs, but that people are valuing them as if they have already proven that they are--and they aren't. So if you really need an elite WR1, get one who has proven it since the cost is the same.Regarding the bolded....if you have to wait for proof, the cost will be much higher and you will miss on many of them. As far as Bryant, of course he has proven nothing...he is a rookie. But for me personally, I think the guy has top 10 (or higher) stud written all over him and I'm valuing him as such. Over the summer I drafted him with the 3.02 pick in a 16 team dynasty league and by next summer I'm convinced that will be considered a steal. If I am wrong, so be it.az_prof said:Sebowski said:
If Austin has another year like last year then he would be in that category--regardless of his draft pedigree. In the case of Bryant, he has proven nothing in the NFL. I have seen far too many players who were hyped just like him who failed in the NFL.
To their credit, both players have an above average (although not HOF quality) QB. On the other hand, they are in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed.
Man of Constant Sorrow
Footballguy
In regards to the discussion on the Miles Austin/Dez Bryant tandem rankings in the top 10 (6), I see a lot of discussion on how likely (or unlikely) it is for both of them to finish in the top 10 (6). I also see a lot of discussion on previous WR tandems that have performed well in years past. As stated, most of this discussion seems to be focused on the actual year end final positional standings, and I truly understand why this is the common focus.
However, when we rank players in general, we often allow for the fact that they are not necessarily going to finish at or above our ranking of them (well, I believe most of us here do). This is even more pronounced in the very top tiers, which is the area we are discussing. For example, Chris Johnson is a very commonly #1 ranked RB this year. I do not believe that the wisest of those ranking him #1 would believe that their preseason #1 ranking was improper if he finished at #2...or #3...or even #4...and possibly #5, provided that he was near the top. That is the nature of Fantasy Football, the preseason #1's don't always/often finish #1...and that's ok...provided they fall within the "general neighborhood" of our ranking expectations.
Now some may claim, "How can it be 'ok' for your preseason #1 to finish 4th or 5th and your preseason #6 to finish 10th or 12th...that is way off."
Is it really? Read some of the great threads on this board that show the % turnover rates every year in the top 10-20 for each position. No, I don't know the numbers off the top of my head (ask SSOG...he'll know them...or find them), but I do know that it is significant. Thus, I want to have a ranking system that does not try to map out the exact breakdown of the year end positional rankings, for that is an impossible dream, but rather tries to land me the players that are most likely to be near the top as significant fantasy contributors on a weekly basis...and in dynasty, on a yearly basis. And when some of my players finish a little below their preseason rankings, I hope to have some sleepers, waiver wive gems or other unexpected performers to help make up the difference. Remember, as the top churns, someone has to move up, and these are often the mid to long shots.
With that in mind, I really would not mind if both Miles and Dez were not "technically" both finishing in the top 10 (6) every year, provided they consistently finish near the top 10 (6) every year...just like many of the other great WR tandems mentioned above. Every year we see surprise finishers in the top 20, but I want to know who the 5-10 guys are who are consistently in the top 20. These guys are the ones to be ranked in the top 10 in a dynasty format. Year after year consistency near the top is worth more than sporadic finishes at the top in my opinion.
This is why I believe that many of the WR tandems spoken of here could very easily have both of players ranked within the top 10 at the same time, even if there were no actual years when they both finished the year at or above that ranking.
Now, the big question is, "Is the Miles/Dez tandem one of these?" I'll leave that up to you guys to figure out.
However, when we rank players in general, we often allow for the fact that they are not necessarily going to finish at or above our ranking of them (well, I believe most of us here do). This is even more pronounced in the very top tiers, which is the area we are discussing. For example, Chris Johnson is a very commonly #1 ranked RB this year. I do not believe that the wisest of those ranking him #1 would believe that their preseason #1 ranking was improper if he finished at #2...or #3...or even #4...and possibly #5, provided that he was near the top. That is the nature of Fantasy Football, the preseason #1's don't always/often finish #1...and that's ok...provided they fall within the "general neighborhood" of our ranking expectations.
Now some may claim, "How can it be 'ok' for your preseason #1 to finish 4th or 5th and your preseason #6 to finish 10th or 12th...that is way off."
Is it really? Read some of the great threads on this board that show the % turnover rates every year in the top 10-20 for each position. No, I don't know the numbers off the top of my head (ask SSOG...he'll know them...or find them), but I do know that it is significant. Thus, I want to have a ranking system that does not try to map out the exact breakdown of the year end positional rankings, for that is an impossible dream, but rather tries to land me the players that are most likely to be near the top as significant fantasy contributors on a weekly basis...and in dynasty, on a yearly basis. And when some of my players finish a little below their preseason rankings, I hope to have some sleepers, waiver wive gems or other unexpected performers to help make up the difference. Remember, as the top churns, someone has to move up, and these are often the mid to long shots.
With that in mind, I really would not mind if both Miles and Dez were not "technically" both finishing in the top 10 (6) every year, provided they consistently finish near the top 10 (6) every year...just like many of the other great WR tandems mentioned above. Every year we see surprise finishers in the top 20, but I want to know who the 5-10 guys are who are consistently in the top 20. These guys are the ones to be ranked in the top 10 in a dynasty format. Year after year consistency near the top is worth more than sporadic finishes at the top in my opinion.
This is why I believe that many of the WR tandems spoken of here could very easily have both of players ranked within the top 10 at the same time, even if there were no actual years when they both finished the year at or above that ranking.
Now, the big question is, "Is the Miles/Dez tandem one of these?" I'll leave that up to you guys to figure out.
SSOG
Moderator
Out of curiousity, what have Nicks and Crabtree "shown"? Nicks had 800 receiving yards last year. Did he look good at times in the process? Absolutely. Do you really think that Dez Bryant isn't going to put up 700-800 yards this year while looking good in this process? And if he does, then where are we? You value Dez where he should have been in the first place because he did what we all knew he was going to do- have a mediocre season while showing flashes of potential, just like Nicks.
Do you know how many top 6 WRs there are every year? Six. That's not very many. There have been very few top-6 WRs, to say nothing of top-6 WR tandems. But it's hardly an unheard of occurrence.Last year, Welker was injured, but he finished 7th in PPG while Moss finished 2nd. I understand that "top 7" isn't quite the same thing as "top 6"... but come on. Anquan Boldin was injured in 2005 and 2008 and finished 8th (in 14 games) and 7th (in 12 games) to go along with 2nd and 1st place finishes by Fitzgerald- in 2008, they were both top TWO WRs in PPG. There are only two Top-2 WRs in any given season, and in 2008 they were both in Arizona. In 2007, Ocho and Housh were 6th and 7th- I understand that's not quite the same thing as "both top 6", but come on. Wayne and Harrison were both top-3 in 2006 and top-8 in 2004. I know that top-8 isn't top-6, but come on. That's 6 top-8 pairs in the past 6 years- that's 25% of all top-8 WRs over that span! Again, I know that top 8 isn't top 6, but come on. Is your argument really that Dez Bryant should be ranked 8th instead of 6th because T.J. Houshmandzadeh only finished 7th in 2007 and Reggie Wayne only finished 8th in 2004? Is it rare for two teammates to both be top 8? Absolutely not! A quarter of all top-8 WRs have been teammates with another top-8 WR over the last 6 years! We're averaging a pair of top-8 teammates a year.
Also, I don't know if this is that clear, but a player doesn't need to finish top 6 every year to justify a top-6 ranking. Hell, a player doesn't need to finish top-6 ANY year to justify a top-6 ranking. Consider Torry Holt. If we were holding a retrospective dynasty draft before the 2000 season knowing what we know today, the first four WRs off the board would be Moss, Harrison, Owens, and Holt- in that order. Holt would be the 4th WR off the board. Do you know how many times Torry Holt finished in the top 4 in his entire career? Just once. Doesn't change the fact that he would be the no-brainer slam-dunk pick as the 4th WR off the board. In the same way, if Dez "only" becomes a perennial top-10 WR, he's still worth every bit of his #6 ranking right now.
Yeah, Ocho/Housh/Palmer was a veritable HoF reunion waiting to happen. Wes Welker and Reggie Wayne are also surely Canton-bound. So is Anquan Boldin and Josh McCown (their QB for half of the 2005 campaign). There are plenty of examples of non-HoF talents being involved in top-10 pairs. Meanwhile, Tony Romo is busy putting up some of the best stats the game has ever seen and averages more fantasy points per game than Peyton Manning over the last three seasons. If there was any situation ripe for a new pair of elite WRs, it's Dallas.
TitanicHornet
Footballguy
Sorry for the 2nd take..
"May I ask why you have Harvin above Nicks? I know its only 1 spot but interested in seeing why you believe Harvin is a better pickup than Nicks. Given the most likely ? next year at QB and Harvins migraine problems, I cant see the reasoning."
"May I ask why you have Harvin above Nicks? I know its only 1 spot but interested in seeing why you believe Harvin is a better pickup than Nicks. Given the most likely ? next year at QB and Harvins migraine problems, I cant see the reasoning."
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG
Moderator
One was offensive rookie of the year. One wasn't.
az_prof
Footballguy
1) Crabtree showed me a lot last year. You can't just look at stats especially because he missed preseason and didn't play the whole season. Despite that, he stepped in mid season and it was clear immediately that he was the best WR on the field for SF. That's amazing. We know that Crabtree is not going to bust--short of devastating injury. Bryant? He could bust. We don't know that he isn't the next Charles Rogers yet. Crabtree isn't. We also don't know where Bryant will stand in the team's target hierarchy. I am very confident that Crabtree will be the number one target on his team. So, give me Crabtree over Bryant easy.2) Holt may have finished in top four only once but he was almost always in the top 10. I loved to own Holt because I knew that I could count on him to perform as my WR1 with absolute confidence. Can you count on Austin or Bryant to do that? Based on what? 2/3 of one season production for the one and lots of hype and college games for the other. Those guys are not at all comparable to Holt yet. Not even close. What Holt brought was consistency. Holt was more talented than Roddy White and a different receiver, but in terms of fantasy production they are very similar. Austin and Bryant haven't proven that they will be top 10 producers year in and year out yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
TitanicHornet
Footballguy
Granted yes, but these are dynasty projections, so you are obviously seeing something in Harvin I am not. I am looking to the future and I cant see anything at QB for the Vikes past this year. Eli will be there for years for he and Nicks to build a repore.
Yes, I'm well aware that there are only 6 top 6 WRs every year, and I'm also well aware that 10 is more than 6.
You keep coming back to PPG because it makes the numbers a little more appealing for you- do you at least acknowledge that most people do not rank guys soley based on PPG? I don't care if Wes Welker was 7th in PPG, or even 7th in points overall- the fact is, in standard scoring leagues, he's never been close to a top 6 dynasty WR. Same with Housh- I know I've never had him in my top 12, nevermind top 6, and I don't know anyone who had. Boldin and Fitz are probably the only teammates that can say that, and it didn't last very long.I know a player doesn't need to finish top 6 every year to justify a top 6 ranking, and I also know that if someone does finish top 6 it doesn't necessarily mean they're a top 6 dynasty WR. It goes both ways. Welker and Housh were never top 6 dynasty WRs regardless if they may have finished close to there (even on a PPG basis).We can argue this until the cows come home, but I'm not sure why you can't acknowledge that I may have a point. You don't think that having two elite WRs on the same roster may cannibalize their stats some after seeing the numbers I presented? You don't think there's anything to the fact that Bruce had by far his best year without Holt even though he played several more full seasons in his prime with Holt, that Marvin's 4 best seasons all came before Wayne was a factor, that Wayne's best season came when Marvin missed 11 games, or that Fitz scored the same amount of TDs in 4 games without Boldin as he did in 12 games with him in 2008? Do you think that AJ and Austin would have put up the same numbers if they had played together last season?Semantics or not, there is a difference between having teammates ranked #7 and #10 vs. #4 and #6. I don't have an issue with the first ranking, but the second one is significantly more unlikely IMO, and yes, at least partly because they are teammates.
az_prof
Footballguy
Harvin has the ability and talent to be an elite receiver. He reminds me a lot of Steve Smith in terms of his attitude and how he runs after the catch. His only question mark are the migraines and the QB on his team.
