Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Fear & Loathing

Dynasty Rankings

Recommended Posts

With regard to weapons, Naanee has shown to be an average talent at best so far in his career, so I don't think it matters much how he ages... he is replaceable. However, I agree that Floyd and especially Gates would be hard to replace easily with comparable talent.

ETA: I find it interesting that you are saying Rivers is more talented but you would take Romo. Aren't you a guy who believes talent trumps situation? And Rivers is a year and a half younger than Romo... not a big deal, but if we are splitting hairs, the edge goes to Rivers in that area.

I say talent usually wins out, but Romo is plenty, plenty talented in his own right. It's not like he's Jon Kitna here, only posting huge yardage totals because of the system he plays in. Rivers and Romo are #1 and #2 in career ANY/A. Romo's not a top-5 QB, but he's easily a top-10 and still a stellar talent. In a normal era, Romo probably would be a top-5 QB, but we happen to be witnessing a golden age for QBs. So, when you've got a guy who is an elite-if-not-quite-uberelite QB talent who's got pretty much the best set of weapons in the entire NFL and a huge track record of success, there's nothing wrong with ranking him way up high. Hell, I think Tony Romo is as good of a QB as Aaron Rodgers, who currently sits at #1 in my rankings. I think he's a substantially better QB than Matt Schaub, who has risen as high as 5th in my rankings. And, again, he's on pace for 5400 yards of his own this season.

Getting back to what F&L said a couple of years ago, and what I resurrected last year, it's easy to go to bat for a guy on a hot streak. It's easy to sit here today and say "Austin Collie should be a top 20 receiver, he's been blazing hot!" or "Brandon Lloyd should be a top 20 receiver, he has almost 600 receiving yards through 5 games", or "Philip Rivers should be a top 3 QB, he's on pace to pass for like 6,000 yards!" or "Miles Austin should be the #1 dynasty WR, the dude is unstoppable!". It's also not particularly useful, since by the time a player is that white-hot, everyone in your league has noticed and that player's owner has undoubtedly turtled up and is refusing all reasonable (and even several unreasonably high) trade offers. Let's see some people going to bat for a player on a cold streak. Or let's see some people badmouthing a player on a hot streak. Let's see some analysis that is based more on the next 4 weeks than it is on the last 4 weeks. Instead of talking about whether Rivers should be over Romo or whether Orton deserves a spot in the top 6/8/10/whatever, why don't we spend some time discussing what QBs are going to catch fire and join those guys at the top in the coming weeks?

:lmao:

I took some heat for having Forte over Foster before last week, with Foster coming off a huge game against Oakland and Forte coming off a stinker in NY.

Anyway, i basically agree with what you are saying, although i dont think Austin or Rivers success at this point can be considered a "streak".

As good as i think Rivers is/was, i thought his last two years of success had as much to do with the Chargers running game(or lack of it) and the emergence of Jackson as it did Rivers himself. It has become clear this season that Rivers is an elite talent, and will likely produce top 5 numbers no matter his supporting cast.

Austin might not have been a first round pick, but if there is a talent gap between him and the top few WR's, it is small. I also think the concerns that Bryant will become the #1 WR are overblown. Even if he does, look at the numbers Boldin was putting up(when healthy) with Fitz there, and that was with Warner/Leinart, not Romo.

Either way, there is no denying the numbers Austin has put up in the last two seasons, especially when you compare them to the numbers of a player like Fitzgerald who is at best, only slightly more talented...IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an observation... I think Orton should be above Kolb due to McNabb's stellar play and I don't Kolb getting a chance ANY time soon. Also, over Henne as I just think Orton is playing good and I don't feel Henne deserves a higher rank until he does something. Finally, I feel Orton is playing good enough and developing pretty nice to be ranked over Leinart who hasn't shown much of anything.I don't think Orton is some incredible awesome player, but he is showing that he is improving and not just managing the game, but actually throwing well. I saw a couple Bears games and was actually impressed with his throws.... I just feel he is more than a stop gap right now. I have no proof, but since we're trying to get ahead of the curve, I feel in my eyes he is worth a higher rank than those other guys even in a Dynasty format.

Well.... Was I right or was I right? :excited:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an observation... I think Orton should be above Kolb due to McNabb's stellar play and I don't Kolb getting a chance ANY time soon. Also, over Henne as I just think Orton is playing good and I don't feel Henne deserves a higher rank until he does something. Finally, I feel Orton is playing good enough and developing pretty nice to be ranked over Leinart who hasn't shown much of anything.I don't think Orton is some incredible awesome player, but he is showing that he is improving and not just managing the game, but actually throwing well. I saw a couple Bears games and was actually impressed with his throws.... I just feel he is more than a stop gap right now. I have no proof, but since we're trying to get ahead of the curve, I feel in my eyes he is worth a higher rank than those other guys even in a Dynasty format.

Well.... Was I right or was I right? :thumbup:
Yes Orton has turned out nice, although that was hard to read. Did you go to English class as a youth? Your grammar is astounding. :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a trade offer for Marshawn Lynch in a league of mine today, but I'm reluctant to move him with my lack of depth at RB.

I wanted to get everyone's opinion on what should be done with Lynch. Should he be traded before his perceived value drops or should we wait to see how he performs and if he exceeds expectations, sell him then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an observation... I think Orton should be above Kolb due to McNabb's stellar play and I don't Kolb getting a chance ANY time soon. Also, over Henne as I just think Orton is playing good and I don't feel Henne deserves a higher rank until he does something. Finally, I feel Orton is playing good enough and developing pretty nice to be ranked over Leinart who hasn't shown much of anything.I don't think Orton is some incredible awesome player, but he is showing that he is improving and not just managing the game, but actually throwing well. I saw a couple Bears games and was actually impressed with his throws.... I just feel he is more than a stop gap right now. I have no proof, but since we're trying to get ahead of the curve, I feel in my eyes he is worth a higher rank than those other guys even in a Dynasty format.

Well.... Was I right or was I right? :excited:
Yes Orton has turned out nice, although that was hard to read. Did you go to English class as a youth? Your grammar is astounding. :boxing:
English was taught just after leather tanning class in the one room school house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a trade offer for Marshawn Lynch in a league of mine today, but I'm reluctant to move him with my lack of depth at RB.I wanted to get everyone's opinion on what should be done with Lynch. Should he be traded before his perceived value drops or should we wait to see how he performs and if he exceeds expectations, sell him then?

I think his value is sure to rise not fall. I would not trade him if I were you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynch has a pretty nice schedule after this coming game (Chicago). I can see him having a big game in the next month or so.

That might be a better time to sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dynasty Buy Low, Sell High:

Buy Low:

Reggie Bush (non-PPR): Bush seems to be get it now. Before his injury, he was finishing runs, and even initiating contact. He is a special talent and should be a big part of the NO offense for years. Get him before he returns from his injury. If he is fighting for touches with Julius Jones and Chris Ivory, he should get the lions share, should PT continue to be hampered.

Sidney Rice: This is one of the rare chances to get a 24 YO, 6'4" 215lb, probowl WR for less than an arm and a leg. Over the 2nd half of the season, and through the playoffs, Rice was one of the best players in the NFL, not just WRs. If you include his playoff numbers, he was right on par (per game) with Miles Austin during his amazing run.

Justin Forsett: His value is at it's valley. Everyone is assuming that Lynch is the man in Seattle. I am not so sure. Forsett can be a cheap lottery ticket, should it not pan out that way.

Matt Schaub: Too talented and too many weapons not to rebound. Daniels, AJ, and Jones have all been injured. When healthy, his tools are elite. The distance between he and the Romos and Rivers of the NFL is growing. He might be closer to Eli Manning, long term. But he is still a top 10 dynasty QB, and a clear tier above guys like Ryan and Flacco.

Sell High:

Cedric Benson: He is not a dynasty RB1. Trade him to someone that values him as one. He is an average NFL talent and average players don't last long past their prime in the NFL.

Matt Forte: His value has almost hit the roof, after it was close to bottoming out, even in dynasty leagues. Get off the rollercoaster and invest in a more stable, consistent horse. Forte has talent and should stick around, due to his pass protection and receiving skills. But he seems to need holes to get yardage, rarely creating it out of nothing. I don't know how often that O-line going to give him room to run. If he was a special talent, his situation would not scare me as much. But I don't know that he is.

Austin Collie: He will go back to one of 5, with Garcon and Gonzales getting healthy. He is a good player, and not a must sell, as his value should be stable after it comes back down to earth. He will still get targets and points in PPR, but his TD total will take a major dip. Trade him if you can get a more talented player. Collie had injury concerns at BYU and is older than most 2nd year players in the NFL.

Ahmad Bradshaw: I really like this guy, the same way I really liked MB3. I predict a similar, equally drastic wall around age 27 for Mr. Bradshaw. His legs and feet are always a concern. He has done a good job, not missing time, but I am not sure he can hold that up for years and years. He is definitely not an urgent sell, but he is not a top 10 dynasty back due to the health/style reasons. If you can get top 10 dynasty value, take it.

Hold:

Roy Williams: I think his hot streak is legit. He is getting a groove with Romo, and that seems to have been the biggest issue with Roy. His talent has always been there, even though it is not what we thought it was out of college. You are not going to get what he is worth to you. I don't see Dez taking the WR2 spot this year.

Mark Sanchez: You might be tempted to sell, with the notion that he can be this good, this soon after looking horrible. He might not be, but if he is, you will regret moving him. It is too late too buy low, and too early to sell high.

Flacco/Ryan: Don't sell low, and you would be right now. If you are going to buy, do so under the impression that they are what you see, and not the potential top 5 they once seemed to be.

Arian Foster: You missed the boat. Most of us did. But he offers you no value right now, relative to what it would cost to get him. Don't buy. If you are going to sell, good luck. Not that there won't be suitors, but his dynasty value is all over the map. It might be time to ride the train as far as it will take you and go all in on house money. If you trade him to sleep better at night, you could regret it if Foster is still doing this 2 years from now. I am not convinced Foster is not elite talent, but I am no longer convinced that he is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sidney Rice: This is one of the rare chances to get a 24 YO, 6'4" 215lb, probowl WR for less than an arm and a leg. Over the 2nd half of the season, and through the playoffs, Rice was one of the best players in the NFL, not just WRs. If you include his playoff numbers, he was right on par (per game) with Miles Austin during his amazing run.

His owners have been holding onto him all season. Why would they sell now? I do think Rice is a talent, but Farve has always been the type of QB that can make any WR look good. Did you see that perfect TD pass that he threw to Moss this past Monday Night? I don't think Favre made Rice, but I don't think Rice sees another season like that again, especially if Minny goes back to Tavaris Jackson next year or if they let him walk and he ends up in a bad situation.

Cedric Benson: He is not a dynasty RB1. Trade him to someone that values him as one. He is an average NFL talent and average players don't last long past their prime in the NFL.

"Average players" also don't generally get drafted at No. 5 overall. Also you wouldn't be selling high right now on Benson as his TD totals are low so he isn't racking up fanatsy points, despite having another good NFL season. If you watch him run, he's certainly not an average talent. I'm not saying he's elite, but the guy has more than enough speed, really nice vision and is a hard powerful runner. His early years were a struggle as I don't think his head was right, but he seems to have tunred his life around and he's on top of his game.

Ahmad Bradshaw: I really like this guy, the same way I really liked MB3. I predict a similar, equally drastic wall around age 27 for Mr. Bradshaw. His legs and feet are always a concern. He has done a good job, not missing time, but I am not sure he can hold that up for years and years. He is definitely not an urgent sell, but he is not a top 10 dynasty back due to the health/style reasons. If you can get top 10 dynasty value, take it.

In full disclosure I just traded for him, but I'll have to disagree here as well. He's only 24 so even if he hit a wall at 27 (which I don't agree with), that's still 3 more years of high production available. I see upside as well, once Bradon Jacobs is finally kicked to the curb. Bradshaw is the complete package: Big play ability and surprising power.

Arian Foster: You missed the boat. Most of us did. But he offers you no value right now, relative to what it would cost to get him. Don't buy. If you are going to sell, good luck. Not that there won't be suitors, but his dynasty value is all over the map. It might be time to ride the train as far as it will take you and go all in on house money. If you trade him to sleep better at night, you could regret it if Foster is still doing this 2 years from now. I am not convinced Foster is not elite talent, but I am no longer convinced that he is not.

I still think you could sell high on him - if you wanted to. One game isn't going to absolutely kill his value. Edited by Dr. Octopus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cedric Benson: He is not a dynasty RB1. Trade him to someone that values him as one. He is an average NFL talent and average players don't last long past their prime in the NFL.

This confused me because he's a RB2 in redraft. No one values him as a RB1 in anything. I was actually thinking of buying him because I think he offers about the same as Turner at a much lower cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dr. O:

Sidney Rice: News JUST broke that Rice might not play this season. He is not on target to return midway through the season, as his owners have been told from the begining. Plus, some might be scared off by the Randy Moss trade. If a team is in the hunt and needs another player that can contribute right now, I do think you can get him cheaper than you usually would. I realize his situation is far from concrete. There is the Tavaris Jackson threat, and the Seattle Seahawks threat. But there is also the Donovan McNabb/ New England Patriots reward. His talent is such that his value won't take too much of a hit. And at 24, I would bet big money that he at least matches his totals last season, which were awesome.

Cedric Benson: We just disagree on him. I am no scout, and don't watch him every game, so take my opinion as just That. But I think he is very average for a starting RB in the NFL. His YPC is nothing special, he gets numbers based on the number of carries he gets. And average talents get drafted number 5 all the time. Braylon Edwards was drafted 3rd, and he is an average, whithin the scope of the conversation. By average, I mean average relative to other starting RBs. Not when you take the comlete pool of RBs, including backups.

Bradshaw looks to be the complete package, but guys that run like that have had shorter careers lately. MB3, being my best example. Plus, he already has life long concerns with his legs. Life long. His legs have already given him major issues and he is only 24 and only now starting to carry a full load. When he is 26 or 27 with a few 300+ carry seasons under his belt, I think it is fair to assume they give him more trouble then.

Foster: I don't base my statement on the fact that his last game was poor. I actually base it on the fact that I am starting to come around to him. I have been on the "Sell, Sell, Sell" bandwagon. I actually did in one of the two leagues that I own him in (AJ). But I don't know if you can get what you could get for a Rashard Mendenhall or Beanie Wells if they were putting up these numbers, because he isn't a traditional stud, as far as pedigree goes. Yet, if this keeps up, he will infact be a stud. He is playing like a top 5 RB. Just recently I would have sold him for less than top 5 return. I woudn't now, I would hold.

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cedric Benson: He is not a dynasty RB1. Trade him to someone that values him as one. He is an average NFL talent and average players don't last long past their prime in the NFL.

This confused me because he's a RB2 in redraft. No one values him as a RB1 in anything. I was actually thinking of buying him because I think he offers about the same as Turner at a much lower cost.
I guess it is all relative. He is the best RB on the owner that drafted him in the 2nd round in my MOX league. He was also the highest paid free agent in my salary cap league, getting paid more than Crabtree, Rice, Grant (when he was healthy), Forte and I am sure a couple others that I am not remembering. I think he is a low end RB 2 in dynasty leagues, but again, I don't think that lasts very long. I think he costs less than Turner, but will also provide you with fewer points. If the owner in my leagues viewed him as a low-end RB2, and I was in the hunt, then I would be shopping for him too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arian Foster: You missed the boat. Most of us did. But he offers you no value right now, relative to what it would cost to get him. Don't buy. If you are going to sell, good luck. Not that there won't be suitors, but his dynasty value is all over the map. It might be time to ride the train as far as it will take you and go all in on house money. If you trade him to sleep better at night, you could regret it if Foster is still doing this 2 years from now. I am not convinced Foster is not elite talent, but I am no longer convinced that he is not.

I would say his value is still very high. Case in point in a TD heavy league non PPR league I was offered Adrain Peterson for Foster, B-Marshall and Vick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arian Foster: You missed the boat. Most of us did. But he offers you no value right now, relative to what it would cost to get him. Don't buy. If you are going to sell, good luck. Not that there won't be suitors, but his dynasty value is all over the map. It might be time to ride the train as far as it will take you and go all in on house money. If you trade him to sleep better at night, you could regret it if Foster is still doing this 2 years from now. I am not convinced Foster is not elite talent, but I am no longer convinced that he is not.

I would say his value is still very high. Case in point in a TD heavy league non PPR league I was offered Adrain Peterson for Foster, B-Marshall and Vick.
No doubt is value is high. But I am starting to think it is high for good reason.Did you take/consider the offer? That is a bit too much for AP, IMO. Marshall is being being treated like a throw in, in this offer. I would consider Foster and B.Marsh for AP/late first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Rotoworld)

According to the Arizona Republic's Bob Young, no undrafted rookie quarterback has started a game in the first five weeks of the season since the 1987 season when replacement players were used.

I have no clue if this means anything or not, but it just stood out to me.

Edited by GreatLakesMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Rotoworld)

According to the Arizona Republic's Bob Young, no undrafted rookie quarterback has started a game in the first five weeks of the season since the 1987 season when replacement players were used.

I have no clue if this means anything or not, but it just stood out to me.

I think it means Arizona is desperate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Rotoworld)

According to the Arizona Republic's Bob Young, no undrafted rookie quarterback has started a game in the first five weeks of the season since the 1987 season when replacement players were used.

I have no clue if this means anything or not, but it just stood out to me.

I think it means Arizona is desperate.

Pretty sure there were a few desperate teams between 1987 and present day with free agent QB's on their roster... I get your point, just saying. Edited by GreatLakesMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin Forsett: His value is at it's valley. Everyone is assuming that Lynch is the man in Seattle. I am not so sure. Forsett can be a cheap lottery ticket, should it not pan out that way.

Matt Schaub: Too talented and too many weapons not to rebound. Daniels, AJ, and Jones have all been injured. When healthy, his tools are elite. The distance between he and the Romos and Rivers of the NFL is growing. He might be closer to Eli Manning, long term. But he is still a top 10 dynasty QB, and a clear tier above guys like Ryan and Flacco.

Seattle brass had all offseason to think about Justin Forsett, and they responded by signing Leon Washington. Then they had 5 weeks to watch Forsett, and they responded by trading for Marshawn Lynch. I'm not saying that I don't think Forsett can possibly be the answer, I'm saying that at this point it's pretty clear that his coaches think he can't possibly be the answer. And since those are the guys doling out the carries... no thanks, I'll pass.

Schaub's not as talented as you make him out to be. If I was listing the top 10 QBs in the NFL, Schaub wouldn't make the list. He'd be close, and he's better than, say, an Eli Manning... but he's not a top-10 signal caller.

Dr. O:

Sidney Rice: News JUST broke that Rice might not play this season. He is not on target to return midway through the season, as his owners have been told from the begining.

Savvy owners have known for weeks that Rice's injury was more significant than was being let on. They saw that massive, hulking cloud of smoke (Minnesota trying desperately to sell their wives and sisters for a legit #1 WR) and thought "hmm... might there be some fire over yonder?".

With that said, I'm sure plenty of us play in leagues with some less-than-savvy owners, so just because the writing's been on the wall for a while now, that doesn't mean that the Sidney Rice owner was reading it until someone started drawing pictures for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be going too far into the weeds on this one, but I started thinking about what the Vincent Jackson situation is telling us.

The NFLPA advised them to report. As an entity solely purposed to benefit the players, why would they tell Jackson to risk serious injury for a couple hundred thousand dollars? Is it possible that they believe something about the 2011 CBA that isn't being publicized?

I guess what I'm saying is... can we read into the NFLPA telling these guys to report as evidence for players on the field in 2011? It seems to support the theory that something will get done, even if its merely a temporary extension of the status quo? Actually, given what I understand about Jackson's situation, it seems to support exactly a temporary extension of the status quo. ( This is, of course, in no way influenced by my previous opinion that this is exactly what happens. :P )

Going too far? :argue::hophead::loco:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be going too far into the weeds on this one, but I started thinking about what the Vincent Jackson situation is telling us.

The NFLPA advised them to report. As an entity solely purposed to benefit the players, why would they tell Jackson to risk serious injury for a couple hundred thousand dollars? Is it possible that they believe something about the 2011 CBA that isn't being publicized?

I guess what I'm saying is... can we read into the NFLPA telling these guys to report as evidence for players on the field in 2011? It seems to support the theory that something will get done, even if its merely a temporary extension of the status quo? Actually, given what I understand about Jackson's situation, it seems to support exactly a temporary extension of the status quo. ( This is, of course, in no way influenced by my previous opinion that this is exactly what happens. :P )

Going too far? :argue::hophead::loco:

That seems to be a fair assumption. Despite all the rhetoric, neither side wins if there is a lockout/strike - especially during this time period where the NFL is absolutely flourishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dynasty Buy Low, Sell High:

Buy Low:

Reggie Bush (non-PPR): Bush seems to be get it now. Before his injury, he was finishing runs, and even initiating contact. He is a special talent and should be a big part of the NO offense for years. Get him before he returns from his injury. If he is fighting for touches with Julius Jones and Chris Ivory, he should get the lions share, should PT continue to be hampered.

Sidney Rice: This is one of the rare chances to get a 24 YO, 6'4" 215lb, probowl WR for less than an arm and a leg. Over the 2nd half of the season, and through the playoffs, Rice was one of the best players in the NFL, not just WRs. If you include his playoff numbers, he was right on par (per game) with Miles Austin during his amazing run.

Justin Forsett: His value is at it's valley. Everyone is assuming that Lynch is the man in Seattle. I am not so sure. Forsett can be a cheap lottery ticket, should it not pan out that way.

Matt Schaub: Too talented and too many weapons not to rebound. Daniels, AJ, and Jones have all been injured. When healthy, his tools are elite. The distance between he and the Romos and Rivers of the NFL is growing. He might be closer to Eli Manning, long term. But he is still a top 10 dynasty QB, and a clear tier above guys like Ryan and Flacco.

Sell High:

Cedric Benson: He is not a dynasty RB1. Trade him to someone that values him as one. He is an average NFL talent and average players don't last long past their prime in the NFL.

Matt Forte: His value has almost hit the roof, after it was close to bottoming out, even in dynasty leagues. Get off the rollercoaster and invest in a more stable, consistent horse. Forte has talent and should stick around, due to his pass protection and receiving skills. But he seems to need holes to get yardage, rarely creating it out of nothing. I don't know how often that O-line going to give him room to run. If he was a special talent, his situation would not scare me as much. But I don't know that he is.

Austin Collie: He will go back to one of 5, with Garcon and Gonzales getting healthy. He is a good player, and not a must sell, as his value should be stable after it comes back down to earth. He will still get targets and points in PPR, but his TD total will take a major dip. Trade him if you can get a more talented player. Collie had injury concerns at BYU and is older than most 2nd year players in the NFL.

Ahmad Bradshaw: I really like this guy, the same way I really liked MB3. I predict a similar, equally drastic wall around age 27 for Mr. Bradshaw. His legs and feet are always a concern. He has done a good job, not missing time, but I am not sure he can hold that up for years and years. He is definitely not an urgent sell, but he is not a top 10 dynasty back due to the health/style reasons. If you can get top 10 dynasty value, take it.

Hold:

Roy Williams: I think his hot streak is legit. He is getting a groove with Romo, and that seems to have been the biggest issue with Roy. His talent has always been there, even though it is not what we thought it was out of college. You are not going to get what he is worth to you. I don't see Dez taking the WR2 spot this year.

Mark Sanchez: You might be tempted to sell, with the notion that he can be this good, this soon after looking horrible. He might not be, but if he is, you will regret moving him. It is too late too buy low, and too early to sell high.

Flacco/Ryan: Don't sell low, and you would be right now. If you are going to buy, do so under the impression that they are what you see, and not the potential top 5 they once seemed to be.

Arian Foster: You missed the boat. Most of us did. But he offers you no value right now, relative to what it would cost to get him. Don't buy. If you are going to sell, good luck. Not that there won't be suitors, but his dynasty value is all over the map. It might be time to ride the train as far as it will take you and go all in on house money. If you trade him to sleep better at night, you could regret it if Foster is still doing this 2 years from now. I am not convinced Foster is not elite talent, but I am no longer convinced that he is not.

Good post, but this last sentence may be the most poorly constructed sentence I've ever seen in the English language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin Forsett: His value is at it's valley. Everyone is assuming that Lynch is the man in Seattle. I am not so sure. Forsett can be a cheap lottery ticket, should it not pan out that way.

Seattle brass had all offseason to think about Justin Forsett, and they responded by signing Leon Washington. Then they had 5 weeks to watch Forsett, and they responded by trading for Marshawn Lynch. I'm not saying that I don't think Forsett can possibly be the answer, I'm saying that at this point it's pretty clear that his coaches think he can't possibly be the answer. And since those are the guys doling out the carries... no thanks, I'll pass.
USC used a lot of RBs. There was never a "the man" at USC. If you acquired Forsett thinking he'd get a full workload, that was a longshot. The fact he got a chance under Caroll - nearly 20 carries the past couple weeks - is probably more surprising than the fact it didn't last. The signing of Lynch is not at all an indictment of Forsett. He's not being replaced, he's just going back to the 7 or 8 carries a game he had W1 & 2. A role he was pretty effective in. Whether he's worth buying is completely league dependent. Shallow, non-PPR leagues he's not worth anything. But a deep league, PPR, with flex spots you could do worse. Not sure if Danny Woodhead who you could have gotten off waivers last week is much better or worse. Edited by thriftyrocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope my question doesn't annoy as it's more AC, but...

Romo vs Rivers

If you have a good team that can compete this year and the next few, which one would you want? I'm concerned about Rivers having an easier schedule than Romo the rest of this year, but I read the posts and SSOG makes some very good arguments for Romo.

SSOG and Chris Wesseling at Rotoworld have Romo in a completely different tier than Rivers.

Balancing trying to win this year and next, who would y'all rather have?

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be going too far into the weeds on this one, but I started thinking about what the Vincent Jackson situation is telling us.

The NFLPA advised them to report. As an entity solely purposed to benefit the players, why would they tell Jackson to risk serious injury for a couple hundred thousand dollars? Is it possible that they believe something about the 2011 CBA that isn't being publicized?

I guess what I'm saying is... can we read into the NFLPA telling these guys to report as evidence for players on the field in 2011? It seems to support the theory that something will get done, even if its merely a temporary extension of the status quo? Actually, given what I understand about Jackson's situation, it seems to support exactly a temporary extension of the status quo. ( This is, of course, in no way influenced by my previous opinion that this is exactly what happens. :P )

Going too far? :lmao::hophead::loco:

That seems to be a fair assumption. Despite all the rhetoric, neither side wins if there is a lockout/strike - especially during this time period where the NFL is absolutely flourishing.
You are reading it wrong. First, he wouldn't be reporting for a "couple of hundred thousand dollars." He would be reporting for Millions. If he doesn't report, they are telling him that he will NOT be a Free Agent. He will still be owned by the Chargers. They are letting him know that they won't support him if he continues to hold out and wants to claim free agency next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin Forsett: His value is at it's valley. Everyone is assuming that Lynch is the man in Seattle. I am not so sure. Forsett can be a cheap lottery ticket, should it not pan out that way.

Matt Schaub: Too talented and too many weapons not to rebound. Daniels, AJ, and Jones have all been injured. When healthy, his tools are elite. The distance between he and the Romos and Rivers of the NFL is growing. He might be closer to Eli Manning, long term. But he is still a top 10 dynasty QB, and a clear tier above guys like Ryan and Flacco.

Seattle brass had all offseason to think about Justin Forsett, and they responded by signing Leon Washington. Then they had 5 weeks to watch Forsett, and they responded by trading for Marshawn Lynch. I'm not saying that I don't think Forsett can possibly be the answer, I'm saying that at this point it's pretty clear that his coaches think he can't possibly be the answer. And since those are the guys doling out the carries... no thanks, I'll pass.

Schaub's not as talented as you make him out to be. If I was listing the top 10 QBs in the NFL, Schaub wouldn't make the list. He'd be close, and he's better than, say, an Eli Manning... but he's not a top-10 signal caller.

Dr. O:

Sidney Rice: News JUST broke that Rice might not play this season. He is not on target to return midway through the season, as his owners have been told from the begining.

Savvy owners have known for weeks that Rice's injury was more significant than was being let on. They saw that massive, hulking cloud of smoke (Minnesota trying desperately to sell their wives and sisters for a legit #1 WR) and thought "hmm... might there be some fire over yonder?".

With that said, I'm sure plenty of us play in leagues with some less-than-savvy owners, so just because the writing's been on the wall for a while now, that doesn't mean that the Sidney Rice owner was reading it until someone started drawing pictures for them.

I am a bit confused on two parts.

1. I understand that coaches brought in Leon Washington to return kicks. And I understand that they traded a 4th and a conditional for Lynch. Even if his coaches do think Lynch is the answer, Lynch still has to prove them right. If he doesn't, Forsett is at least the lead back of the split. My confusion is this: Everybody reading this knows why Forsett's value is much lower than it was a couple weeks ago. But isn't that when you buy? As I said, he is a lottery ticket, in that he shouldn't cost you much. If he doesn't work out, you have a back up RB/handcuff or a RBBC guy, which is really all you are going to have to pay for. If he does work out, you have more than what you paid for.

2. How talented did I attempt to make Schaub out to be? I said he was too talented not to bounce back. That's it. And I said he was a top 10 dynasty FF QB, which you agree with, according to your rankings.

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post, but this last sentence may be the most poorly constructed sentence I've ever seen in the English language.

If it's not the worst, it's top 10 for sure. Typo. :useless:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope my question doesn't annoy as it's more AC, but...Romo vs RiversIf you have a good team that can compete this year and the next few, which one would you want? I'm concerned about Rivers having an easier schedule than Romo the rest of this year, but I read the posts and SSOG makes some very good arguments for Romo.SSOG and Chris Wesseling at Rotoworld have Romo in a completely different tier than Rivers.Balancing trying to win this year and next, who would y'all rather have?Thanks!

Rivers, mostly because i think he is more talented. He doesnt throw as much as Romo, and doesnt have the weapons Romo has, but always puts up similar numbers. With LT finally out of SD, this is officially Rivers team, and he is now throwing as much(at least close) as the other top 5 QB's, and the results are him currently being #1 in FF points. This isnt to take anything from Romo, he is a talented QB too and will continue to pass alot with plenty of weapons at his disposal. I just think Rivers is the safer play, and has at least as much upside. I am not too concerned with QB's strength of schedule, except that Romo plays in the East and Rivers in the West, so Rivers will likely be playing in nicer weather, especially during FF playoffs.I currently have Rivers as QB3, one point behind Peyton, and Romo at QB5, two points behind Brees, and five points behind Rivers. After this season, i think Rivers and Rodgers will be the in a tier of their own as the clear #1/2 dynasty QB's. I also wouldnt be suprised to see Rivers as the #1 overall, ahead of Rodgers. Edited by Go deep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I currently have Rivers as QB3, one point behind Peyton, and Romo at QB5, two points behind Brees, and five points behind Rivers. After this season, i think Rivers and Rodgers will be the in a tier of their own as the clear #1/2 dynasty QB's. I also wouldnt be suprised to see Rivers as the #1 overall, ahead of Rodgers.

:ph34r: A lot can change over the rest of the year. But Rivers and Rodgers are the only two QBs I would look at in the first round of a dynasty start up next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be going too far into the weeds on this one, but I started thinking about what the Vincent Jackson situation is telling us.

The NFLPA advised them to report. As an entity solely purposed to benefit the players, why would they tell Jackson to risk serious injury for a couple hundred thousand dollars? Is it possible that they believe something about the 2011 CBA that isn't being publicized?

I guess what I'm saying is... can we read into the NFLPA telling these guys to report as evidence for players on the field in 2011? It seems to support the theory that something will get done, even if its merely a temporary extension of the status quo? Actually, given what I understand about Jackson's situation, it seems to support exactly a temporary extension of the status quo. ( This is, of course, in no way influenced by my previous opinion that this is exactly what happens. :P )

Going too far? :shrug::hophead::loco:

That seems to be a fair assumption. Despite all the rhetoric, neither side wins if there is a lockout/strike - especially during this time period where the NFL is absolutely flourishing.
You are reading it wrong. First, he wouldn't be reporting for a "couple of hundred thousand dollars." He would be reporting for Millions. If he doesn't report, they are telling him that he will NOT be a Free Agent. He will still be owned by the Chargers. They are letting him know that they won't support him if he continues to hold out and wants to claim free agency next season.
I think the OP is basically saying the same thing as your second point, however didn't the Chargers reduce his tender offer to $300k? So he would be playing for "couple of hundred thousand dollars."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope my question doesn't annoy as it's more AC, but...Romo vs RiversIf you have a good team that can compete this year and the next few, which one would you want? I'm concerned about Rivers having an easier schedule than Romo the rest of this year, but I read the posts and SSOG makes some very good arguments for Romo.SSOG and Chris Wesseling at Rotoworld have Romo in a completely different tier than Rivers.Balancing trying to win this year and next, who would y'all rather have?Thanks!

Rivers, mostly because i think he is more talented. He doesnt throw as much as Romo, and doesnt have the weapons Romo has, but always puts up similar numbers. With LT finally out of SD, this is officially Rivers team, and he is now throwing as much(at least close) as the other top 5 QB's, and the results are him currently being #1 in FF points. This isnt to take anything from Romo, he is a talented QB too and will continue to pass alot with plenty of weapons at his disposal. I just think Rivers is the safer play, and has at least as much upside. I am not too concerned with QB's strength of schedule, except that Romo plays in the East and Rivers in the West, so Rivers will likely be playing in nicer weather, especially during FF playoffs.I currently have Rivers as QB3, one point behind Peyton, and Romo at QB5, two points behind Brees, and five points behind Rivers. After this season, i think Rivers and Rodgers will be the in a tier of their own as the clear #1/2 dynasty QB's. I also wouldnt be suprised to see Rivers as the #1 overall, ahead of Rodgers.
Thanks! I had forgotten to mention that I had looked at your rankings previously too. It's nice to have you guys posting quality dynasty stuff in-season.

I currently have Rivers as QB3, one point behind Peyton, and Romo at QB5, two points behind Brees, and five points behind Rivers. After this season, i think Rivers and Rodgers will be the in a tier of their own as the clear #1/2 dynasty QB's. I also wouldnt be suprised to see Rivers as the #1 overall, ahead of Rodgers.

:goodposting: A lot can change over the rest of the year. But Rivers and Rodgers are the only two QBs I would look at in the first round of a dynasty start up next year.
Yeah, I think the best way to define it is who you'd take in a start-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking to make a quick decision between two williams. BMW (Sea) or Stephen (Ari). Both were praised in the preseason, neither have lived up to expectations. This season's trauma units have made it necessary to cut one. I would think that Stephen had the more upside / younger but all the buzz from BMW still has me guessing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USC used a lot of RBs. There was never a "the man" at USC. If you acquired Forsett thinking he'd get a full workload, that was a longshot. The fact he got a chance under Caroll - nearly 20 carries the past couple weeks - is probably more surprising than the fact it didn't last. The signing of Lynch is not at all an indictment of Forsett. He's not being replaced, he's just going back to the 7 or 8 carries a game he had W1 & 2. A role he was pretty effective in. Whether he's worth buying is completely league dependent. Shallow, non-PPR leagues he's not worth anything. But a deep league, PPR, with flex spots you could do worse. Not sure if Danny Woodhead who you could have gotten off waivers last week is much better or worse.

I've got no problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to be an 8-10 carry a game kind of guy. I think that's a fair assumption. I just have a problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to outperform everyone and one day become a featured back. At this point, it's clear that Forsett is a CoP kind of guy. Better NFL asset than fantasy asset.

I am a bit confused on two parts.

1. I understand that coaches brought in Leon Washington to return kicks. And I understand that they traded a 4th and a conditional for Lynch. Even if his coaches do think Lynch is the answer, Lynch still has to prove them right. If he doesn't, Forsett is at least the lead back of the split. My confusion is this: Everybody reading this knows why Forsett's value is much lower than it was a couple weeks ago. But isn't that when you buy? As I said, he is a lottery ticket, in that he shouldn't cost you much. If he doesn't work out, you have a back up RB/handcuff or a RBBC guy, which is really all you are going to have to pay for. If he does work out, you have more than what you paid for.

2. How talented did I attempt to make Schaub out to be? I said he was too talented not to bounce back. That's it. And I said he was a top 10 dynasty FF QB, which you agree with, according to your rankings.

Re: the bolded... no, that's not when you buy. Jamarcus Russell's value is much lower than it was a couple of months ago. Laurence Maroney's value has dropped substantially over the last couple of weeks. Ben Tate and Steve Slaton have had their value consistently declining since Foster took over. Are you going to rush out to acquire those guys, too?

Just because a player's value is dropping doesn't mean you should buy him. A lot of times, those value drops are very much deserved. As a "for example"... if you're an RB with very good efficiency metrics whose owners value reasonably highly under the assumption that you have a legit shot at locking up a featured role, and your coaching staff goes out and spends valuable assets to require a well-regarded featured back, you're going to take a very deserved value hit.

Some backs are not featured back material. Think of Mewelde Moore or Jerious Norwood. No matter how well those backs perform, the coaching staffs just keep on bringing on other guys who DO fit the featured back mold. There's a huge body of evidence now that Justin Forsett belongs in a group with those two RBs. If you want to buy low on Mewelde Moore 2.0, then be my guest, but don't do it just because his value is in free-fall right now.

Second, you said Schaub's tools were "elite". Personally, I disagree. I don't think there's anything at all about Schaub that is elite. I don't think he's "too talented not to rebound". He's Marc Bulger 2.0. Do I expect him to rebound? Yeah, but if he doesn't, I'm not going to be posting on here about how he was too talented to fail.

Also, if having Schaub in your top 10 is the same as agreeing with you, then I figure you'll have a hard time buying low on Schaub, because I doubt there are very many dynasty owners who don't agree with you and have Schaub in their top 10. Are you really seeing people panic and drop him out of their top 10 after a slow start to the season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be going too far into the weeds on this one, but I started thinking about what the Vincent Jackson situation is telling us.

The NFLPA advised them to report. As an entity solely purposed to benefit the players, why would they tell Jackson to risk serious injury for a couple hundred thousand dollars? Is it possible that they believe something about the 2011 CBA that isn't being publicized?

I guess what I'm saying is... can we read into the NFLPA telling these guys to report as evidence for players on the field in 2011? It seems to support the theory that something will get done, even if its merely a temporary extension of the status quo? Actually, given what I understand about Jackson's situation, it seems to support exactly a temporary extension of the status quo. ( This is, of course, in no way influenced by my previous opinion that this is exactly what happens. :P )

Going too far? :shrug: :shrug: :rolleyes:

That seems to be a fair assumption. Despite all the rhetoric, neither side wins if there is a lockout/strike - especially during this time period where the NFL is absolutely flourishing.
You are reading it wrong. First, he wouldn't be reporting for a "couple of hundred thousand dollars." He would be reporting for Millions. If he doesn't report, they are telling him that he will NOT be a Free Agent. He will still be owned by the Chargers. They are letting him know that they won't support him if he continues to hold out and wants to claim free agency next season.
The only thing Jackson is guaranteed at this point is about $200K from my understanding ( $300K tender minus fines for time missed ). The NFL PA is saying to him... "Look, Bud... you've been holding out thinking that you'll be a UFA at the beginning of next year. Well, we're saying that if you don't report, then there's a good chance you won't be."

In **ANY OTHER YEAR**, the CBA would have made Jackson a UFA before this season. Since the NFLPA is advising him to play, its logical that they're saying that the CBA verbiage of 2009 is as good as dead. Since they know what the 2011 CBA **won't** contain, it implies in turn that they have some semblance of an idea of what it **will** contain. From my standpoint, the logical options are...

1) there's a new, long-term CBA that's close to being decided, which increases the UFA from 4 to 6 years permanently , or

2) there's a temporary CBA in place that keeps the current uncapped year and temporary requirement at 6 years in place for another year.

I don't really care about Vincent Jackson. I'm trying to infer something about what the NFLPA's actions might say about football in 2011. Admittedly, it might be a stretch to go this far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking to make a quick decision between two williams. BMW (Sea) or Stephen (Ari). Both were praised in the preseason, neither have lived up to expectations. This season's trauma units have made it necessary to cut one. I would think that Stephen had the more upside / younger but all the buzz from BMW still has me guessing.

They have equal upside. Both are big WRs who could be target hogs, RZ weapons, and anything else you'd want in a WR. BMW has more urgency. You'll know at the end of the year if he's worth keeping or not. Few guys work out on 3rd chances, Lloyd being a notable exception. Even if Stephen Williams doesn't play another down this year, he'd still be rosterable next year, and still have the same upside, and probably still get some hype (Ramses Barden's name popped up a few times this summer and I don't think he has an NFL catch yet).I'd gamble on BMW. There's much more chance for a near term breakout. I think if Whitehurst gets some starts, there might be a connection there. If at the end of the year he's not starting, Tate looks better, Stokley is getting more lookst, etc. you'll just be able to have space for the next Stephen Williams next year. (Also the Branch trade opens up a few more targets for him, potentially.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USC used a lot of RBs. There was never a "the man" at USC. If you acquired Forsett thinking he'd get a full workload, that was a longshot. The fact he got a chance under Caroll - nearly 20 carries the past couple weeks - is probably more surprising than the fact it didn't last. The signing of Lynch is not at all an indictment of Forsett. He's not being replaced, he's just going back to the 7 or 8 carries a game he had W1 & 2. A role he was pretty effective in. Whether he's worth buying is completely league dependent. Shallow, non-PPR leagues he's not worth anything. But a deep league, PPR, with flex spots you could do worse. Not sure if Danny Woodhead who you could have gotten off waivers last week is much better or worse.

I've got no problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to be an 8-10 carry a game kind of guy. I think that's a fair assumption. I just have a problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to outperform everyone and one day become a featured back. At this point, it's clear that Forsett is a CoP kind of guy. Better NFL asset than fantasy asset.

I am a bit confused on two parts.

1. I understand that coaches brought in Leon Washington to return kicks. And I understand that they traded a 4th and a conditional for Lynch. Even if his coaches do think Lynch is the answer, Lynch still has to prove them right. If he doesn't, Forsett is at least the lead back of the split. My confusion is this: Everybody reading this knows why Forsett's value is much lower than it was a couple weeks ago. But isn't that when you buy? As I said, he is a lottery ticket, in that he shouldn't cost you much. If he doesn't work out, you have a back up RB/handcuff or a RBBC guy, which is really all you are going to have to pay for. If he does work out, you have more than what you paid for.

2. How talented did I attempt to make Schaub out to be? I said he was too talented not to bounce back. That's it. And I said he was a top 10 dynasty FF QB, which you agree with, according to your rankings.

Re: the bolded... no, that's not when you buy. Jamarcus Russell's value is much lower than it was a couple of months ago. Laurence Maroney's value has dropped substantially over the last couple of weeks. Ben Tate and Steve Slaton have had their value consistently declining since Foster took over. Are you going to rush out to acquire those guys, too?

Just because a player's value is dropping doesn't mean you should buy him. A lot of times, those value drops are very much deserved. As a "for example"... if you're an RB with very good efficiency metrics whose owners value reasonably highly under the assumption that you have a legit shot at locking up a featured role, and your coaching staff goes out and spends valuable assets to require a well-regarded featured back, you're going to take a very deserved value hit.

Some backs are not featured back material. Think of Mewelde Moore or Jerious Norwood. No matter how well those backs perform, the coaching staffs just keep on bringing on other guys who DO fit the featured back mold. There's a huge body of evidence now that Justin Forsett belongs in a group with those two RBs. If you want to buy low on Mewelde Moore 2.0, then be my guest, but don't do it just because his value is in free-fall right now.

Second, you said Schaub's tools were "elite". Personally, I disagree. I don't think there's anything at all about Schaub that is elite. I don't think he's "too talented not to rebound". He's Marc Bulger 2.0. Do I expect him to rebound? Yeah, but if he doesn't, I'm not going to be posting on here about how he was too talented to fail.

Also, if having Schaub in your top 10 is the same as agreeing with you, then I figure you'll have a hard time buying low on Schaub, because I doubt there are very many dynasty owners who don't agree with you and have Schaub in their top 10. Are you really seeing people panic and drop him out of their top 10 after a slow start to the season?

Yes to the bolded, especially if i am a Foster owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking to make a quick decision between two williams. BMW (Sea) or Stephen (Ari). Both were praised in the preseason, neither have lived up to expectations. This season's trauma units have made it necessary to cut one. I would think that Stephen had the more upside / younger but all the buzz from BMW still has me guessing.

They have equal upside. Both are big WRs who could be target hogs, RZ weapons, and anything else you'd want in a WR. BMW has more urgency. You'll know at the end of the year if he's worth keeping or not. Few guys work out on 3rd chances, Lloyd being a notable exception. Even if Stephen Williams doesn't play another down this year, he'd still be rosterable next year, and still have the same upside, and probably still get some hype (Ramses Barden's name popped up a few times this summer and I don't think he has an NFL catch yet).I'd gamble on BMW. There's much more chance for a near term breakout. I think if Whitehurst gets some starts, there might be a connection there. If at the end of the year he's not starting, Tate looks better, Stokley is getting more lookst, etc. you'll just be able to have space for the next Stephen Williams next year. (Also the Branch trade opens up a few more targets for him, potentially.)
The possibilities of breaking out this season is more with BMW this season though it feels like neither right now. On that alone BMW won the roster spot only because S Williams shouldn't gain that much interest from other teams and would be easier to re-acquire if wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USC used a lot of RBs. There was never a "the man" at USC. If you acquired Forsett thinking he'd get a full workload, that was a longshot. The fact he got a chance under Caroll - nearly 20 carries the past couple weeks - is probably more surprising than the fact it didn't last. The signing of Lynch is not at all an indictment of Forsett. He's not being replaced, he's just going back to the 7 or 8 carries a game he had W1 & 2. A role he was pretty effective in. Whether he's worth buying is completely league dependent. Shallow, non-PPR leagues he's not worth anything. But a deep league, PPR, with flex spots you could do worse. Not sure if Danny Woodhead who you could have gotten off waivers last week is much better or worse.

I've got no problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to be an 8-10 carry a game kind of guy. I think that's a fair assumption. I just have a problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to outperform everyone and one day become a featured back. At this point, it's clear that Forsett is a CoP kind of guy. Better NFL asset than fantasy asset.

I am a bit confused on two parts.

1. I understand that coaches brought in Leon Washington to return kicks. And I understand that they traded a 4th and a conditional for Lynch. Even if his coaches do think Lynch is the answer, Lynch still has to prove them right. If he doesn't, Forsett is at least the lead back of the split. My confusion is this: Everybody reading this knows why Forsett's value is much lower than it was a couple weeks ago. But isn't that when you buy? As I said, he is a lottery ticket, in that he shouldn't cost you much. If he doesn't work out, you have a back up RB/handcuff or a RBBC guy, which is really all you are going to have to pay for. If he does work out, you have more than what you paid for.

2. How talented did I attempt to make Schaub out to be? I said he was too talented not to bounce back. That's it. And I said he was a top 10 dynasty FF QB, which you agree with, according to your rankings.

Re: the bolded... no, that's not when you buy. Jamarcus Russell's value is much lower than it was a couple of months ago. Laurence Maroney's value has dropped substantially over the last couple of weeks. Ben Tate and Steve Slaton have had their value consistently declining since Foster took over. Are you going to rush out to acquire those guys, too?

Just because a player's value is dropping doesn't mean you should buy him. A lot of times, those value drops are very much deserved. As a "for example"... if you're an RB with very good efficiency metrics whose owners value reasonably highly under the assumption that you have a legit shot at locking up a featured role, and your coaching staff goes out and spends valuable assets to require a well-regarded featured back, you're going to take a very deserved value hit.

Some backs are not featured back material. Think of Mewelde Moore or Jerious Norwood. No matter how well those backs perform, the coaching staffs just keep on bringing on other guys who DO fit the featured back mold. There's a huge body of evidence now that Justin Forsett belongs in a group with those two RBs. If you want to buy low on Mewelde Moore 2.0, then be my guest, but don't do it just because his value is in free-fall right now.

Second, you said Schaub's tools were "elite". Personally, I disagree. I don't think there's anything at all about Schaub that is elite. I don't think he's "too talented not to rebound". He's Marc Bulger 2.0. Do I expect him to rebound? Yeah, but if he doesn't, I'm not going to be posting on here about how he was too talented to fail.

Also, if having Schaub in your top 10 is the same as agreeing with you, then I figure you'll have a hard time buying low on Schaub, because I doubt there are very many dynasty owners who don't agree with you and have Schaub in their top 10. Are you really seeing people panic and drop him out of their top 10 after a slow start to the season?

First, yes. Do yourself a favor and buy Ben Tate now. Just like we should have purchased Foster when Tate was drafted. That is the best time to buy low.

As far as Forsett, he is not Jemarcus Russell. He could be Jerious Norwood or Mewelde more, or he could end up being much more than that. I am willing to pay a "Mewelde Moore" price. If he turns out to be more, I make out. If not, I get what I paid for. See why it makes sense to buy low? I don't know if you play in shallow leagues, but back up/RBBC backs still have value in the ones I play in.

As for Schaub, by tools, I means weapons around him: AJ, JJ, AW, OD and so on. AJ, JJ and OD have all been injured. I actually JUST traded for Schaub, giving up much less than I would have had to if he was playing well. This is in a MOX league full of sharks. If his value can slip there, it can slip anywhere. If you would like, I can provide the link when I get off work. (Blocked at work) You shoot down my buy low candidates, using the argument that nobody will sell low. This is a very short-sighted, simple, and quite frankly, arrogant way to view things. First, you couldn't possibly know what the majority of owners are doing with schaub, seeing as how there are literally millions of Schaub owners in the world. If this doesn't apply to the leagues that you play in, fine. And when was Marc Bulger EVER a top 8 dynasty QB? Never, and we have never had this many young, talented QBs in the NFL, since I have followed it. And by discrediting Schuab by comparing him to Bulger, you discredit your own rankings. You have Schaub ranked exactly one point behind Tom Brady. You have him 4 points behind Manning. For reference, there are a full 6 points between Manning and the higher ranked Romo. If you are going to use the Bulger comparision to downplay Schaub's status as a dynasty QB, at the very least you should be consistent and apply the same (faulty) logic to your rankings.

Your "2.0" argument is seriously lacking and again, arrogant. Until you can provide ways that Schaub and Bulger are similar, and Forsett and Mewelde are similar, your analogies are weak. Moore and Forsett are no more or less similar than Moore and B. Westbrook. Justin Forsett = Brian Westbrook 2.0. See how silly that is. Fact is, you don't know what is in store for Justin Forsett and you don't know how the Seahawks plan to use him or Marshawn Lynch. Even if there is only a small chance that you are wrong about him, as long as you pay a back up RB price, you lose nothing if that is all he ever turns out to be. Hence the term, buy low.

So again, if you are going to use "His value is down for a reason (DUH!)" or "His value isn't low" what is the point in responding? Value is relative.

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USC used a lot of RBs. There was never a "the man" at USC. If you acquired Forsett thinking he'd get a full workload, that was a longshot. The fact he got a chance under Caroll - nearly 20 carries the past couple weeks - is probably more surprising than the fact it didn't last. The signing of Lynch is not at all an indictment of Forsett. He's not being replaced, he's just going back to the 7 or 8 carries a game he had W1 & 2. A role he was pretty effective in. Whether he's worth buying is completely league dependent. Shallow, non-PPR leagues he's not worth anything. But a deep league, PPR, with flex spots you could do worse. Not sure if Danny Woodhead who you could have gotten off waivers last week is much better or worse.

I've got no problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to be an 8-10 carry a game kind of guy. I think that's a fair assumption. I just have a problem with buying Forsett under the assumption that he's going to outperform everyone and one day become a featured back. At this point, it's clear that Forsett is a CoP kind of guy. Better NFL asset than fantasy asset.

I am a bit confused on two parts.

1. I understand that coaches brought in Leon Washington to return kicks. And I understand that they traded a 4th and a conditional for Lynch. Even if his coaches do think Lynch is the answer, Lynch still has to prove them right. If he doesn't, Forsett is at least the lead back of the split. My confusion is this: Everybody reading this knows why Forsett's value is much lower than it was a couple weeks ago. But isn't that when you buy? As I said, he is a lottery ticket, in that he shouldn't cost you much. If he doesn't work out, you have a back up RB/handcuff or a RBBC guy, which is really all you are going to have to pay for. If he does work out, you have more than what you paid for.

2. How talented did I attempt to make Schaub out to be? I said he was too talented not to bounce back. That's it. And I said he was a top 10 dynasty FF QB, which you agree with, according to your rankings.

Re: the bolded... no, that's not when you buy. Jamarcus Russell's value is much lower than it was a couple of months ago. Laurence Maroney's value has dropped substantially over the last couple of weeks. Ben Tate and Steve Slaton have had their value consistently declining since Foster took over. Are you going to rush out to acquire those guys, too?

Just because a player's value is dropping doesn't mean you should buy him. A lot of times, those value drops are very much deserved. As a "for example"... if you're an RB with very good efficiency metrics whose owners value reasonably highly under the assumption that you have a legit shot at locking up a featured role, and your coaching staff goes out and spends valuable assets to require a well-regarded featured back, you're going to take a very deserved value hit.

Some backs are not featured back material. Think of Mewelde Moore or Jerious Norwood. No matter how well those backs perform, the coaching staffs just keep on bringing on other guys who DO fit the featured back mold. There's a huge body of evidence now that Justin Forsett belongs in a group with those two RBs. If you want to buy low on Mewelde Moore 2.0, then be my guest, but don't do it just because his value is in free-fall right now.

Second, you said Schaub's tools were "elite". Personally, I disagree. I don't think there's anything at all about Schaub that is elite. I don't think he's "too talented not to rebound". He's Marc Bulger 2.0. Do I expect him to rebound? Yeah, but if he doesn't, I'm not going to be posting on here about how he was too talented to fail.

Also, if having Schaub in your top 10 is the same as agreeing with you, then I figure you'll have a hard time buying low on Schaub, because I doubt there are very many dynasty owners who don't agree with you and have Schaub in their top 10. Are you really seeing people panic and drop him out of their top 10 after a slow start to the season?

As far as Forsett, he is not Jemarcus Russell. He could be Jerious Norwood or Mewelde more, or he could end up being much more than that. I am willing to pay a "Mewelde Moore" price. If he turns out to be more, I make out. If not, I get what I paid for. See why it makes sense to buy low? I don't know if you play in shallow leagues, but back up/RBBC backs still have value in the ones I play in.

As for Schaub, by tools, I means weapons around him: AJ, JJ, AW, OD and so on. AJ, JJ and OD have all been injured. I actually JUST traded for Schaub, giving up much less than I would have had to if he was playing well. This is in a MOX league full of sharks. If his value can slip there, it can slip anywhere. If you would like, I can provide the link when I get off work. (Blocked at work) You shoot down my buy low candidates, using the argument that nobody will sell low. This is a very short-sighted, simple, and quite frankly, arrogant way to view things. First, you couldn't possibly know what the majority of owners are doing with schaub, seeing as how there are literally millions of Schaub owners in the world. If this doesn't apply to the leagues that you play in, fine. And when was Marc Bulger EVER a top 8 dynasty QB? Never, and we have never had this many young, talented QBs in the NFL, since I have followed it. And by discrediting Schuab by comparing him to Bulger, you discredit your own rankings. You have Schaub ranked exactly one point behind Tom Brady. You have him 4 points behind Manning. For reference, there are a full 6 points between Manning and the higher ranked Romo. If you are going to use the Bulger comparision to downplay Schaub's status as a dynasty QB, at the very least you should be consistent and apply the same (faulty) logic to your rankings.

Your "2.0" argument is seriously lacking and again, arrogant. Until you can provide ways that Schaub and Bulger are similar, and Forsett and Mewelde are similar, your analogies are weak. Moore and Forsett are no more or less similar than Moore and B. Westbrook. Justin Forsett = Brian Westbrook 2.0. See how silly that is. Fact is, you don't know what is in store for Justin Forsett and you don't know how the Seahawks plan to use him or Marshawn Lynch. Even if there is only a small chance that you are wrong about him, as long as you pay a back up RB price, you lose nothing if that is all he ever turns out to be. Hence the term, buy low.

So again, if you are going to use "His value is down for a reason (DUH!)" or "His value isn't low" what is the point in responding? Value is relative.

Actually, Schaub was a top 8 QB from 2003-2006. He finished 8th in 2003, 10th in 2004 while missing two games. He only played 8 games in 2005, but those games prorated would have easily put him in the top 5. He finished as the #3 Qb in 2006.

Im not sure what SSOG's point was comparing Schaub to Bulger, but its a fair comparison. Both players are/were talented QB's, maybe not elite, but certainly in the top 10 during their prime.

Edited by Go deep

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Schaub was a top 8 QB from 2003-2006. He finished 8th in 2003, 10th in 2004 while missing two games. He only played 8 games in 2005, but those games prorated would have easily put him in the top 5. He finished as the #3 Qb in 2006. Im not sure what SSOG's point was comparing Schaub to Bulger, but its a fair comparison. Both players are/were talented QB's, maybe not elite, but certainly in the top 10 during their prime.

Not top 8 in scoring. Top 8 as a dynasty QB.And SSOG can't have it both ways. He can't concede that Bulger actually was a talented player worthy of being a top 8 dynasty QB, provide borderline elite stats, and build Bulger up. He already used Bulger as a negative comparison for Schaub. And Schaub is just as comparable to Bulger as Romo, who SSOG has ranked #3. The "2.0" tag just isn't logical. If you apply it to Schaub, apply it to Romo. When healthy and starting, Schuab has put up comparable numbers. Neither are elite talents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Schaub was a top 8 QB from 2003-2006. He finished 8th in 2003, 10th in 2004 while missing two games. He only played 8 games in 2005, but those games prorated would have easily put him in the top 5. He finished as the #3 Qb in 2006.

Im not sure what SSOG's point was comparing Schaub to Bulger, but its a fair comparison. Both players are/were talented QB's, maybe not elite, but certainly in the top 10 during their prime.

Not top 8 in scoring. Top 8 as a dynasty QB.

And SSOG can't have it both ways. He can't concede that Bulger actually was a talented player worthy of being a top 8 dynasty QB, provide borderline elite stats, and build Bulger up. He already used Bulger as a negative comparison for Schaub.

And Schaub is just as comparable to Bulger as Romo, who SSOG has ranked #3. The "2.0" tag just isn't logical. If you apply it to Schaub, apply it to Romo. When healthy and starting, Schuab has put up comparable numbers. Neither are elite talents.

Bulger was considered a top 8 dynasty QB back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Schaub was a top 8 QB from 2003-2006. He finished 8th in 2003, 10th in 2004 while missing two games. He only played 8 games in 2005, but those games prorated would have easily put him in the top 5. He finished as the #3 Qb in 2006.

Im not sure what SSOG's point was comparing Schaub to Bulger, but its a fair comparison. Both players are/were talented QB's, maybe not elite, but certainly in the top 10 during their prime.

Not top 8 in scoring. Top 8 as a dynasty QB.

And SSOG can't have it both ways. He can't concede that Bulger actually was a talented player worthy of being a top 8 dynasty QB, provide borderline elite stats, and build Bulger up. He already used Bulger as a negative comparison for Schaub.

And Schaub is just as comparable to Bulger as Romo, who SSOG has ranked #3. The "2.0" tag just isn't logical. If you apply it to Schaub, apply it to Romo. When healthy and starting, Schuab has put up comparable numbers. Neither are elite talents.

Bulger was considered a top 8 dynasty QB back then.
I will differ to you, as I was not playing dynasty back then. Maybe my assumption is wrong. But if that was the case, my point is still valid. Then Bulger shouldn't have been used as a negative, and the "2.0" tag is just as applicable to Tony Romo, who SSOG has as the #3 dynasty QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Schaub was a top 8 QB from 2003-2006. He finished 8th in 2003, 10th in 2004 while missing two games. He only played 8 games in 2005, but those games prorated would have easily put him in the top 5. He finished as the #3 Qb in 2006.

Im not sure what SSOG's point was comparing Schaub to Bulger, but its a fair comparison. Both players are/were talented QB's, maybe not elite, but certainly in the top 10 during their prime.

Not top 8 in scoring. Top 8 as a dynasty QB.

And SSOG can't have it both ways. He can't concede that Bulger actually was a talented player worthy of being a top 8 dynasty QB, provide borderline elite stats, and build Bulger up. He already used Bulger as a negative comparison for Schaub.

And Schaub is just as comparable to Bulger as Romo, who SSOG has ranked #3. The "2.0" tag just isn't logical. If you apply it to Schaub, apply it to Romo. When healthy and starting, Schuab has put up comparable numbers. Neither are elite talents.

Bulger was considered a top 8 dynasty QB back then.
I will differ to you, as I was not playing dynasty back then. Maybe my assumption is wrong. But if that was the case, my point is still valid. Then Bulger shouldn't have been used as a negative, and the "2.0" tag is just as applicable to Tony Romo, who SSOG has as the #3 dynasty QB.
I wouldnt disagree with that. Romo, Bulger and Schaub are all in the same tier when it comes to talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steelers WR Emmanuel Sanders will replace Antonio Brown on kickoffs this week against the Browns.

Analysis: Brown is a better return man for the Steelers, but the coaching staff wants Sanders active due to his superior receiving skills. Now healthy, he'll try to put heat on Antwaan Randle El for the No. 3 role.

(Rotoworld)

Sanders was banged up a bit, but he appears to full go now.

Pitt's coaches were gushing over this kid in camp.... very interested to see how he's used now that Rothlisberger is back.

Edited by GreatLakesMike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be going too far into the weeds on this one, but I started thinking about what the Vincent Jackson situation is telling us.

The NFLPA advised them to report. As an entity solely purposed to benefit the players, why would they tell Jackson to risk serious injury for a couple hundred thousand dollars? Is it possible that they believe something about the 2011 CBA that isn't being publicized?

I guess what I'm saying is... can we read into the NFLPA telling these guys to report as evidence for players on the field in 2011? It seems to support the theory that something will get done, even if its merely a temporary extension of the status quo? Actually, given what I understand about Jackson's situation, it seems to support exactly a temporary extension of the status quo. ( This is, of course, in no way influenced by my previous opinion that this is exactly what happens. :P )

Going too far? :):hophead::loco:

That seems to be a fair assumption. Despite all the rhetoric, neither side wins if there is a lockout/strike - especially during this time period where the NFL is absolutely flourishing.
You are reading it wrong. First, he wouldn't be reporting for a "couple of hundred thousand dollars." He would be reporting for Millions. If he doesn't report, they are telling him that he will NOT be a Free Agent. He will still be owned by the Chargers. They are letting him know that they won't support him if he continues to hold out and wants to claim free agency next season.
I think the OP is basically saying the same thing as your second point, however didn't the Chargers reduce his tender offer to $300k? So he would be playing for "couple of hundred thousand dollars."
I think the tender is around $300,000 divided by 16 game checks. Ugly if true.

But if he signs the tender, he can start negotiations with AJ on a contract extension. Don't think he ever said he didn't want to re-sign, just that he didn't want to play for any tender offer. May not have a choice on the later, but can still work on the former. It's all about business.

Edited by Riffraff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, yes. Do yourself a favor and buy Ben Tate now. Just like we should have purchased Foster when Tate was drafted. That is the best time to buy low.

Again, buying low means buying players whose value you think will rebound, not buying players whose value just took a hit. Yes, in the case of Arian Foster, it worked out. On the other hand, if you'd "bought low" on Chester Taylor when the Vikings brought in Peterson, and on Jerious Norwood when the Falcons brought in Turner, and on Michael Bush when the Raiders brought in McFadden, and on Marion Barber when the Cowboys brought in Felix, and on LenDale when the Titans brought in Johnson, and so on, then you would have lost your shirt. Buying players just because their value dropped is not a net positive strategy in the long run. Most players whose values drop see their value drop for a reason. It's possible that the drop is too extreme, or an overreaction to a trivial piece of evidence, but in those cases the reason to buy isn't "because his value went down", it's "because his value went down TOO MUCH". If you want to argue that now is the time to buy Forsett because people are overreacting, or because they're underestimating him, then that's one thing. If you want to argue that now is the time to buy Forsett because his value is lower today than it was a week ago, that's another thing entirely. The first is good process. The second is bad process.

As far as Forsett, he is not Jemarcus Russell. He could be Jerious Norwood or Mewelde more, or he could end up being much more than that. I am willing to pay a "Mewelde Moore" price. If he turns out to be more, I make out. If not, I get what I paid for. See why it makes sense to buy low? I don't know if you play in shallow leagues, but back up/RBBC backs still have value in the ones I play in.

My main dynasty has 270 offensive skill players rostered (QB/RB/WR/TE). It's a pretty deep league. And I used to own MeMo. He saved my bacon in a big way once when his stint as a starter in 2008 coincided with some injuries on my squad. He kept me afloat. With that said, his value was minimal, and only barely above what I would expect from someone off the street. If I had spent a valuable fantasy asset to acquire him, I would have regretted it. I'd much rather roster upside... and MeMo has none.

As for Schaub, by tools, I means weapons around him: AJ, JJ, AW, OD and so on. AJ, JJ and OD have all been injured. I actually JUST traded for Schaub, giving up much less than I would have had to if he was playing well. This is in a MOX league full of sharks. If his value can slip there, it can slip anywhere. If you would like, I can provide the link when I get off work. (Blocked at work) You shoot down my buy low candidates, using the argument that nobody will sell low. This is a very short-sighted, simple, and quite frankly, arrogant way to view things. First, you couldn't possibly know what the majority of owners are doing with schaub, seeing as how there are literally millions of Schaub owners in the world. If this doesn't apply to the leagues that you play in, fine. And when was Marc Bulger EVER a top 8 dynasty QB? Never, and we have never had this many young, talented QBs in the NFL, since I have followed it. And by discrediting Schuab by comparing him to Bulger, you discredit your own rankings. You have Schaub ranked exactly one point behind Tom Brady. You have him 4 points behind Manning. For reference, there are a full 6 points between Manning and the higher ranked Romo. If you are going to use the Bulger comparision to downplay Schaub's status as a dynasty QB, at the very least you should be consistent and apply the same (faulty) logic to your rankings.

First off, when someone mentions a QB's "tools", they're typically talking about things like his physical attributes- his height, his arm strength, his footwork, etc. Like in baseball, a "five tool player" is a player who can hit for average, hit for power, run the bases, field, and throw. "Tools" are innate attributes. If you want to discuss a player's targets, the typical nomenclature is "weapons". Schaub's tools are not elite, but his weapons are (or, at least, one of his weapons is). Again, that's the most common usage of the words, so for clarity purposes, those are the uses that I try to limit myself to.

Second off, you say that you just bought low on Schaub. What did you trade for him? What are some other trades involving QBs in that league? How low are we talking about, compared to the established market for proven QBs?

As for Bulger... back in 2006, plenty of people had him in their top 8, including F&L himself. F&L still had him as a top-10 dynasty QB as recently as the 2008 offseason- which was *AFTER* his nightmarish 2007 season where he averaged under 250 yards per game for the first time in his career (he actually averaged under 200) and threw 15 INTs vs. just 11 TDs. Bulger was a legit, no question, no hesitation top-8 dynasty QB for several years.

There's no inconsistency in my rankings. I've said from Day 1 that Matt Schaub was a better fantasy player than NFL player. I've said that he's less talented than the guys around him in the rankings, but he deserves the ranking because of the stability of his situation and the consistency of his production. This "Matt Schaub is the new Marc Bulger" thing is not a new invention. F&L and I have both been saying that the players were very similar for years now. Here's F&L in 2008 saying Matt Schaub runs the risk of being another Marc Bulger. Here's a post where F&L calls Schaub a Bulger clone, and I quote him and agree that Schaub is a much better FF QB than NFL QB. Here's another Bulger comparison from F&L. Here's a post where I go over the AMAZINGLY similar career numbers of Bulger vs. Schaub and reiterate one last time that the majority of his value is derived from situation instead of natural talent. You're accusing me of inconsistency when I've been stone-cold consistent for quite some time now on Schaub. I've been saying for ages now that he's an above average NFL QB who happens to put up elite FF numbers. I've said that he merits his lofty ranking based on the back of his production and his situation, but that if his situation turns, his ranking will turn on a dime because he doesn't have the talent to support that ranking without situation propping him up. Again, complete and utter consistency, here.

I'm not using the Bulger comparison as an attempt to denigrate Matt Schaub as a dynasty asset. Marc Bulger was a *FANTASTIC* dynasty asset. He put up awesome numbers for the Rams, and many contenders were built on the back of his performance. Then, however, his situation turned and his value dropped like a stone because he didn't have the talent to continue supporting his high rankings. That's Matt Schaub- fully worthy of his high ranking right now, but Schaub owners have to be extra wary to potential shifts in situation, because Schaub is far more dependent on his situation than his peers in the rankings. That's the whole point of the Bulger comparison. It's not to say that Schaub is a great dynasty QB, or a terrible dynasty QB, it's to say that Schaub is not a top-10 NFL QB and that a disproportionate amount of his fantasy value is based on situation when compared to his peers.

Your "2.0" argument is seriously lacking and again, arrogant. Until you can provide ways that Schaub and Bulger are similar, and Forsett and Mewelde are similar, your analogies are weak. Moore and Forsett are no more or less similar than Moore and B. Westbrook. Justin Forsett = Brian Westbrook 2.0. See how silly that is. Fact is, you don't know what is in store for Justin Forsett and you don't know how the Seahawks plan to use him or Marshawn Lynch. Even if there is only a small chance that you are wrong about him, as long as you pay a back up RB price, you lose nothing if that is all he ever turns out to be. Hence the term, buy low.

So again, if you are going to use "His value is down for a reason (DUH!)" or "His value isn't low" what is the point in responding? Value is relative.

It's arrogant? Finding similarities between players is now a sign of arrogance? I'm afraid you're going to have to unpack that one for me a little bit, because I'm not following.

As for similarities between Justin Forsett and Mewelde Moore... how about the fact that we now have 2 different coaching staffs who refuse to make Forsett a featured back, just like we had 3 coaching staffs refuse to do it with Mewelde, despite the fact that both players are the most efficient RBs on their respective teams? How about the fact that, despite their rate stats making it blindingly obvious that they should be getting more carries, every coach they've played for has gone out of their way to get them less carries? Philadelphia never traded future draft picks to bring in a new featured back when Brian Westbrook was in town, that's for sure.

Also, the phrase "back up RB price" is misleading. Backup RBs have zero inherent value. They'll never see your starting lineup (because they're backups), so they'll never score points for you. If all you get from an RB is backup production, then ANY PRICE YOU PAID was too high of a price. Any non-zero value traded is too much, because you're getting zero value in return.

I mean, take your "buy backups just because they're cheap!" statement to its logical conclusion. Why should I be trading for Justin Forsett in particular, here? Why shouldn't I trade for, say, Chester Taylor? He's a backup, so as long as I pay "backup price" for him, I can't possibly lose! And why stop there? Why not roster Matt Flynn and Matt Moore? They're backups, so I'll just pay "backup price" for them. And let's get Taylor Price, and Julian Edelman, and Quarless, and Martellus Bennett while we're at it. Pretty soon I'll have a roster constructed of nothing but backups... but it's okay, because I only paid backup price for them, so if they all perform like backups, it's not like I overpayed or anything. Could I possibly win a championship with that roster, though? Is acquiring cheap players on the cheap for no better reason than because they're cheap really a winning strategy, here? Of course not- you have to differentiate the guys who are cheaper than they should be, and the guys who are dirt cheap for a reason (a well-deserved reason, at that).

If you want to argue that I should be rostering Forsett because of his efficiency metrics, I'll listen. If you want to argue because of your "eyeball test", I'll listen. If you want to argue because Lynch is one misstep away from a major suspension, I'll listen. If you have inside information from the Seahawk coaching staff, I'll listen. If you have an observation about a strength that is a particularly good fit in Seattle's offense, or a particularly good fit against an opposing defense, I'll listen. Those are all examples of good process. If you want to tell me to add Forsett just because he's cheap, I'm not going to listen to you anymore. That's an example of bad process. The phrase "buy low" doesn't mean buy players whose value is low, it means buy players whose value is low but will wind up rising. Unless you've got some reason why a player's value will rise, then he's not a "buy low". If you do have some reason why a player's value will rise, then I'm all ears, but so far all I've heard from you is "he's cheaper right now than he was a week ago" and "he's a backup, so just pay "backup price" for him!".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will differ to you, as I was not playing dynasty back then. Maybe my assumption is wrong. But if that was the case, my point is still valid. Then Bulger shouldn't have been used as a negative, and the "2.0" tag is just as applicable to Tony Romo, who SSOG has as the #3 dynasty QB.

I have him as my #3 dynasty QB because the "Marc Bulger 2.0" tag is not the slightest bit applicable to Tony Romo. Romo is a SUBSTANTIALLY better QB than Bulger was. He's a SUBSTANTIALLY better QB than Schaub is. In real-world terms, I think Romo is as good of a QB as Aaron Rodgers is.

If I were tiering current NFL QBs based on talent (note: not fantasy rankings, just talent rankings), I'd have something like this (note #2: this is a quick off-the-cuff list and not a rigorously prepared and heavily researched super-definitive set of rankings):

Tier 1- Peyton Manning, Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers

Tier 2- Romo, Rodgers, McNabb, Cutler

Tier 3- Vick, Orton, Ryan, Flacco, Schaub, Favre

Tier 4- Bradford, Freeman, Eli Manning, Sanchez

Do you disagree? Fantastic! Disagreement is what makes this interesting. That's how *I* rank the talents, though, and needless to say, my fantasy rankings are based on my perceptions of a player's talents. Don't imply that I'm being inconsistent in my treatment of Romo and Schaub when, in my mind, they're radically different players. One's a QB6-9 kind of guy, while the other is a QB10-15 kind of guy.

Edited by SSOG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SSOG: I know this was mentioned as a possible evolution of your site awhile back, but I would be very interested in seeing where you (or others for that matter) slot in draft picks among your rankings (and how that might change as the season goes on and projections of teams' draft positions get more certain).

Edited by EthnicFury

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were tiering current NFL QBs based on talent (note: not fantasy rankings, just talent rankings), I'd have something like this (note #2: this is a quick off-the-cuff list and not a rigorously prepared and heavily researched super-definitive set of rankings):

Tier 1- Peyton Manning, Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers

Tier 2- Romo, Rodgers, McNabb, Cutler

Tier 3- Vick, Orton, Ryan, Flacco, Schaub, Favre

Tier 4- Bradford, Freeman, Eli Manning, Sanchez

Do you disagree? Fantastic! Disagreement is what makes this interesting. That's how *I* rank the talents, though, and needless to say, my fantasy rankings are based on my perceptions of a player's talents. Don't imply that I'm being inconsistent in my treatment of Romo and Schaub when, in my mind, they're radically different players. One's a QB6-9 kind of guy, while the other is a QB10-15 kind of guy.

Schaub's an interesting guy IMO. I haven't seen every game he's played but when I have seen him I've liked what I've seen. However, I agree that he's in tier 3. I don't have Orton quite that high on pure talent but he's done pretty well. The disagreement I have with you here, if we're talking about pure talent is Bradford and to a lesser degree Freeman. On a pure talent level, Bradford is every bit as talented as Rivers or Ben. Freeman pretty close to McNabb. Both clearly need more seasoning to be ranked that high as far as true value, but you're talking pure talent. I might also bump Flacco up a tier but that's not a strong disagreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SSOG: I know this was mentioned as a possible evolution of your site awhile back, but I would be very interested in seeing where you (or others for that matter) slot in draft picks among your rankings (and how that might change as the season goes on and projections of teams' draft positions get more certain).

My rankings include draft picks, just compare a players or picks DS(dynaty score) to each other. For example, right now the 1.1 pick has a DS of 52, Peyton Manning has a 51, Lesean Mccoy has a 52, and Larry Fitzgerald has a 53. So acccording to my rankings, the 1.1 has similar value to those players. The pick scores are subject to change once we get a better idea of this years crop.

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.