Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Fear & Loathing

Dynasty Rankings

Recommended Posts

I don't know what a vintage Arian Foster game is, but I do know he has 5 100 yard + games and a 150 yarder while Rice has 2 100+ yarders with a high of 102. having seen lots of Foster this year I can say his yard per catch mark is totally due to the offense he only catches dump offs with little room to run now basically and not any more wheels and way less screens. that's something that can change pretty quickly though. the line is also down a bit this season.

still when 2 guys are within 6 months in age and Foster has put up 20.6, 19.7, 18.3 the last 3 years in PPG while Rice has gone 13.4, 18.6, and 14.5 (I know situations change) I am going to need a bit more convincing to drop him 7 spots below Rice than you got tired of waiting on a vintage Foster game during a season he is the leading fantasy scorer among RBs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

points today are not inherently more valuable than points tomorrow

Actually they are. The only points that matter for your FF team are the points they will score in the next game. You can always trade for, draft pick up players to score you points next season or in future seasons.I do not mean to say that the value of a player being able to repeat their performance over a period of time is not also valuable, it certainly is very valuable, that is why you rank Rice over Doug Martin, a position that for the most part I agree with btw but points scored in 2015 are not equal to points in 2012 or 2013 which are currently at a premium.If your team is not contending for a title in 2012 then you should shift gears as points in 2012 have no real value to your ability to win a championship. But when you are trading for the future you should still be demanding premium on current performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Rice has over Martin is a track record. What Rice has over Richardson is a legit NFL franchise. You might value a track record and a supporting cast less than I do. That's your prerogative. I don't. That's my prerogative. It's good to get sane and rational people with different opinions, because otherwise you wind up with an echo chamber effect. And it's not like my opinion is really all that out there- Couch Potato has Rice over Martin. Bloom has Rice over both. On a scale of one to insane, this isn't "Arian Foster outside the top 10".

Agree on the pedigree, but as we all know the shelf life of an RB isn't that long - we can argue all day whether it's age, workload or some combination of the two.For dynasty purposes, the challenge is not relying on Rice for that one year when he starts falling over the wrong side of the cliff. Whether that's next year or not remains to be seen, but I think he's close to - if not at - his peak.At this point in time, I'd take the young legs of Richardson or Martin over Rice in a heartbeat, but that's me. All are franchise backs whose offenses will go through them, and are on the field in all situations.
:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

points today are not inherently more valuable than points tomorrow

Actually they are. The only points that matter for your FF team are the points they will score in the next game. You can always trade for, draft pick up players to score you points next season or in future seasons.

I do not mean to say that the value of a player being able to repeat their performance over a period of time is not also valuable, it certainly is very valuable, that is why you rank Rice over Doug Martin, a position that for the most part I agree with btw but points scored in 2015 are not equal to points in 2012 or 2013 which are currently at a premium.

If your team is not contending for a title in 2012 then you should shift gears as points in 2012 have no real value to your ability to win a championship. But when you are trading for the future you should still be demanding premium on current performance.

Agreed, depending on one's dynasty strategy. SSOG looks at a 10 year dynasty timeline and thinks points in 2013, 2014, or 2015+ are worth the same as points today. Not saying he is wrong, it is just that I am from a different school of thought. I generally look at a 2-3 years max future time line - however, I always keep in mind from my Dynasty 101 class: The only year you can win is the one you are currently competing in, so if I am in the playoff hunt and am one player short to remain competitive, then the current points are always worth more than future points - but as they say, different strokes... Edited by squistion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what a vintage Arian Foster game is, but I do know he has 5 100 yard + games and a 150 yarder while Rice has 2 100+ yarders with a high of 102. having seen lots of Foster this year I can say his yard per catch mark is totally due to the offense he only catches dump offs with little room to run now basically and not any more wheels and way less screens. that's something that can change pretty quickly though. the line is also down a bit this season.

still when 2 guys are within 6 months in age and Foster has put up 20.6, 19.7, 18.3 the last 3 years in PPG while Rice has gone 13.4, 18.6, and 14.5 (I know situations change) I am going to need a bit more convincing to drop him 7 spots below Rice than you got tired of waiting on a vintage Foster game during a season he is the leading fantasy scorer among RBs

Foster's topped 150 yards once this season. He did it 10 times in 2011, and 6 times in 2010. He's averaging 10 receiving yards per game and hasn't topped 40 yards once despite putting up 15 such games in his career.

These guys would rather have Stewart than foster lol

If I'd rather have Stewart than Foster, I would have ranked Stewart over Foster.

points today are not inherently more valuable than points tomorrow

Actually they are. The only points that matter for your FF team are the points they will score in the next game. You can always trade for, draft pick up players to score you points next season or in future seasons.

I do not mean to say that the value of a player being able to repeat their performance over a period of time is not also valuable, it certainly is very valuable, that is why you rank Rice over Doug Martin, a position that for the most part I agree with btw but points scored in 2015 are not equal to points in 2012 or 2013 which are currently at a premium.

If your team is not contending for a title in 2012 then you should shift gears as points in 2012 have no real value to your ability to win a championship. But when you are trading for the future you should still be demanding premium on current performance.

Strongly, strongly, strongly disagree. Again, hyperbolic discounting. If you could trade points today for points tomorrow at a 10% premium, and you simply did that over and over, you would eventually own every single point in the entire league. By sacrificing a few titles early on, you would build an unstoppable juggernaut that would win every single game in perpetuity for the duration of the league's existence. If you could trade a pick today for an equal pick next year and a lesser pick this year, and you did that with every pick you owned, eventually you would wind up owning every single draft pick your league awarded for the remainder of the league's existence. Look at New England trading current picks for future picks, and look at Washington trading future picks for current picks, and go look back over the last decade and tell me which strategy has paid greater dividends.

Again, there are perfectly valid reasons why one would value the present over the future. If your league is unstable and likely to fold, then the future is uncertain and should be discounted. If your team is making a run right now, then you should place a slight (but not huge) premium on present production. Despite the existence of scenarios where one or the other should be discounted, though, neither present points nor future points are inherently more valuable than the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

On pace for 400 carries in the regular season alone. Also declining effectiveness. Being propped up by said carries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

The saying is that TDs follow yards, not that yards follow TDs. Foster has suffered a dramatic decline in effectiveness that has been hidden in his fantasy totals by his strong TD production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

On pace for 400 carries in the regular season alone. Also declining effectiveness. Being propped up by said carries.
Foster has helped "prop up" my team to two consecutive Super Bowls (champion in 2010, finished 2nd in 2011), and he's currently helping "prop up" my team to the most pts scored, #1 playoff seed, and hopefully a 3rd straight Super Bowl appearance in 2012. If you're correct in cautioning us all that a 26 year old Foster has begun his downward slide, then I guess I'll just have to enjoy the ride. Maybe I can coast to another championship or two along the way...:thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for funsies:

1. Rice

2. Richardson

3. Peterson

4. McCoy

5. Martin

6. Charles

7. Spiller

8. Foster

9. Forte

10. Mathews

11. Lynch

12. Morris

For how long will people be continuing to rank Mathews a top 10 back? He's got a whopping 5 games with 100 rushing yards in his career (and none this year). I just don't understand the love for him.
I'm not a Mathews fan, but I heard the same argument about Dez Bryant. How's that working out for the non-believers?
Solid statistical foundation here.
Just pointing out your strawman. What Mathews has done in the past means nothing if he's rushing for 1400 yards next season. Just like Dez Bryant's first 2 years mean nothing except that people gave up too soon because they were too frustrated to see the forest for the trees. Like I said, I'm not a Mathews fan either, but I wouldn't be drawing conclusions based on how many times he hit some arbitrary number when he was in his early 20s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

The saying is that TDs follow yards, not that yards follow TDs. Foster has suffered a dramatic decline in effectiveness that has been hidden in his fantasy totals by his strong TD production.
I'm willing to acknowledge this.

While it's appropriate to point out the decline in yardage and effectiveness, I don't think it was entirely unexpected entering the season.

I'm also of the opinion that Foster can continue to produce at current levels or better over the next couple of seasons. Therefore, the current decline doesn't bother me as much as it will some. Also, there are certain players who have historically been great at producing TDs. I think that is one of the reasons you were as big of a fan of Vincent Jackson's career path a couple of seasons ago. I see no reason to discount Foster for continuing to be an elite TD producer...

:shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over time, I've moved away from a "tread on the tires" mindset. Age is important. Career workload is not. In fact, backs with a high workload early are more likely to maintain that high workload late in their careers, too.

What Rice has over Martin is a track record. What Rice has over Richardson is a legit NFL franchise. You might value a track record and a supporting cast less than I do. That's your prerogative. I don't. That's my prerogative. It's good to get sane and rational people with different opinions, because otherwise you wind up with an echo chamber effect. And it's not like my opinion is really all that out there- Couch Potato has Rice over Martin. Bloom has Rice over both. On a scale of one to insane, this isn't "Arian Foster outside the top 10".

Without adding another opinion on which side is 'right' in the Martin/Rice dynasty value debate - I think accepting the bolded has been a critical component of my own success in a dynasty format.

Over the years the SP has had threads, discussions, historical comparisons which have seemed to confirm that age is the greatest factor in charting elite RB production and longevity. We've also seen that "the best of the best" continue to produce and sustain the highest career workloads and production at ages beyond their peers.

I agree with SSOG that the 25 year old Rice's track record and workload is a HUGE positive in the debate, rather than a negative.

Rice has shown that he can handle being a bellcow and his career trajectory could very well be elite production for several more seasons. In today's NFL, 3-4 years of plug-and-play RB1 production is incredibly valuable. Positional scarcity at the RB position makes these guys worth their weight in fantasy gold, despite relatively short career lifespans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 years ago ray rice had a 4.0 ypc season. Just because fosters ypc dropped doesn't mean he no longer an effective runner and will stop getting Tds. The line is not as good as last year and it could easily improve again. More importantly, texans are more willing than most to feed their rbs inside the 5.

Rice is averaging 4.3 ypc and still has a lower ypc over the past 3 seasons with a reasonably large gulf between his and fosters production. The argument is being made that foster might be ready to fall off a cliff but I have yet to see a strong case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: Foster.

His effectiveness is down right now, but I really don't know what that means for the future. I think his effectiveness is down due to over-use...which should correct itself once Tate is healthy again.

Of course, Tate is a legit talent in his own right, and if Foster's effectiveness is down for any reason other than over-use, his value could take a nosedive when Tate gets healthy.

I think the answer is to pair those two, regardless of what you normally think about handcuffs. Foster owners should either aquire Tate, or sell Foster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with SSOG that the 25 year old Rice's track record and workload is a HUGE positive in the debate, rather than a negative.

Gotta disagree with that. The guy is at least half spent as an NFL player. Buy him now and you're paying full price for half a product. Players who get high workloads over multiple seasons generally do so because they have exceptional talent. So of course they age better than guys who don't get the ball as much. If a guy is good enough to command a high percentage of his team's touches for several years, he is probably pretty talented. Enough so that his skills could decline and he might still be a starting caliber player. But if you have a young guy with the same level of ability, there's little reason not to take him instead. The greater longevity potential is worth a lot more than the peace of mind you get from a guy who has done it for 3-5 years already. You don't get points from 2010 when you buy Ray Rice in 2012. No question I take a Richardson or Martin over a Peterson or Rice. It's an easy decision. You're getting the same production right now, with a much rosier future outlook. I would also take a Luck or Griffin over a Brees, Brady, or Manning without hesitation. Easy call when you're convinced that the young guy is special. The risk with this approach is that you get stuck with a Braylon Edwards/Jay Cutler/Koren Robinson, but the potential for a career that is twice as valuable as an older player's affords you a big margin for error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

The saying is that TDs follow yards, not that yards follow TDs. Foster has suffered a dramatic decline in effectiveness that has been hidden in his fantasy totals by his strong TD production.
I'm willing to acknowledge this.

While it's appropriate to point out the decline in yardage and effectiveness, I don't think it was entirely unexpected entering the season.

I'm also of the opinion that Foster can continue to produce at current levels or better over the next couple of seasons. Therefore, the current decline doesn't bother me as much as it will some. Also, there are certain players who have historically been great at producing TDs. I think that is one of the reasons you were as big of a fan of Vincent Jackson's career path a couple of seasons ago. I see no reason to discount Foster for continuing to be an elite TD producer...

:shrug:

To clarify, I wasn't meaning to suggest that I see Foster's TDs declining. He's too big a part of what that offense does in the red zone. I'm just worried about him getting hurt (396 carry pace!), or seeing his yards continue to decline, or seeing Tate eat into his role. And for what it's worth, I still really like Foster. Look at the guys I have ahead of him. Rice and McCoy are both younger, both proven, and don't carry as much risk (IMO). Richardson and Martin are younger still and lighting the league on fire. Peterson is a year older, but is a first ballot HoFer enjoying his best season while still recovering from injury. And Spiller/Charles are the only two guys in the league capable of putting up 6+ ypc over a full season. The ranking is not meant as much as a criticism of Foster as it is a huge vote of confidence in the other guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

On pace for 400 carries in the regular season alone. Also declining effectiveness. Being propped up by said carries.
Foster has helped "prop up" my team to two consecutive Super Bowls (champion in 2010, finished 2nd in 2011), and he's currently helping "prop up" my team to the most pts scored, #1 playoff seed, and hopefully a 3rd straight Super Bowl appearance in 2012. :
I never said anything about him being propped up in 2010 and 2011.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and despite Foster getting almost no receiving yards this year he remains the #1 overall RB. I'd wager the yards are more likely to rise back toward his career averages than fall to zero over the next few seasons so I don't quite see the problem there. why give the #1 spot to Rice at the same age and producing at a much lower level and the #8 spot to Foster who has now made it 3 straight years of producing like a guy worth the #1 overall pick (as opposed to 1 out of 3 for Rice) and whose team shows no signs of moving away from him and just signed a long-term deal?

On pace for 400 carries in the regular season alone. Also declining effectiveness. Being propped up by said carries.
Foster has helped "prop up" my team to two consecutive Super Bowls (champion in 2010, finished 2nd in 2011), and he's currently helping "prop up" my team to the most pts scored, #1 playoff seed, and hopefully a 3rd straight Super Bowl appearance in 2012. :
I never said anything about him being propped up in 2010 and 2011.
touche ;) I just didn't know where you were going with talk of the decline. I fully acknowledge that it's taken place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any current dynasty rankings I can look at?

Or do I just use the projections thing that Dodds and those guys come up with..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pointing out your strawman. What Mathews has done in the past means nothing if he's rushing for 1400 yards next season. Just like Dez Bryant's first 2 years mean nothing except that people gave up too soon because they were too frustrated to see the forest for the trees. Like I said, I'm not a Mathews fan either, but I wouldn't be drawing conclusions based on how many times he hit some arbitrary number when he was in his early 20s.

FYI - this post would have been silly 2 weeks ago. Slow your roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strongly, strongly, strongly disagree. Again, hyperbolic discounting. If you could trade points today for points tomorrow at a 10% premium, and you simply did that over and over, you would eventually own every single point in the entire league. By sacrificing a few titles early on, you would build an unstoppable juggernaut that would win every single game in perpetuity for the duration of the league's existence. If you could trade a pick today for an equal pick next year and a lesser pick this year, and you did that with every pick you owned, eventually you would wind up owning every single draft pick your league awarded for the remainder of the league's existence. Look at New England trading current picks for future picks, and look at Washington trading future picks for current picks, and go look back over the last decade and tell me which strategy has paid greater dividends.

Again, there are perfectly valid reasons why one would value the present over the future. If your league is unstable and likely to fold, then the future is uncertain and should be discounted. If your team is making a run right now, then you should place a slight (but not huge) premium on present production. Despite the existence of scenarios where one or the other should be discounted, though, neither present points nor future points are inherently more valuable than the other.

Well it is alright that we disagree and I think I understand your point, that a point 2 years from now = a point tomorrow. In a sense that it is true but it does not take into consideration replacement value of the asset that one will replace an older player with when that time in the future arrives. So in reality how much more valuable a players future performance may be compared to another is only relevant compared to what you would be replacing that player with at that point of time.

As far as trading for the future I fully agree with it and always look for opportunities to trade for draft picks. As far as ones ability to be able to corner the market in rookie picks depends more on the quality of the league than anything else. Good owners are not going to give up their picks that easily and a solid rule structure should not allow you to trade for picks 2-3 years into the future, at least from my perspective of what would be a healthy league.

Most years I will have more rookie picks than I would have for staying pat, I always try to trade off my picks for another teams unless I know I will have a bad season, some trades are just to swap picks, or I try to find some one willing to flip with me. There are some seasons where I have even had as many as 4 1st round picks in a 12 team league, but if the other owners are any good at all they should not allow one team to control much more than that, to me that would be a sign of a broken league more than anything else.

To me a rookie pick has more value than a player on your roster in many cases, however that is because I see picks as additional roster spots, so I am always looking to add picks when possible to boost the overall value of assets available to my team. Rookie picks are tradable as players while players can be replaced by waiver claims, picks only get replaced once a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any current dynasty rankings I can look at?Or do I just use the projections thing that Dodds and those guys come up with..

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/viewrankings.php?viewpos=rb&type=dynasty&howrecent=21http://dynastyleaguefootball.com/rankings/rb-rankingshttp://www.dynastyrankings.net/Can't speak to the quality of the rankings provided in all cases, but that should at least give you a lot of opinions to look at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are going to catch hell for foster rank i think, but i agree.Wilson, Miller most glaring for me.

A month ago, I would have had Foster much higher. His sudden decline in effectiveness is worrisome. Wilson and Miller are guys who are out of sight, out of mind. Guys like them make for good buy lows- think Rice, McCoy, and Charles. I don't think they're as good as any of those guys, but in a weak RB crop, I think they're smart gambles.
I meant both those guys are far too low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are going to catch hell for foster rank i think, but i agree.Wilson, Miller most glaring for me.

A month ago, I would have had Foster much higher. His sudden decline in effectiveness is worrisome. Wilson and Miller are guys who are out of sight, out of mind. Guys like them make for good buy lows- think Rice, McCoy, and Charles. I don't think they're as good as any of those guys, but in a weak RB crop, I think they're smart gambles.
I meant both those guys are far too low.
Oh. I think you're going to be in the minority on that one. They've both got way too many questions for me to slide them up a little, let alone a lot. For Miller, why did he plummet so far, and why can't he seem to beat out Daniel Thomas? For Wilson, is he ever going to be anything more than a CoP back in that crowded backfield? I feel like I've already got them both towards the high end of where you'll find them among rankers (because I love me some upside), and I couldn't see ranking them any higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just pointing out your strawman. What Mathews has done in the past means nothing if he's rushing for 1400 yards next season. Just like Dez Bryant's first 2 years mean nothing except that people gave up too soon because they were too frustrated to see the forest for the trees. Like I said, I'm not a Mathews fan either, but I wouldn't be drawing conclusions based on how many times he hit some arbitrary number when he was in his early 20s.

FYI - this post would have been silly 2 weeks ago. Slow your roll.
I only use Dez Bryant as an example because Otis is in that thread beating himself up for trading the guy. I agree with you.

Though, aren't you the one that made that silly post that is going to be debunked in one week?

Edited by ItsOnlytheRiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking to the point of the ranking of Wilson/Miller, they both have a decent amount of talent, but their situations need to change somewhat. I think Miller is closer to being a viable fantasy asset (feel like Bush will probably be gone and Miller will assume his role), while I believe if they were both put into the same fantasy situation then it would be Wilson who would be more valuable.

Just feel like Wilson is the more talented player. However, with all of that being said, I'd be VERY hard pressed to rank either guy in the Top 20-25 for dynasty purposes until I get a better idea of how their games will translate to the NFL level. Need to see a little more action from both guys as they aren't overwhelming talented in my eyes as someone like a Trent Richardson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking to the point of the ranking of Wilson/Miller, they both have a decent amount of talent, but their situations need to change somewhat. I think Miller is closer to being a viable fantasy asset (feel like Bush will probably be gone and Miller will assume his role), while I believe if they were both put into the same fantasy situation then it would be Wilson who would be more valuable. Just feel like Wilson is the more talented player. However, with all of that being said, I'd be VERY hard pressed to rank either guy in the Top 20-25 for dynasty purposes until I get a better idea of how their games will translate to the NFL level. Need to see a little more action from both guys as they aren't overwhelming talented in my eyes as someone like a Trent Richardson.

Agreed - the jury is still out on Wilson, but he had both the fortune and misfortune to be drafted by the Giants. Good in that he'll be coached very well, bad in that perhaps more so than any other team, he's got to earn his playing time.If Wilson were on about 20 or so other teams, we'd probably already know how good (or not so good) he is. So situation is perhaps bigger for Wilson than any other young RB out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan Stewart always seems to be ranked so high on lists I see here compared to what you can get for him or with him. I'm starting to regret trading him and Vincent Jackson for Julio Jones when I see him ranked at a dizzying 14. I just couldn't imagine anyone accepting a straight up deal if you shopped him to the Ridley, Chris Johnson or Murray owner. Even in response to the question above, I wonder if an owner would give up Wilson straight up for him, I'd be inclined to say they wouldn't. The other ones that stand out or me from a selfish point of view as I ve just bought them cheap are Ingram and Ben Tate, both much higher than I've seen ranked elsewhere. Excellent work SSOG

There's never been a better time to buy Stewart. A lot of the people who took him high as a rookie are finally getting fed up and bailing, right before he is poised to finally return some of their investment. Carolina will be getting a top 10 pick and a new coach in the offseason. DeAngelo Williams is about to turn 30. Nowhere to go but up for Stewart's production, provided that he stays healthy and plays at a similar level to what he's done so far in his career. The FF value of RBs is mainly about opportunity. Guys like Ridley, Morris, and Foster are not incredible talents. They're just good players in favorable situations that exploit their skills to the max. A guy like Stewart has just as much talent and will eventually have a good run of FF production to match it if he ever gets a real chance to be the man for a team.
I don't discount your logic, but the one thing you are omitting from your calculation is the underlying injury concerns with Stewart. I wonder whether or not those foot and ankle injuries he has had will make it impossible for him to ever put together two or three years of top 10 production?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was from the Cecil Shorts thread, but I thought it would be better here and would avoid hijacking the Shorts discussion...

Just drives home the #1 lesson of this FF season for me, which is that TIMING is everything. By the time I was trying to trade for Shorts, he had already shown too much to come cheap. And now a few weeks later he would probably command even more value, to the point of being almost untouchable.

I missed out on Victor Cruz in a bunch of leagues last year because I dropped him after the preseason and then didn't find room for him when he made the active roster and had his big two TD 'fluke' game in Week 3.

I think the only way around this is to value guys who have a chance right now over guys you think may actually be better players. I'm not talking about top prospects, just the end of roster guys.

For example, Fasano was limping into Week 12 yesterday and Clay is someone I've been curious about since the end of last year. There are guys on my rosters I like better as prospects, but I still found room for Clay and vacuumed him up before kickoff where I didn't already own him. Either he does well with the bigger opportunity or you can drop him again for someone else with a chance to shine in an upcoming week. It's a short-term decision and doesn't tie up the roster spot for very long if they miss. You'll still miss way more than you'll hit obviously, but I think being flexible about player valuations with a bias for the current week improves your odds.

Edited by wdcrob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Rice has over Martin is a track record. What Rice has over Richardson is a legit NFL franchise. You might value a track record and a supporting cast less than I do. That's your prerogative. I don't. That's my prerogative. It's good to get sane and rational people with different opinions, because otherwise you wind up with an echo chamber effect. And it's not like my opinion is really all that out there- Couch Potato has Rice over Martin. Bloom has Rice over both. On a scale of one to insane, this isn't "Arian Foster outside the top 10".

Agree on the pedigree, but as we all know the shelf life of an RB isn't that long - we can argue all day whether it's age, workload or some combination of the two.For dynasty purposes, the challenge is not relying on Rice for that one year when he starts falling over the wrong side of the cliff. Whether that's next year or not remains to be seen, but I think he's close to - if not at - his peak.At this point in time, I'd take the young legs of Richardson or Martin over Rice in a heartbeat, but that's me. All are franchise backs whose offenses will go through them, and are on the field in all situations.
I'd be selling Rice if people value him as a top 5-6 overall dynasty player. The peace of mind you get from having the safe bet is offset by the fact that four years of his prime are dead and gone. In dynasty I generally subscribe to the philosophy that it's better to sell a player a year too early than a year too late. Martin and Richardson are just as good and have a lot more longevity potential. Easy call there for me, as someone who owns all three players in various leagues.
Doug Martin will turn 24 in January, he's only 2 years younger than Rice who willl turn 26 in January. Is that "a lot more longevity potential"?Is it possible that Rice plays well at 32, like an Emmitt Smith, C. Martin or T. Jones while D. Martin falls off a cliff at 30? If so where's the "a lot more longevity potential"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Rice has over Martin is a track record. What Rice has over Richardson is a legit NFL franchise. You might value a track record and a supporting cast less than I do. That's your prerogative. I don't. That's my prerogative. It's good to get sane and rational people with different opinions, because otherwise you wind up with an echo chamber effect. And it's not like my opinion is really all that out there- Couch Potato has Rice over Martin. Bloom has Rice over both. On a scale of one to insane, this isn't "Arian Foster outside the top 10".

Agree on the pedigree, but as we all know the shelf life of an RB isn't that long - we can argue all day whether it's age, workload or some combination of the two.For dynasty purposes, the challenge is not relying on Rice for that one year when he starts falling over the wrong side of the cliff. Whether that's next year or not remains to be seen, but I think he's close to - if not at - his peak.At this point in time, I'd take the young legs of Richardson or Martin over Rice in a heartbeat, but that's me. All are franchise backs whose offenses will go through them, and are on the field in all situations.
I'd be selling Rice if people value him as a top 5-6 overall dynasty player. The peace of mind you get from having the safe bet is offset by the fact that four years of his prime are dead and gone. In dynasty I generally subscribe to the philosophy that it's better to sell a player a year too early than a year too late. Martin and Richardson are just as good and have a lot more longevity potential. Easy call there for me, as someone who owns all three players in various leagues.
Doug Martin will turn 24 in January, he's only 2 years younger than Rice who willl turn 26 in January. Is that "a lot more longevity potential"?Is it possible that Rice plays well at 32, like an Emmitt Smith, C. Martin or T. Jones while D. Martin falls off a cliff at 30? If so where's the "a lot more longevity potential"?
It's possible, but Rice has over 1400 touches on his young career. Many will argue that age rather than touches are most relevant, but IMO it's some combination of the two. While Rice is not a pounding type runner, all that punishment has to take its toll sooner rather than later.That's not to say Rice can't be vey productive for the next 2 or 3 years, but Martin is just getting going. Edited by zamboni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colin Kaepernick - where you do rank him?

In a league in which I am rebuilding, I am looking to "downgrade" from Dalton for him. He has looked really good, and will score points on the ground. I haven't done QB rankings since the season started, but I would imagine I'd land him around 13-15, right now. Around Tannehill, Romo, Dalton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are going to catch hell for foster rank i think, but i agree.Wilson, Miller most glaring for me.

A month ago, I would have had Foster much higher. His sudden decline in effectiveness is worrisome. Wilson and Miller are guys who are out of sight, out of mind. Guys like them make for good buy lows- think Rice, McCoy, and Charles. I don't think they're as good as any of those guys, but in a weak RB crop, I think they're smart gambles.
I meant both those guys are far too low.
Oh. I think you're going to be in the minority on that one. They've both got way too many questions for me to slide them up a little, let alone a lot. For Miller, why did he plummet so far, and why can't he seem to beat out Daniel Thomas? For Wilson, is he ever going to be anything more than a CoP back in that crowded backfield? I feel like I've already got them both towards the high end of where you'll find them among rankers (because I love me some upside), and I couldn't see ranking them any higher.
I have Wilson ranked #15 and Miller at #28 and feel pretty good about both of those. My rankings are due for an update, but I think both guys will be in similar spots following the update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colin Kaepernick - where you do rank him?In a league in which I am rebuilding, I am looking to "downgrade" from Dalton for him. He has looked really good, and will score points on the ground. I haven't done QB rankings since the season started, but I would imagine I'd land him around 13-15, right now. Around Tannehill, Romo, Dalton.

He's obviously due for a bump. 15 sounds about right to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed out on Victor Cruz in a bunch of leagues last year because I dropped him after the preseason and then didn't find room for him when he made the active roster and had his big two TD 'fluke' game in Week 3.

I think the only way around this is to value guys who have a chance right now over guys you think may actually be better players. I'm not talking about top prospects, just the end of roster guys.

The thing with both Cruz and Shorts is they weren't supposed to have a chance. Jax signed Laurent and drafted Blackmon and still had Mike Thomas on the roster. NYG had Manningham coming off a good year plus Nicks, and had spent draft picks on Barden and Jernigan. Sometimes hard to guess situation until its staring you right in the face. I don't think signing the 4th WR off next year's Jaguars-like-team is necessarily a recipe for success. We spent all summer trying to guess who would break out as a WR2 in HOU or a WR3 in Dallas and no one did.

Another way to view Shorts and Cruz is to target failed hype players. Shorts had a lot of hype in his rookie camp but it didn't materialize until he was droppable or tradeable for the lowest of picks. Could mean Lestar and Martin are viable buy lows at the moment, but I'm not sure how much I'd move in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colin Kaepernick - where you do rank him?In a league in which I am rebuilding, I am looking to "downgrade" from Dalton for him. He has looked really good, and will score points on the ground. I haven't done QB rankings since the season started, but I would imagine I'd land him around 13-15, right now. Around Tannehill, Romo, Dalton.

Around Tannehill and Wilson sounds about right, I'm putting all of them above Dalton (Locker too). Romo is tougher to rank vs. him because I would rather have Romo for the next 4 weeks if he's my starter and I'm in the playoffs. If I'm rebuilding, Kaepernick. I'd prefer him to Big Ben, Flacco, Rivers, etc. though.I had a few offers for him over the weekend, but none of them were mildly interesting and I was busy with family so I didn't even look at counter offers. Sitting on him, Luck, Bradford, and Geno (developmental squad) I'm going to have some thinkign to do this offseason as that's overkill. I need to trade one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Rice has over Martin is a track record. What Rice has over Richardson is a legit NFL franchise. You might value a track record and a supporting cast less than I do. That's your prerogative. I don't. That's my prerogative. It's good to get sane and rational people with different opinions, because otherwise you wind up with an echo chamber effect. And it's not like my opinion is really all that out there- Couch Potato has Rice over Martin. Bloom has Rice over both. On a scale of one to insane, this isn't "Arian Foster outside the top 10".

Agree on the pedigree, but as we all know the shelf life of an RB isn't that long - we can argue all day whether it's age, workload or some combination of the two.For dynasty purposes, the challenge is not relying on Rice for that one year when he starts falling over the wrong side of the cliff. Whether that's next year or not remains to be seen, but I think he's close to - if not at - his peak.At this point in time, I'd take the young legs of Richardson or Martin over Rice in a heartbeat, but that's me. All are franchise backs whose offenses will go through them, and are on the field in all situations.
I'd be selling Rice if people value him as a top 5-6 overall dynasty player. The peace of mind you get from having the safe bet is offset by the fact that four years of his prime are dead and gone. In dynasty I generally subscribe to the philosophy that it's better to sell a player a year too early than a year too late. Martin and Richardson are just as good and have a lot more longevity potential. Easy call there for me, as someone who owns all three players in various leagues.
Doug Martin will turn 24 in January, he's only 2 years younger than Rice who willl turn 26 in January. Is that "a lot more longevity potential"?Is it possible that Rice plays well at 32, like an Emmitt Smith, C. Martin or T. Jones while D. Martin falls off a cliff at 30? If so where's the "a lot more longevity potential"?
Two years of extra production is two years of extra production. That would represent anywhere from 25% to 50% of the prime years of a high quality RB. So yes, Martin has a lot more longevity potential than Rice. And that's just Martin. Richardson is a lot younger than both of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. Peterson

8. Foster

To me, if you're ranking Foster this low, I think you can make a solid argument that his workload + age = less value than guys like Martin and Richardson.

However, to then rank Peterson at #3 contradicts that. Look, we can agree than Peterson is a once in a lifetime talent. There's no doubt. But this seems like a ranking that's built around pedigree more than it is performance.

Arian Foster

-- Rushing --	-- Receiving --	
YEAR GP ATT YARDS TD RCPT YARDS TD
2010 16 326 1614 16 66 604 2
2011 13 278 1224 10 53 617 2
2012 10 249 949 10 20 111 2

Adrian Peterson

-- Rushing --	-- Receiving --	
YEAR GP ATT YARDS TD RCPT YARDS TD
2010 15 283 1298 12 36 345 1
2011 12 209 973 12 18 139 1
2012 10 195 1128 7 29 155 0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully, we'll get to see David Wilson get some extensive action with Brown out. Need to see what I really have in him and how his game will transfer to the NFL in some higher leverage situations. (Outside of the few garbage time carries he has gotten)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan Stewart always seems to be ranked so high on lists I see here compared to what you can get for him or with him. I'm starting to regret trading him and Vincent Jackson for Julio Jones when I see him ranked at a dizzying 14. I just couldn't imagine anyone accepting a straight up deal if you shopped him to the Ridley, Chris Johnson or Murray owner. Even in response to the question above, I wonder if an owner would give up Wilson straight up for him, I'd be inclined to say they wouldn't. The other ones that stand out or me from a selfish point of view as I ve just bought them cheap are Ingram and Ben Tate, both much higher than I've seen ranked elsewhere. Excellent work SSOG

There's never been a better time to buy Stewart. A lot of the people who took him high as a rookie are finally getting fed up and bailing, right before he is poised to finally return some of their investment. Carolina will be getting a top 10 pick and a new coach in the offseason. DeAngelo Williams is about to turn 30. Nowhere to go but up for Stewart's production, provided that he stays healthy and plays at a similar level to what he's done so far in his career. The FF value of RBs is mainly about opportunity. Guys like Ridley, Morris, and Foster are not incredible talents. They're just good players in favorable situations that exploit their skills to the max. A guy like Stewart has just as much talent and will eventually have a good run of FF production to match it if he ever gets a real chance to be the man for a team.
I don't discount your logic, but the one thing you are omitting from your calculation is the underlying injury concerns with Stewart. I wonder whether or not those foot and ankle injuries he has had will make it impossible for him to ever put together two or three years of top 10 production?
Up to this point in his career he has been able to play and play well despite his nagging injury issues. His production has dipped this year, but I think it's pretty clear that something is rotten in the state of Carolina. The whole team has taken a dump this year, so I'm inclined to give him a little bit of a pass. I wouldn't want Stewart as my dynasty RB1, but at this point he's probably a lot more talented than a lot of the players you could trade for him. I just don't believe that he'll go an entire career without getting a shot to be the man. I think it's coming, and probably sooner than later. Given how bad the Eagles are, I wouldn't even be surprised to see him have a big game tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was from the Cecil Shorts thread, but I thought it would be better here and would avoid hijacking the Shorts discussion...

Just drives home the #1 lesson of this FF season for me, which is that TIMING is everything. By the time I was trying to trade for Shorts, he had already shown too much to come cheap. And now a few weeks later he would probably command even more value, to the point of being almost untouchable.

I missed out on Victor Cruz in a bunch of leagues last year because I dropped him after the preseason and then didn't find room for him when he made the active roster and had his big two TD 'fluke' game in Week 3.

I think the only way around this is to value guys who have a chance right now over guys you think may actually be better players. I'm not talking about top prospects, just the end of roster guys.

For example, Fasano was limping into Week 12 yesterday and Clay is someone I've been curious about since the end of last year. There are guys on my rosters I like better as prospects, but I still found room for Clay and vacuumed him up before kickoff where I didn't already own him. Either he does well with the bigger opportunity or you can drop him again for someone else with a chance to shine in an upcoming week. It's a short-term decision and doesn't tie up the roster spot for very long if they miss. You'll still miss way more than you'll hit obviously, but I think being flexible about player valuations with a bias for the current week improves your odds.

Kind of repeating myself here, but what I've really realized is that the only good time to buy a player is before he starts producing. If you think a guy like Kendall Hunter or Michael Floyd is going to be good down the road, you need to move for him ASAP because the minute he puts together two good games in a row his value will skyrocket and his owners will not sell. Kaepernick is a great example. You probably could've gotten him for a 2nd-3rd round rookie in some leagues two weeks ago. Now an owner might ask you for a top 5 pick.

I think one of the best strategies is to identify prospects you really like and then "overpay" to get them based on market value, knowing that their actual value is still a lot higher. Part of this is developing strong opinions of players when they are draft prospects. The other part is being the first to act when an unknown player shows good potential. Once again Kaepernick is a good example. If you think he's going to be a star, buy him right now. If you're right, you will never get a lower price. With a guy like Shorts or Cruz, you still could've gotten a good deal on them if you came calling with something like a late 1st round or even a 2nd round rookie pick after their first big game or two. A couple weeks later they were untouchable.

Many of my best picks and acquisitions in my dynasty leagues have come when I've ignored consensus value and drafted a player based on where I rated him, not where he "should" have gone. That means taking Calvin Johnson in the 2nd round of a startup when he was a rookie. That means taking Demaryius Thomas in the 3rd round of a startup when he was a rookie. If you think a guy is a star, draft him accordingly. A few years back I did a startup when Trent Richardson was just entering his sophomore season. I was already a huge fan. I thought he was a future star, but I didn't want to take him until the 6th round. He went a round earlier and I had to settle for a vastly inferior option. Stupid. If anything, you need to reach for guys like this when you find them.

The trick is deciding who's legit. I picked up Shorts in one league after his week one game only to drop him the next week when he put up a goose egg. I cut Victor Cruz last year in two leagues right before the season based on some things I read about him strictly being a slot receiver and looking unlikely to have a starting role. Woops. I feel like I am usually pretty good at gauging the true worth of draft prospects, but sometimes it can be really hard to decide when to hold and when to cut loose with veterans and less familiar prospects. In the league where I dropped Cruz, I kept Eddie Royal all last season. So yeah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Kaepernick, here's my take.

The 49ers were doing quite well with Smith. He took them to the NFC title game last year, and played quite well. This year he was leading the team to one of the best records in the NFL. Basically, there was no major pressure to bench him. He might not have been an ideal option, but he clearly wasn't preventing the team from being successful.

With that in mind, the fact that the 49ers were willing to risk everything and bench him for Kaepernick suggests that they think Kaepernick can be pretty special. Why else make the move? It's not like they're a 3-8 team with nothing to lose. They have everything to lose by making this switch. I think they would only make the switch if they were completely convinced that Kaepernick is the much better option. That's a big endorsement for Kaepernick. Makes me think he has a pretty good chance to develop into a very good player. I would look into the possibility of buying him, but the trade deadline has passed in most of my leagues. By the end of the year his value will have skyrocketed if he plays well down the stretch and in the playoffs, so there's nothing I can do but sit back and watch now.

One thing that I know about Harbaugh from following him at Stanford is that he's a pretty keen evaluator of talent. Before Toby Gerhart's monster year, I seem to recall Harbaugh making a lot of bold statements about what Gerhart was going to accomplish. At the time it just sounded like hot air. Then it actually happened. After Luck's redshirt freshman season, Harbaugh made a bunch of outlandish statements about how good Luck was. Saying things like he's the best football player in the country and "the best football player I've ever been around." Seemed ridiculous at the time. Not so much in hindsight. I respect Harbaugh's football acumen, so when he says AJ Jenkins will be fine, I'm inclined to believe him. When he benches a big winner like Smith for an inexperienced young player like Kaepernick, I'm inclined to believe that he has good reason for doing so. I've never been especially high on Kaepernick, but after the recent turn of events I would definitely be inclined to take a gamble on him if I were looking for a potential star at QB without the gaudy price tag of a Luck or Griffin. If you can somehow get him for a Joe Flacco, Jay Cutler, or Jake Locker, by all means do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is an interesting topic: when/how to acquire young prospects.

This season, I made a signiciant effort in my league to go after underperforming rookies and second year guys just before the trade deadline. Basically, I sent out offers to teams that owned young players that hadn’t lived up to expectations, and hoped to acquire said players on the cheap if their current owners were growing tired of them.

For me, it wasn’t so much about targeting players that I “know” are going to be good down the road, it was taking the minimal risk at some upside players whilst shopping at the bargain bins. –Someone else paid sticker price and saw some sharp depreciation on their asset. I bought it at the new, lower price; hoping to see it bounce back even close to the original valuation.

Not sure if I’ll hit on any of the couple/few acquisitions I made, but given the price I paid, it won’t hurt me too badly if I don’t. The trick was/is finding owners that are tired of the underperforming youngsters.

ETA: I definitely don't mean to suggest that an owner should target young players that they have little-to-no faith in over the long haul, just because they can be acquired cheap.

Edited by mlball77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking to Kaepernick, I think the fact that the 49ers had one of the best records in the NFL and STILL made this move speaks volumes about Kaepernick's abilities. As EBF pointed out, Harbaugh has a pretty good track record with his understanding of talent. If he believes Kaepernick gives his team the best chance to win right now, then I'm all on board. Obviously, for fantasy purposes, Kaepernick possesses a skill set that Alex Smith certainly can't match.

Now, where does Kaepernick rank right now? Obviously, it's early and we won't know the real answer unless Kaepernick is the starter for the remainder of the season. As of right now (2 starts), I feel like the sky could really be the limit for him. I'm saying this with the belief that he'll progress even further with a full off-season as the MAN and under the tutelage of Harbaugh.

I have to feel like the 49ers may also make some dynamic changes to their play calling/play design with Kaepernick at QB with a full off-season to work with.

Overall, I currently view him as a QB1 for the future, but I really couldn't argue with someone who says his body of work is very incomplete. This is just my gut feeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was from the Cecil Shorts thread, but I thought it would be better here and would avoid hijacking the Shorts discussion...

Just drives home the #1 lesson of this FF season for me, which is that TIMING is everything. By the time I was trying to trade for Shorts, he had already shown too much to come cheap. And now a few weeks later he would probably command even more value, to the point of being almost untouchable.

I missed out on Victor Cruz in a bunch of leagues last year because I dropped him after the preseason and then didn't find room for him when he made the active roster and had his big two TD 'fluke' game in Week 3.

I think the only way around this is to value guys who have a chance right now over guys you think may actually be better players. I'm not talking about top prospects, just the end of roster guys.

For example, Fasano was limping into Week 12 yesterday and Clay is someone I've been curious about since the end of last year. There are guys on my rosters I like better as prospects, but I still found room for Clay and vacuumed him up before kickoff where I didn't already own him. Either he does well with the bigger opportunity or you can drop him again for someone else with a chance to shine in an upcoming week. It's a short-term decision and doesn't tie up the roster spot for very long if they miss. You'll still miss way more than you'll hit obviously, but I think being flexible about player valuations with a bias for the current week improves your odds.

Kind of repeating myself here, but what I've really realized is that the only good time to buy a player is before he starts producing. If you think a guy like Kendall Hunter or Michael Floyd is going to be good down the road, you need to move for him ASAP because the minute he puts together two good games in a row his value will skyrocket and his owners will not sell. Kaepernick is a great example. You probably could've gotten him for a 2nd-3rd round rookie in some leagues two weeks ago. Now an owner might ask you for a top 5 pick.

I think one of the best strategies is to identify prospects you really like and then "overpay" to get them based on market value, knowing that their actual value is still a lot higher. Part of this is developing strong opinions of players when they are draft prospects. The other part is being the first to act when an unknown player shows good potential. Once again Kaepernick is a good example. If you think he's going to be a star, buy him right now. If you're right, you will never get a lower price. With a guy like Shorts or Cruz, you still could've gotten a good deal on them if you came calling with something like a late 1st round or even a 2nd round rookie pick after their first big game or two. A couple weeks later they were untouchable.

Many of my best picks and acquisitions in my dynasty leagues have come when I've ignored consensus value and drafted a player based on where I rated him, not where he "should" have gone. That means taking Calvin Johnson in the 2nd round of a startup when he was a rookie. That means taking Demaryius Thomas in the 3rd round of a startup when he was a rookie. If you think a guy is a star, draft him accordingly. A few years back I did a startup when Trent Richardson was just entering his sophomore season. I was already a huge fan. I thought he was a future star, but I didn't want to take him until the 6th round. He went a round earlier and I had to settle for a vastly inferior option. Stupid. If anything, you need to reach for guys like this when you find them.

The trick is deciding who's legit. I picked up Shorts in one league after his week one game only to drop him the next week when he put up a goose egg. I cut Victor Cruz last year in two leagues right before the season based on some things I read about him strictly being a slot receiver and looking unlikely to have a starting role. Woops. I feel like I am usually pretty good at gauging the true worth of draft prospects, but sometimes it can be really hard to decide when to hold and when to cut loose with veterans and less familiar prospects. In the league where I dropped Cruz, I kept Eddie Royal all last season. So yeah...

:goodposting:

But this has always been what dynasty is about. Buy low, sell high. The team that builds up the most talent is typically the team that finds that talent before it's obvious to everyone else, and then waits on it.

Perfect recent example: Michael Turner. In his years in SD he was stuck behind LT2. I held him and sat on him for a couple years. He went to ATL and emerged and was just studly for a couple years. Gladly I got off the bandwagon before he got old and slow (I don't remember what exactly I traded him for, but I'm sure it was pretty valuable, all for something that I got off the waiver wire in the first place), but I think that's how you build a dynasty team. I did the same with Frank Gore -- got him as a throw-in in a larger trade when he was really one of the main pieces I wanted, and all while Kevan Barlow was all the rage in SF.

Right now I've got Kendall Hunter, Robert Turbin, Daryl Richardson, and Shane Vereen sitting down my roster at the RB spot. None will really be all that useful right now, but either by injury or trade or aging out, any one of them could become a stud. You have to grab the guys you believe in before anyone else does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With that in mind, the fact that the 49ers were willing to risk everything and bench him for Kaepernick suggests that they think Kaepernick can be pretty special. Why else make the move? It's not like they're a 3-8 team with nothing to lose. They have everything to lose by making this switch. I think they would only make the switch if they were completely convinced that Kaepernick is the much better option. That's a big endorsement for Kaepernick. Makes me think he has a pretty good chance to develop into a very good player. I would look into the possibility of buying him, but the trade deadline has passed in most of my leagues. By the end of the year his value will have skyrocketed if he plays well down the stretch and in the playoffs, so there's nothing I can do but sit back and watch now.

I feel bad for Smith. But yeah, for the 49ers to make a switch now says a lot. We don't get to see Kaepernick at practice every day, so we don't get the same picture Harbaugh's getting. I think it's a pretty daring gamble to make this switch now. You have to think they see Kaepernick as having a much higher ceiling to make this switch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. Peterson

8. Foster

To me, if you're ranking Foster this low, I think you can make a solid argument that his workload + age = less value than guys like Martin and Richardson.

However, to then rank Peterson at #3 contradicts that. Look, we can agree than Peterson is a once in a lifetime talent. There's no doubt. But this seems like a ranking that's built around pedigree more than it is performance.

Arian Foster

-- Rushing --	-- Receiving --	
YEAR GP ATT YARDS TD RCPT YARDS TD
2010 16 326 1614 16 66 604 2
2011 13 278 1224 10 53 617 2
2012 10 249 949 10 20 111 2

Adrian Peterson

-- Rushing --	-- Receiving --	
YEAR GP ATT YARDS TD RCPT YARDS TD
2010 15 283 1298 12 36 345 1
2011 12 209 973 12 18 139 1
2012 10 195 1128 7 29 155 0

Read my responses to the Foster ranking. My thoughts on him have nothing to do with either workload and age, and everything to do with a major decline in effectiveness. He's averaging under 4 yards per carry behind a good line (not as good as last year, but still a quality unit). His receiving numbers have fallen off a cliff. He's on pace for 400 carries, which is often the kiss of death. If he still had a ypc above 4.5 and 25 receiving yards per game, he'd still be in my top 3. If Peterson had 1.5 fewer yards per carry, he'd be nowhere near my top 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking to Kaepernick, I think the fact that the 49ers had one of the best records in the NFL and STILL made this move speaks volumes about Kaepernick's abilities. As EBF pointed out, Harbaugh has a pretty good track record with his understanding of talent. If he believes Kaepernick gives his team the best chance to win right now, then I'm all on board. Obviously, for fantasy purposes, Kaepernick possesses a skill set that Alex Smith certainly can't match. Now, where does Kaepernick rank right now? Obviously, it's early and we won't know the real answer unless Kaepernick is the starter for the remainder of the season. As of right now (2 starts), I feel like the sky could really be the limit for him. I'm saying this with the belief that he'll progress even further with a full off-season as the MAN and under the tutelage of Harbaugh. I have to feel like the 49ers may also make some dynamic changes to their play calling/play design with Kaepernick at QB with a full off-season to work with. Overall, I currently view him as a QB1 for the future, but I really couldn't argue with someone who says his body of work is very incomplete. This is just my gut feeling.

With the NFL having 32 teams and most FF leagues being only 10-16 teams, a replacement level QB is basically worthless. So while guys like Schaub, Flacco, Cutler, and even Romo, Roethlisberger, and Rivers are pretty good players in real life, they are not worth a whole lot in FF.With that in mind, I think a promising QB prospect is actually worth more than those guys in some respects since he at least has the potential to develop into a difference-makers, whereas most of those guys have settled into FF mediocrity. That means I'd take Kaepernick over them, even though he is much more volatile. The only guys who are clearly ahead of him for me are...RodgersGriffinLuckNewtonRyanStaffordBreesBradyManningSo he'd probably come in at QB10 for me. And I think he still has upside at that slot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RodgersGriffinLuckNewtonRyanStaffordBreesBradyManning

Why no Dalton?For the record, he was a guy I didn't like much going into this season; tossed him in with Ponder and Locker. But I now feel he belongs on your list. He is QB8 in my 4TD league, I assume higher in a 6TD league. That kind of production in year 2, when a QB usually doesn't max out until 5 years in, is a solid sign. I really think he has Matt Ryan potential. Having the best young WR in the league is a plus as well.

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.