What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Dynasty Rankings (6 Viewers)

He is Romo give or take. He's not going to be elite, but he has weapons and an offense to consistently put up points.
Romo averaged 8.61 YPA in his first year as a starter and 8.10 in his second. He has a curious aversion to winning games, but his passing numbers rank him pretty highly among all QBs for the past half decade. His 7.94 career YPA has to be one of the best in the NFL.I would say Dalton is more like Chad Pennington. Not a bad player, but not a guy who is really going to elevate your FF team. I don't think those low end QB1 guys have much value in dynasty, so I'd be inclined to use the roster space elsewhere. Dalton's TD production will definitely drop, so he'll have to throw more or be more efficient to maintain this level of FF production, and I wouldn't bet on either of those things happening in his case. I think he's a guy like Jay Cutler or Joe Flacco who is going to get some hype for a while until people realize that at the end of the day he's just a pretty ordinary FF option.
 
I think he's a guy like Jay Cutler or Joe Flacco who is going to get some hype for a while until people realize that at the end of the day he's just a pretty ordinary FF option.
I think that is fair and I wouldn't be surprised. I was never high on Flacco, but thought Cutler was going to be an eventual top 5-6 guy. Dalton would need to take steps to be anything more than a baseline dynasty option. I think his 2nd year production suggests that he can do that, however.
 
"You're our best player. Win us the game." That's almost unheard of for a rookie QB.
:yes: Luck is a special player. Not many QBs are asked to do what he does, let alone rookie QBs.
How are Luck's more advanced metrics? I'm just wondering how this is different from Bradford's overrated rookie year where he threw the ball a ton, it was quantity over quality to a high degree, and other than the great 3rd-and-long conversion statistic on Luck I haven't seen anything else. High volume seriously made many overrate Bradford's performance on a bad team. Were they telling him "you're our best player. Win us the game." as well?

Obviously Lucks team actually IS winning, but how do their metrics differ? The eyeball test supports Luck over Bradford as well in terms of their poise and the throws they make/made as rookies, I just haven't seen any numbers.

 
"You're our best player. Win us the game." That's almost unheard of for a rookie QB.
:yes: Luck is a special player. Not many QBs are asked to do what he does, let alone rookie QBs.
How are Luck's more advanced metrics? I'm just wondering how this is different from Bradford's overrated rookie year where he threw the ball a ton, it was quantity over quality to a high degree, and other than the great 3rd-and-long conversion statistic on Luck I haven't seen anything else. High volume seriously made many overrate Bradford's performance on a bad team. Were they telling him "you're our best player. Win us the game." as well?

Obviously Lucks team actually IS winning, but how do their metrics differ? The eyeball test supports Luck over Bradford as well in terms of their poise and the throws they make/made as rookies, I just haven't seen any numbers.
The advanced metrics love Luck, and didn't Bradford. ESPN's QBR has Luck top 3, as does advanced NFL stat's WPA (win % added). Luck is LEADING the NFL in % of targets beyond 15 yards. There are no training wheels here. There clearly were with Bradford.

 
'mlball77 said:
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.
People tend to get down on prospects who don't produce immediately, but that doesn't mean you should target every guy who is slow out of the gates. I think one of the important things is to recognize the difference between a justified and unjustified downgrade. Isaiah Pead is a guy who should be ranked a lot lower than he was entering the season. Why? Because he has been beaten out by a less heralded rookie at his same position. It's almost like if Kirk Cousins was playing ahead of RGIII. Obviously that was never going to happen given Washington's obscene investment in Griffin, but purely for the sake of a hypothetical, I think we can agree that if Griffin was getting overshadowed by a less heralded rookie QB on his own team, it would be a very bad omen for his future. On the flipside, there is literally no good reason to downgrade a guy like Michael Floyd or Rueben Randle based on their quiet rookie years. In the case of Floyd, he is stuck behind two great receivers on a team with pitiful QB play. Unless he was Randy Moss, he was never going to produce right away. So your opinion of him should be completely unchanged by his rookie year. It is a similar story with Randle, who was never going to crack the starting lineup as a rookie on a team with two Pro Bowl caliber receivers already in place. It is kind of like the difference between getting an F and getting an incomplete. Blaine Gabbert's rookie year is an example of getting an F. He played and was horrible. Aaron Rodgers's rookie year is an example of getting an incomplete. He wasn't good or bad. He simply didn't play, so there was never a reason to downgrade him for the lack of opportunity. But it's not always that simple. Sometimes people play early and look horrible. Roddy White and Plaxico Burress come to mind. If you judged them on their rookie years, you never would've expected greatness. Same with Drew Brees and Eli Manning. So while I think it's important to draw a distinction between guys who are actually failing and guys who simply aren't getting an opportunity, I also think you have to give all rookies a little bit of wiggle room to suck, especially at WR, QB, and TE. Many good players were not good right away. On some level it's just a judgment call. You can't always look at the stats or performances and determine which crappy rookie QB is going to become Drew Brees and which will become Mark Sanchez. You make a call and go with it. Another important factor is the price. I'll throw out offers for guys like AJ Jenkins, Michael Floyd, and Chris Givens because I think the upside justifies the cost, and not so much because I'm convinced any one of them is going to pan out.
Yep, fair points. I agree that throwing out offers for any/all underperforming youngsters isn't wise. Finding the right ones is the goal, but very tricky, particularly for those of us (like me) that aren't necessarily great talent evaluators. - -I've always been very strong on the other end of things, evaluating situations/circumstances. --So, for me, trying to spot the underutilized talent might not be as easy as it is for someone like you. I have to explore other approaches... like looking at situations that may change or have a decent enough likelihood of changing in favor of a once highly-regarded youngster/rookie. Cost factors heavily into my decision on whether or not to buy (bargain bin shopping).Your example of Pead is a good one here. He is one I landed dirt cheap recently. I wouldn't have interest in him if the cost were much at all, but based on the situation in STL, I believe that he could get a real shot to be involved there, despite showing nothing promising this season. -Did I acquire him largely because of my evaluation of his talent? Nope. I don't know one way or another if he can hack it at the pro level. However, based on cost and situation, I was/am happy to add him to my squad. Plus, there was enough positive analysis of his game several months back that he seemed worthy enough to take a shot on (again, when cost and situation are also factored in). Discernment is definitely needed on this front, and I believe what I have detailed exhibits such. My talent evaluating won’t be the primary driver, unfortunately, but I have another approach that has been reasonably successful for me. Call it a cost/benefit analysis given favorable situation probability. –There is more than one way to skin this cat.
 
"You're our best player. Win us the game." That's almost unheard of for a rookie QB.
:yes: Luck is a special player. Not many QBs are asked to do what he does, let alone rookie QBs.
How are Luck's more advanced metrics? I'm just wondering how this is different from Bradford's overrated rookie year where he threw the ball a ton, it was quantity over quality to a high degree, and other than the great 3rd-and-long conversion statistic on Luck I haven't seen anything else. High volume seriously made many overrate Bradford's performance on a bad team. Were they telling him "you're our best player. Win us the game." as well?

Obviously Lucks team actually IS winning, but how do their metrics differ? The eyeball test supports Luck over Bradford as well in terms of their poise and the throws they make/made as rookies, I just haven't seen any numbers.
The advanced metrics love Luck, and didn't Bradford. ESPN's QBR has Luck top 3, as does advanced NFL stat's WPA (win % added). Luck is LEADING the NFL in % of targets beyond 15 yards. There are no training wheels here. There clearly were with Bradford.
Excellent, thank you. I thought this is what the numbers would show based on the eyeball test, but didn't want to fall into the trap many did with Bradford.Through I'd argue he put those training wheels on himself. His team gave him the pass attempts, and despite the crappy OL and WR's he could have done more, but that's another topic.

 
I don't see the appeal in buying Dalton if I don't have him or selling him if I do have him. Who thinks there is consistent top 7...top 10 upside here? Unless there is that guy in your league there's no profit to be had from selling him, you're better off holding steady and hoping his stock improves. In the meantime he's a good starting consideration in good matchups.

 
Through I'd argue he put those training wheels on himself. His team gave him the pass attempts, and despite the crappy OL and WR's he could have done more, but that's another topic.
Very good point. Perhaps the low number of deep passes were more his doing than scheme.
I don't know about that, his OC in 2010 was Pat Shurmur and he's taken his horizontal offense to Cleveland with both a noodle arm (Colt) and a gun slinger (Weeden). He lost his entire offseason in 2011 then had to implement McDaniels' complicated offense on the fly with inferior weapons around him. He's now in offense #3 with a coaching staff that clearly thought he had inferior weapons around him - adding two top 100 WR's and taking a flier on Steve Smith in free agency. I haven't watched enough of the Rams to have an opinion on him this season, have read a lot though, and a lot of the opinions I've read have conveyed he looked his best right before Amendola got hurt then hit a lull while Givens got his feet under him, and he had a very strong game with both Givens and Amendola available yesterday. If those two stay intact I think we'll learn a lot about Bradford over the next few weeks, I have him on a dyno squad with Luck, Kaep, and Geno and am going to make sure to catch at least 2-3 STL games down the stretch to see if Bradford's a sell candidate or not. I'm optimistic though.
 
He is Romo give or take. He's not going to be elite, but he has weapons and an offense to consistently put up points.
Romo averaged 8.61 YPA in his first year as a starter and 8.10 in his second.
Couldn't care less about this.
I would say Dalton is more like Chad Pennington.
I am glad we can both pull useless names out of the air. Pennington was made out of glass but at one point he was a much better prospect than Dalton is now. I am sure his YPA was always terrible, but that is not why his career VBD is low. He became something different after he hurt his shoulder.
I think he's a guy like Jay Cutler or Joe Flacco who is going to get some hype for a while until people realize that at the end of the day he's just a pretty ordinary FF option.
If you want to say he's a less ##### Cutler or more pass-friendly Flacco I have no problem with that. If by "replacement level" talent you mean long term top 15 QB with only a slight hope for top 5, I would definitely agree with that. Fantasy replacement level, not NFL replacement level.
 
Through I'd argue he put those training wheels on himself. His team gave him the pass attempts, and despite the crappy OL and WR's he could have done more, but that's another topic.
Very good point. Perhaps the low number of deep passes were more his doing than scheme.
I don't know about that, his OC in 2010 was Pat Shurmur and he's taken his horizontal offense to Cleveland with both a noodle arm (Colt) and a gun slinger (Weeden). He lost his entire offseason in 2011 then had to implement McDaniels' complicated offense on the fly with inferior weapons around him. He's now in offense #3 with a coaching staff that clearly thought he had inferior weapons around him - adding two top 100 WR's and taking a flier on Steve Smith in free agency. I haven't watched enough of the Rams to have an opinion on him this season, have read a lot though, and a lot of the opinions I've read have conveyed he looked his best right before Amendola got hurt then hit a lull while Givens got his feet under him, and he had a very strong game with both Givens and Amendola available yesterday. If those two stay intact I think we'll learn a lot about Bradford over the next few weeks, I have him on a dyno squad with Luck, Kaep, and Geno and am going to make sure to catch at least 2-3 STL games down the stretch to see if Bradford's a sell candidate or not. I'm optimistic though.
I was simply talking about his rookie numbers. His YPC/YPA were very low. I actually haven't cared to look at his stats this season to know if that's changed.
 
Through I'd argue he put those training wheels on himself. His team gave him the pass attempts, and despite the crappy OL and WR's he could have done more, but that's another topic.
Very good point. Perhaps the low number of deep passes were more his doing than scheme.
I don't know about that, his OC in 2010 was Pat Shurmur and he's taken his horizontal offense to Cleveland with both a noodle arm (Colt) and a gun slinger (Weeden). He lost his entire offseason in 2011 then had to implement McDaniels' complicated offense on the fly with inferior weapons around him. He's now in offense #3 with a coaching staff that clearly thought he had inferior weapons around him - adding two top 100 WR's and taking a flier on Steve Smith in free agency.
I definitely think the WR deserve part of the blame here. I posted somewhere else before the year
A little experiment I sorted Bradford's starts by YPA and looked at the box and one thing stuck out - the leading receiver.2010.12 8.3 - Danario Alexander 4/952010.16 7.9 - Danario Alexander 6/992011.06 7.3 - Danario Alexander 6/912011.02 7.2 - Danario Alexander 3/1222010.14 7.2 - Danario Alexander DNP
STL has had terrible WRs, and even with Amendola playing markedly better and Givens doing well they are well below average for the NFL. I am not buying Bradford, but I don't think that label is justified.
 
It has to be discouraging for Quick owners that he can't get on the field.
If you spent a top 15-18 pick on him expecting 2012 production you deserve what you get. The discouragement will only really start if they sign a Bowe, Wallace, Jennings next offseason. IMO the Rams need to do this to salvage Bradford, but it may be hard for them to do that and re-up Amendola. They have cap room but will resign Long and Laurenitis too. (Interesting catch-22 that Bradford was the last overpaid draft pick, and lack of a WR1 hurting his development.)
 
It has to be discouraging for Quick owners that he can't get on the field.
If you spent a top 15-18 pick on him expecting 2012 production you deserve what you get. The discouragement will only really start if they sign a Bowe, Wallace, Jennings next offseason. IMO the Rams need to do this to salvage Bradford, but it may be hard for them to do that and re-up Amendola. They have cap room but will resign Long and Laurenitis too. (Interesting catch-22 that Bradford was the last overpaid draft pick, and lack of a WR1 hurting his development.)
Nobody should have expected 2012 production, but he should be getting on the field. Hill is on the field for the Jets, and they are equally raw. The Rams could use his raw playmaking ability with what they're rolling out there at WR, so it's just odd that he's not getting snaps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It has to be discouraging for Quick owners that he can't get on the field.
If you spent a top 15-18 pick on him expecting 2012 production you deserve what you get. The discouragement will only really start if they sign a Bowe, Wallace, Jennings next offseason. IMO the Rams need to do this to salvage Bradford, but it may be hard for them to do that and re-up Amendola. They have cap room but will resign Long and Laurenitis too. (Interesting catch-22 that Bradford was the last overpaid draft pick, and lack of a WR1 hurting his development.)
Anybody who drafted Quick had unreasonable expectations if they expected a rookie breakout season. This was a converted basketball player (didn't play football until his senior year in H.S. and missed most of his freshman year in college due to injury). The scouting reports generally referred to him as a "raw talent" and "a work in progress." I drafted him in a couple leagues with the understanding that it would probably take a year or two for him to develop - I have been encouraged so far, but I wasn't expecting much for the 2012 season. Even in this day and age some coaches are more patient with their rookie WR prospects than others, so I wouldn't read that much into it that he hasn't been getting on the field.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
'EBF said:
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.
Echos my thinking on this. Got a few eyebrows raised when I moved Greg Jennings for him at the deadline in one league though.
 
It has to be discouraging for Quick owners that he can't get on the field.
If you spent a top 15-18 pick on him expecting 2012 production you deserve what you get. The discouragement will only really start if they sign a Bowe, Wallace, Jennings next offseason. IMO the Rams need to do this to salvage Bradford, but it may be hard for them to do that and re-up Amendola. They have cap room but will resign Long and Laurenitis too. (Interesting catch-22 that Bradford was the last overpaid draft pick, and lack of a WR1 hurting his development.)
Nobody should have expected 2012 production, but he should be getting on the field. Hill is on the field for the Jets, and they are equally raw. The Rams could use his raw playmaking ability with what they're rolling out there at WR, so it's just odd that he's not getting snaps.
I didn't like either the Hill or Quick picks because expecting anything from either of them before 2014 was foolish, those just aren't early #2 picks. If the Rams don't do anything in free agency I'm going to see if I can get Quick as a throw-in if I like what I see from Bradford in December.
 
Bryce Brown looks like what I thought Jonathan Stewart would look like.
:shrug: Stewart has looked good when the o-line bothered blocking people. Bryce Brown looks great though.
Any NFL RB looks good when the oline is blocking.
True, but you have to be on the field to take advantage. So you have to stop fumbling and you have to stay healthy. Did they say Stewart tweaked his ankle again?
 
Bryce Brown looks like what I thought Jonathan Stewart would look like.
:shrug: Stewart has looked good when the o-line bothered blocking people. Bryce Brown looks great though.
Any NFL RB looks good when the oline is blocking.
True, but you have to be on the field to take advantage. So you have to stop fumbling and you have to stay healthy. Did they say Stewart tweaked his ankle again?
Amen. JStew has to be the all-time most frustrating dynasty RB. Brown looked great with exception to the fumbles that cost his team a chance to win. Hopefully he progresses and learns. Although ironically he could follow JStew's footsteps and live as backup for awhile. I thought JStew looked good when given the chance but he is in a mix of RBBC fiery and has Cam the goal-line vulture leading the crew. Circumstance and situation play a huge role in RB success.
 
I really liked what I saw from Newton last night. I realize that some of his passes were pretty easy (especially the two TD passes), but he really showed some poise last night. You also have to like the fact that he was used as the GL back.

Really hope he can build off of this performance and parlay it into a nice finish and some momentum into next season. This guy can still be an animal, but now that teams have made their adjustments, he needs to make his.

While the Philly D is a very uninspired group, I was pleasantly surprised to see Newton play so well.

If nothing else, it's a slight reminder of why I drafted this guy in the 1st round and what he is capable of.

 
I really liked what I saw from Newton last night. I realize that some of his passes were pretty easy (especially the two TD passes), but he really showed some poise last night. You also have to like the fact that he was used as the GL back. Really hope he can build off of this performance and parlay it into a nice finish and some momentum into next season. This guy can still be an animal, but now that teams have made their adjustments, he needs to make his. While the Philly D is a very uninspired group, I was pleasantly surprised to see Newton play so well. If nothing else, it's a slight reminder of why I drafted this guy in the 1st round and what he is capable of.
It was great to hear Steve Young praise his footwork. And I always enjoy seeing him avoid the hit by getting down. Very good game, and, as you said, a reminder of his potential.
 
I don't think those low end QB1 guys have much value in dynasty,
I hear this all the time on this board but even in all of my start 1 QB, 12 team leagues it really isn't the reality. I undertsand the concept - lots of starting QBs to get a team by - but every team needs to start a QB so why wouldn't a QB1 have any value? Even teams that have 3 solid options at QB generally aren't just giving one away.I tend to agree about Dalton's long term prospects and don't think the Pennington comparison is completely unfair - but I also don't necessarily agree that TD passes are as volitile a stat for QBs as TD receptions or TD runs are for WRs and RBs. Generally you could probably guess who will be among the top 10 in TD passes, year in and year out - and end up being fairly close at season's end. Dalton having AJ Green and a few interesting prospects at the WR position could very well mean that he'll consistently be near the top of the league in TD passes. Personally I don't see that as being very far fetched.
 
In regards to Dalton, I'm in the camp that he is still just an above average starter. However, where I can see his value is in the weapons that he'll have around him. Green, Sanu, Jones, Gresham, and Hawkins are pretty good weapons. I can definitely see them making a move for another weapon at WR at some point also.

With that being said, I can see him as a low-end QB1/high end QB2 for Dynasty purposes, but I would not want him as my QB1. I can see the argument, but much more than other QBs, I see the main point being his situation and talent around him. If that were to change, is he the kind of QB that makes the players around him better? I'm not sure he is and I don't feel like his talent level is on par with other top signal callers.

 
I don't think those low end QB1 guys have much value in dynasty,
I hear this all the time on this board but even in all of my start 1 QB, 12 team leagues it really isn't the reality. I undertsand the concept - lots of starting QBs to get a team by - but every team needs to start a QB so why wouldn't a QB1 have any value?
Same reason fringe RB2's and WR3's and low end TE1's don't, replacement value just isn't that high. If my team had a QB issue I'd look for the team that's 3 deep and cut a deal. The team that's 2 deep is not inclined to move a QB since he's an injury away from needing his guy, but with 2 backups available an owner would be more willing to part with something. Really haven't thought much about specifics given my dyno team's QB situations, I know I'm cutting a deal this offseason in my Luck/Kapepernick/Bradford/Geno league,just not sure what I'm going to do yet. An issue to address in January.
 
In regards to Dalton, I'm in the camp that he is still just an above average starter. However, where I can see his value is in the weapons that he'll have around him. Green, Sanu, Jones, Gresham, and Hawkins are pretty good weapons. I can definitely see them making a move for another weapon at WR at some point also. With that being said, I can see him as a low-end QB1/high end QB2 for Dynasty purposes, but I would not want him as my QB1. I can see the argument, but much more than other QBs, I see the main point being his situation and talent around him. If that were to change, is he the kind of QB that makes the players around him better? I'm not sure he is and I don't feel like his talent level is on par with other top signal callers.
This is why I think he still has value to take advantage of: He is a 25 year old QB currently producing top 7 numbers, but is still valued as only a top 12-15 option. QBs don't reach their peak numbers until year 5. Now if I were to view this season as an outlier, I wouldn't put stock in these numbers, but I don't. He looks a lot like Matt Ryan, and is following his career path. We are seeing what Ryan is doing with a great situation; Cincy is well on it's way to being a very favorable situation for a QB. If this were Sam Bradford putting up these numbers, even in Dalton's situation, he would be a top 7 dynasty option. But Dalton went to a non-BCS school and was drafted in the 2nd round, so the buzz isn't there like it was with Bradford. But it should be. Even Flacco had more buzz with lesser production, early in his career.
 
Same reason fringe RB2's and WR3's and low end TE1's don't, replacement value just isn't that high. If my team had a QB issue I'd look for the team that's 3 deep and cut a deal. The team that's 2 deep is not inclined to move a QB since he's an injury away from needing his guy, but with 2 backups available an owner would be more willing to part with something. Really haven't thought much about specifics given my dyno team's QB situations, I know I'm cutting a deal this offseason in my Luck/Kapepernick/Bradford/Geno league,just not sure what I'm going to do yet. An issue to address in January.
It depends on what we mean by low end, or baseline. Eli Manning was never anythimg more than a dynasty mid/low end QB1, but he cost a good deal this off season. Ben, Romo, Rivers have all been worth a good deal at one point in their careers. If we are going to use this logic to discount Dalton, we shouldn't invest in any QBs that don't have running production, and aren't in the elite out of school prospect level, like Peyton and Luck. Again, Dalton's numbers, and even his advanced metrics which some have questioned, are very favorable for a 2nd year QB. If we are going to write him off as just another baseline player with no value, then we what does a non-running QB need to do? What more does he need to do to show that he has potential? If this guy doesn't have value in the standard fantasy format, maybe we need to start questioning that format.
 
I don't think it's a matter of Dalton not having value in a standard format as much I just feel he isn't on par with some other QBs, so he would be replacement level in my eyes.

If you think he's a QB1 fine, obviously other people will feel the same way.

I just don't see him above any of these:

Rodgers

RG3

Luck

Brees

Brady

Newton

Manning

Stafford

Kaepernick

Ryan

Other people must believe in Dalton's ability more than myself and that's fine, but I don't see him as big-time QB. He'd be in the conversation with Eli and Romo. Even then, I think I like both of them over Dalton.

 
I don't think it's a matter of Dalton not having value in a standard format as much I just feel he isn't on par with some other QBs, so he would be replacement level in my eyes.If you think he's a QB1 fine, obviously other people will feel the same way.I just don't see him above any of these:
Aside form Kaepernick, I have those guys ranked ahead of Dalton too. Manning is a tough guy to rank, however. I think where my opinion is different from the majority: I think he belongs on the list; I think he is on his way to being a Ryan/Stafford level fantasy option. Also, I think a top 10 dynasty QB has plenty of value. Especially when he still offers upside, as Dalton does.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am trying to buy Cowboys players where I can. The offense is very close to being what NYG is now. If they can fix their Oline this off season, as they did their secondary last, Murray, Austin, and Romo will get major bumps in production and thus, value. Bryant and Witten could benefit too, but their value hasn't been damaged like the other 3.

 
Same reason fringe RB2's and WR3's and low end TE1's don't, replacement value just isn't that high. If my team had a QB issue I'd look for the team that's 3 deep and cut a deal. The team that's 2 deep is not inclined to move a QB since he's an injury away from needing his guy, but with 2 backups available an owner would be more willing to part with something. Really haven't thought much about specifics given my dyno team's QB situations, I know I'm cutting a deal this offseason in my Luck/Kapepernick/Bradford/Geno league,just not sure what I'm going to do yet. An issue to address in January.
It depends on what we mean by low end, or baseline. Eli Manning was never anythimg more than a dynasty mid/low end QB1, but he cost a good deal this off season. Ben, Romo, Rivers have all been worth a good deal at one point in their careers. If we are going to use this logic to discount Dalton, we shouldn't invest in any QBs that don't have running production, and aren't in the elite out of school prospect level, like Peyton and Luck. Again, Dalton's numbers, and even his advanced metrics which some have questioned, are very favorable for a 2nd year QB. If we are going to write him off as just another baseline player with no value, then we what does a non-running QB need to do? What more does he need to do to show that he has potential? If this guy doesn't have value in the standard fantasy format, maybe we need to start questioning that format.
I think you're onto something with your last sentence, I feel similarly re tight ends. My general stance is to never pay up for an average QB because I feel like I can get passable production from a cheaper vet like Carson and focus on the draft to get the future at QB. I made a deal for Rivers a couple of years ago when McNabb fell off the cliff because I had no in-house alternatives but all it cost me was the 1.12. The other owner and I haggled for a long time because he thought I would bend but I wouldn't. He was 3 deep and didn't need Rivers, I was one last conversation away from talking with the Hasselbeck owner when he finally caved. He finally realized something I told him a while before, I'm the only owner looking for a starting QB, meet me halfway (he was asking for a starting WR) and we've got a deal but I would rather scrape the bottom of the barrel and start throwing draft day darts than create another hole on my roster by patching this one.As a seller, I am always looking for opportunities to sell my good QB's I don't think will ever be elite, but I'm not going to force the issue. QB depth is a great thing to have when another owner develops an issue, but it's not as valuable when other owners don't have a need. 3 years later, I would not have made that Rivers deal now. Instead I would have done something like I did this year, trading Rivers for Carson and a #2 once I realized I could trust RG3. If I'm trading for non-elite QB's I want to trade for the guys looked at closer to the 18-22 range, not the 10-15, MUCH cheaper to acquire and the difference in production is not all that great.Think I got off topic a bit there, it happens...
 
I am trying to buy Cowboys players where I can. The offense is very close to being what NYG is now. If they can fix their Oline this off season, as they did their secondary last, Murray, Austin, and Romo will get major bumps in production and thus, value. Bryant and Witten could benefit too, but their value hasn't been damaged like the other 3.
I think Murray is in a committee next season and the window to buy Dez closed a few weeks ago. Witten and Austin may be affordable offseason buys though, depends how the season ends.
 
I am trying to buy Cowboys players where I can. The offense is very close to being what NYG is now. If they can fix their Oline this off season, as they did their secondary last, Murray, Austin, and Romo will get major bumps in production and thus, value. Bryant and Witten could benefit too, but their value hasn't been damaged like the other 3.
I think Murray is in a committee next season and the window to buy Dez closed a few weeks ago. Witten and Austin may be affordable offseason buys though, depends how the season ends.
Committee? With whom? Felix had 3 carries total before Murray got hurt. Dunbar does nothing that Murray doesn't, but Murray does more, and is the better player. And if the Cowboys spend big money, or a top pick on a RB when their line is so poor...nevermind, I don't want to think about that.
 
It depends on what we mean by low end, or baseline. Eli Manning was never anythimg more than a dynasty mid/low end QB1, but he cost a good deal this off season.
Eli's value went up a lot because he had his best season from a yardage and VBD perspective. He was pretty easy to acquire before then. For like 7 years, very easy to acquire. If Dalton approaches 5000 yards I'm sure his value will go up even if there are 2011-like-inflated guys ahead of him that year.
If we are going to use this logic to discount Dalton, we shouldn't invest in any QBs that don't have running production, and aren't in the elite out of school prospect level, like Peyton and Luck.
Stafford, Bradford, Ryan, etc. all went late 1st/early 2nd in my leagues. Commonly behind pedestrian or longshot RB talent drafted into good positions or boom/bust WRs. 2010 wasn't that long ago. 2011 changed a lot but not everything. Trading for a developmental QB doesn't usually work out given the scarcity of elite performers at QB and unlikelihood of new QBs entering that pantheon.
If this guy doesn't have value in the standard fantasy format, maybe we need to start questioning that format.
Definitely enjoy formats that favor QBs more.
 
I am trying to buy Cowboys players where I can. The offense is very close to being what NYG is now. If they can fix their Oline this off season, as they did their secondary last, Murray, Austin, and Romo will get major bumps in production and thus, value. Bryant and Witten could benefit too, but their value hasn't been damaged like the other 3.
Dallas is tough for me to get a handle on. I have to think that Jerry is getting pretty fed up with the under-achieving, so I'm worried about Romo and the receivers if Garrett and his pass heavy redone offense get the boot. Romo / Witten might be good buys for a win now team due to the "wrong side of 30 discount," but they might also crash and burn if a running / defensive coach is brought in. Dez' price is (rightfully) through the roof, and Austin is valued correctly as a "what you see is what you get" WR2 IMO. I've never been on board with Murray as a workhorse and that hasn't changed. I see most of them as likely holds until we see what happens.
 
I am trying to buy Cowboys players where I can. The offense is very close to being what NYG is now. If they can fix their Oline this off season, as they did their secondary last, Murray, Austin, and Romo will get major bumps in production and thus, value. Bryant and Witten could benefit too, but their value hasn't been damaged like the other 3.
Dallas is tough for me to get a handle on. I have to think that Jerry is getting pretty fed up with the under-achieving, so I'm worried about Romo and the receivers if Garrett and his pass heavy redone offense get the boot. Romo / Witten might be good buys for a win now team due to the "wrong side of 30 discount," but they might also crash and burn if a running / defensive coach is brought in. Dez' price is (rightfully) through the roof, and Austin is valued correctly as a "what you see is what you get" WR2 IMO. I've never been on board with Murray as a workhorse and that hasn't changed. I see most of them as likely holds until we see what happens.
Romo is as safe, or safer, than most QBs. Jerry likes him and doesn't blame him. The Cowboys aren't going to blow it up with so much talent everywhere on the roster, but Oline. There are very close to being a good team. There is a threat of a coaching change and I wouldn't be surprised. I would be surprised if the new staff didn't lean on Romo and his weapons enough for their lack of attempts to be overcome, and then some, by the increase in efficiency, however. The Cowboys are not scoring the TDs that their offensive talent, save the line, warrants.
 
It depends on what we mean by low end, or baseline. Eli Manning was never anythimg more than a dynasty mid/low end QB1, but he cost a good deal this off season.
Eli's value went up a lot because he had his best season from a yardage and VBD perspective. He was pretty easy to acquire before then. For like 7 years, very easy to acquire. If Dalton approaches 5000 yards I'm sure his value will go up even if there are 2011-like-inflated guys ahead of him that year.
If we are going to use this logic to discount Dalton, we shouldn't invest in any QBs that don't have running production, and aren't in the elite out of school prospect level, like Peyton and Luck.
Stafford, Bradford, Ryan, etc. all went late 1st/early 2nd in my leagues. Commonly behind pedestrian or longshot RB talent drafted into good positions or boom/bust WRs. 2010 wasn't that long ago. 2011 changed a lot but not everything. Trading for a developmental QB doesn't usually work out given the scarcity of elite performers at QB and unlikelihood of new QBs entering that pantheon.
If this guy doesn't have value in the standard fantasy format, maybe we need to start questioning that format.
Definitely enjoy formats that favor QBs more.
All very solid points. I don't want to bore everyone repeating the same points, so I won't. I'll just say that I think he will have more value than the majority seem to think, and that that value will be enough to make him a quality buy now, even in standard league formats.
 
Got Vick and a mid 4th for Donald brown and a late 3rd. If you believe he has anything left, nows the time to buy.

Lottery ticket at this point, who knows if anyone wants to give him a shot, but for a potential differencemaker that's an easy decision if you have the roster spot

 
I don't think Vick is a terrible buy at his current price. He could potentially still be a difference maker, but his inability to make reads at the line of scrimmage and pick up a blitz are major turnoffs for me.

I feel like every team in the league just blitzes him on almost every down and he can't figure it out. He'll most certainly be on a different team next year, so maybe a different scheme will help him out. Maybe going to a team with a better O-Line he'll regain some value.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What are that Quizz gets 60%+ of the teams RB touches next season? He seems to be a guy under the radar, in that regard. I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen, and the Falcons are becoming, if not already, one of the elite offenses in the NFL.

The Falcons have been leaning on him more and more, so now is the time to buy, if you like him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With a good finish to the season (and this past Sunday was a start), I think Quizz could enter next season as the leader in a committee. He needs to prove his worth over these last 5 games and then the playoffs. It also won't hurt if Turner continues to look old and slow.

Quizz as the lead committee back would have nice value going into next season, but I feel like he'll be far too overrated to acquire at that point. Now or maybe a few weeks ago would have been an ideal time to buy. I still think he is a marginal talent, but his situation will dictate his value (Passing Offense with a lot of weapons). He could face some soft fronts and be a nice source of receptions.

 
I don't know if he'll hold onto the job (much less the ball), but Dwyer is now the official starter.

With Mendenhall an UFA after this year, the door is open for Dwyer to audition for next year.

 
I am trying to buy Cowboys players where I can. The offense is very close to being what NYG is now. If they can fix their Oline this off season, as they did their secondary last, Murray, Austin, and Romo will get major bumps in production and thus, value. Bryant and Witten could benefit too, but their value hasn't been damaged like the other 3.
I think Murray is in a committee next season and the window to buy Dez closed a few weeks ago. Witten and Austin may be affordable offseason buys though, depends how the season ends.
Committee? With whom? Felix had 3 carries total before Murray got hurt. Dunbar does nothing that Murray doesn't, but Murray does more, and is the better player. And if the Cowboys spend big money, or a top pick on a RB when their line is so poor...nevermind, I don't want to think about that.
I have always thought he would be best in the mb3 role so I would expect someone else to be brought in to replace Felix unless they really like Dunbar or tanner for the job. I don't think he is a workhorse regardless, it's why I never bought into him
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have always thought he would be best in the mb3 role so I would expect someone else to be brought in to replace Felix unless they really like Dunbar or tanner for the job. I don't think he is a workhorse regardless, it's why I never bought into him
They guy was a workhorse in college, getting a huge number of touches. His two NFL injuries were cause by awkward hits that could have happened to anyone. Maybe all the injury stuff is tied to together, or maybe he's had two bad breaks. I personally think he is a workhorse that should get 20+ touches a game.
 
What are that Quizz gets 60%+ of the teams RB touches next season? He seems to be a guy under the radar, in that regard. I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen, and the Falcons are becoming, if not already, one of the elite offenses in the NFL.The Falcons have been leaning on him more and more, so now is the time to buy, if you like him.
I was a big fan of Quizz coming into the league, but when I watch him at this level I just don't see anything special (and beleive me I want to). He isn't exceptionally quick for a smaller back and doesn't break many tackles. My guess is he plays the same role next season, CoP to a bigger back that the Falcons draft or bring in as a FA.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top