Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

by_the_sea_wannabe

SSL4 Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

jeez dude I didn't quote you. I said "i'm pretty sure". Which means, I think I vaguely remember that but can't be bothered to go back through 4 billion posts to actually use the quote function on the board.And yes I'm definitely a lhucks alias. A zookeeper alias created eight years ago to torment you during the 2011 fantasy football offseason.You proved yourself to be a true message board troll when you completely ignored the rest of the post in which I presented logical reasoning for you as to where lhucks was coming from. I also questioned lhuck's strong opinion on Roy Helu without insulting him; instead attempting to educate you how to create a confrontational point without insulting the other poster. Instead of commenting on any of that you chose to pick out a meaningless point of contention that didn't add anything to the discussion.sorry but I'm not paying your bridge toll.

Sorry I was to busy defending myself of being wrongly accused of my credibility. Hate my tone and way of showing it all you like, but dont say things that you are not sure of, just any rule of thumb anywhere. And another reason I didnt respond to your other remarks, was you made decent points, I wasnt gonna dispute with much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you're right dude....I offer very little to these things....my bad...

I meant currently to this discussion, sorry for the confusion on that part and if you took me out of context.

Ref I see you break down teams, I respect it...but I'm not going after you personally every second I can get, like you drool to look for holes in everything I said.

With every post I make, I am zoned into football talk only. I really dont like having to but heads, but when people dont like you, they miss the message all together. Obviously thats what happened here yet again.

You dont have to agree, listen, or trust in anything I say. But I enjoy posting here to discuss football, i hate to see debate lead to attacks on people. attack my knowledge of the game all you like, but just hating a person for how they share their opinion on a forum, no matter what the tone is crazy.

And as far as a suspension talk, you said it, but maybe i took it out of context...that stuff happens as we so frequently see here.

I didn't say it....not even anything close....and in fact, the odds are that you probably have me confused with one of the other guys you went a few rounds with.....possibly the one that actually reported you....
Agree to disagree....

I just really want to talk football!

Football Critic, I haven't quite figured you out. You know something about football, but you are very impatient and lack polish. I think you have a lot of potential to be a quality poster and hope you continue to progress in that direction. I can see you going in either direction at this point, a flash in the pan type poster who says a lot of things for a short while and you never hear from them again or someone who learns how to curb their emotions when writing and is able to use their wisdom to make an intelligent point without insulting the other side.

I'm tough to understand! I assure you, 90% of my somewhat abbrasive posts to others and how they see them, is not really how it sounds. Its tough to convey in text, but trust me all my talk of ignorance, or uneducation is all football related. There are many very smart people, who just dont understand football as much as they think they do. I have strong feelings and passion, and take this very seriously, more serious then many. I may sound abbrasive, but I'm just here to talk football. I assume people dont take things personally, maybe thats my fault...I'm sorry!

But since a post was directed at me, I figured I would respond....honestly I much rather talk Football!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Draft thread and all team rosters now updated. Sorry for the delay! I was :yawn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Draft thread and all team rosters now updated. Sorry for the delay! I was :yawn:

Good work, thx for maintaining it...if no one else tells u!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the work you did on our draft. I appreciate your efforts and I'm sure others in SSL4 are grateful for the work you put forth. Much obliged partner :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I just have to win! :)

Honestly, I will feel lucky to finish in the top half. This is my first go-around, and I think it is definitely a learning experience for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I just have to win! :)Honestly, I will feel lucky to finish in the top half. This is my first go-around, and I think it is definitely a learning experience for me.

Looks like you caught some bum luck with Carson Palmer and Christian Ponder. Hopefully, the Palmer situation sorts itself out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revisiting my team before the start of the season, 3 months later:

Draft Spot 7 - gandalas

QB: Drew Brees QB5

QB: Carson Palmer QB30

QB: Christian Ponder QB33

At QB, I seem to only have 1 starter now. Still, that starter is Drew Brees, so he should be good for a while. The concern is that he has a week 11 bye, which is both good and bad. Good in that I will last until week 11, bad that the only teams left that late will be pretty good. Well, maybe Ponder will be starting by then...

RB: Maurice Jones-Drew RB7

RB: DeAngelo Williams RB22

RB: Beanie Wells RB39

RB: Tim Hightower RB60

What a GREAT 3 months for my RB situation. I went from having 2 studs to 4 definite starters to begin the season. This will be a strength for my team, for sure.

WR: Brandon Marshall WR13

WR: Brandon Lloyd WR23

WR: Anthony Armstrong WR46

WR: Robert Meachem WR53

WR: Jerrico Cotchery WR72

Armstrong went from Starter to backup, so I could have some depth issues here. Still, Orton still being there can only help Lloyd. Cotchery on the steelers could be good or bad - they pass more than the Jets, but he is not even WR3 yet.

TE: Dustin Keller TE12

TE: Marcedes Lewis TE14

This position is about the same as when I drafted it. Decent week-to-week upside

DEF: Chicago Bears Defense DEF14

DEF: Denver Broncos DEF30

Nothing major happening here

PK: Neil Rackers PK7

PK: Jay Feeley PK28

I Still feel that rackers should be a top-5 K when it is said and done, and Feeley should do just fine as well.

All in all, although my RB situation improved DRAMATICALLY in the past 3 months, my lack of depth at QB and WR could cost me. We shall see how far I can go! :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Week 1:

QB - Brees 39.25

RB - Wells 20.20

RB - Hightower 18.70

WR - Meachem - 18.00

WR - Armstrong - 10.40

WR3 - ??? (Brandon Marshall and Brandon Lloyd still to play)

TE - Keller - 22.10

K - Rackers - 10.00

DEF - Bears - 18.00 (Broncos Still to play)

I am in 2nd place with 156.65 points with my top 2 WRs still to go. I am hopeful of getting top score and the all-important amnesty for next week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB: B+ Cam will play and his running stats will help. Volek would be a wasted pick on a thin roster.

You would rather have Phillip Rivers and Cam Newton than Bradford and Schaub??
Rivers and Newton.

Last year Rivers outscored the Schuab/Bradford 8 of 16 weeks - push.

Last year Rivers scored 423 (included Clausen's 11 pts in wk 10 for River's bye) v. S/B total of 404 - advantage Rivers.

Last year posted 20 or more points in 12 wks v. 12 for the S/B combo - push.

Last year adding Bradford to Schaub netted you 6 (wk 1) + 2 (3) + 3 (4) + 21 (7 Schaub bye) + 9 (8) + 5 (11) + 13 (12) + 2 (16). Tossing out the bye week, that's only 40 pts Bradford added over 15 weeks.

Bradford should improve but adding Newton to the equation should offset this.

Just for discussion, Bradford would have helped River's by 32 points (excluding bye) and Schaub would have helped Rivers by 54 pts.

Adding that second QB when your primary doesn't get hurt usually doesn't add many points. I did this excerise earlier for addig Flacco to Brees and as I recall Flacco improved the total by 15 points.

Anyway, that's why you got a B- (4-5 teams will outscore you) and he got a B+ (2-3 teams will outscore him). A B- is a high grade in my book.

I disagree, I would much rather have Bradford and Schaub as a duo compared to Rivers and Newton. I think your logic is faulty at best. Your lucky if Newton will help 1 or 2 weeks this year, Panthers are a very bad team. Where as Bradford could easly help out half the scoring weeks. You are way underestimating Bradfords value in my opinion.
Please provide details where my logic is faulty. Everytime I run the numbers, the second QB is marginalized. At QB, a stud and a dog getting reps always out performs two average to slightly above average qbs.

Some thoughts...

1. If Bradford helps out in half the scoring weeks, then Schaub was drafted too high.

2. QB is a unique position. A bad week for good QBs is 200 yd and 1 td. When your base is 16 pts it's hard for a backup to be a big contributor. Much easier to shut down a WR/TE and then RB in these leagues. Even when you have a stud like Foster or AJ from last year, your backup has another roster spot or two to shoot at surpassing.

3. Newton's role should only be 1-2 weeks given where Rivers was drafted and his past performance.

To answer number 1. Not necessarily. Bradford and Schaub could both be playing at a high level and they switch off back and forth each week, giving a person a damn good score each week. Plus I would rather have Bradford covering my main QB's bye week over a rookie QB on a bad team in a lockout year.
:popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB: B+ Cam will play and his running stats will help. Volek would be a wasted pick on a thin roster.

You would rather have Phillip Rivers and Cam Newton than Bradford and Schaub??
Rivers and Newton.

Last year Rivers outscored the Schuab/Bradford 8 of 16 weeks - push.

Last year Rivers scored 423 (included Clausen's 11 pts in wk 10 for River's bye) v. S/B total of 404 - advantage Rivers.

Last year posted 20 or more points in 12 wks v. 12 for the S/B combo - push.

Last year adding Bradford to Schaub netted you 6 (wk 1) + 2 (3) + 3 (4) + 21 (7 Schaub bye) + 9 (8) + 5 (11) + 13 (12) + 2 (16). Tossing out the bye week, that's only 40 pts Bradford added over 15 weeks.

Bradford should improve but adding Newton to the equation should offset this.

Just for discussion, Bradford would have helped River's by 32 points (excluding bye) and Schaub would have helped Rivers by 54 pts.

Adding that second QB when your primary doesn't get hurt usually doesn't add many points. I did this excerise earlier for addig Flacco to Brees and as I recall Flacco improved the total by 15 points.

Anyway, that's why you got a B- (4-5 teams will outscore you) and he got a B+ (2-3 teams will outscore him). A B- is a high grade in my book.

I disagree, I would much rather have Bradford and Schaub as a duo compared to Rivers and Newton. I think your logic is faulty at best. Your lucky if Newton will help 1 or 2 weeks this year, Panthers are a very bad team. Where as Bradford could easly help out half the scoring weeks. You are way underestimating Bradfords value in my opinion.
Please provide details where my logic is faulty. Everytime I run the numbers, the second QB is marginalized. At QB, a stud and a dog getting reps always out performs two average to slightly above average qbs.

Some thoughts...

1. If Bradford helps out in half the scoring weeks, then Schaub was drafted too high.

2. QB is a unique position. A bad week for good QBs is 200 yd and 1 td. When your base is 16 pts it's hard for a backup to be a big contributor. Much easier to shut down a WR/TE and then RB in these leagues. Even when you have a stud like Foster or AJ from last year, your backup has another roster spot or two to shoot at surpassing.

3. Newton's role should only be 1-2 weeks given where Rivers was drafted and his past performance.

To answer number 1. Not necessarily. Bradford and Schaub could both be playing at a high level and they switch off back and forth each week, giving a person a damn good score each week. Plus I would rather have Bradford covering my main QB's bye week over a rookie QB on a bad team in a lockout year.
:popcorn:
He had one good game against a bad defense. If he does the same thing against a good defense like the Ravens, then I will admit I was wrong. :popcorn:;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Week 1 Scores (for those too lazy to wait on his site to load...)

gandalas 182.05

MrTwo94 180.70

by_the_sea_wannabe 175.60

Go Blue 167.55

Jackal King 155.80

Iwannabeacowboybaby! 149.15

HitNRun 149.00

BusMan 146.80

snellman 145.45

Broadway G 145.15

Football Critic 126.65

krsone21 120.20

LHUCKS 118.90

Ghost of Bill Walsh 118.30

CommuterMan 112.60

Go Pack 107.95

Go Pack is OUT

Despite a 31.05 point Effort from Michael Vick, Pack was let down by his lack of RB scoring, with CJ Spiller leading the way with 9.10 points. Ingram only had 4.00 as his second RB. Holmes and Moss both scored over 13, but that was it at WR. TE and PK were both decent, with 11.90 and 12.00 points, but he only got 6 points from his defense.

Gandalas wins Amnesty for Week 2

39.25 from Drew Brees, 20.20 and 18.70 from Beanie and Hightower. 20.90 from Marshall, 18.00 from Meachem, and 14.90 from Lloyd. 22.10 from Keller at TE, 10.00 from Neil Rackers, and 18.00 from the Bears defense. Great scoring all around - I hope I didn't use all my mojo up in week 1. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow, Hucks actually advanced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Week 2 Scores:

snellman - 178.25 points

Iwannabeacowboybaby! - 172.10

MrTwo94 - 171.90 points

Football Critic - 164.45

Go Blue - 161.30

Jackal King - 161.30

by_the_sea_wannabe - 157.25

krsone21 - 151.60

gandalas - 137.80

LHUCKS - 136.75

BusMan - 136.35

CommuterMan - 135.05

HitNRun - 125.80

Broadway G - 124.30

Ghost of Bill Walsh - 97.55

Ghost of Bill walsh is OUT.

Peyton Manning claims another victim - Alex Smith actually scored a respectable 23 points, but only getting .1 points from one of your 2 RB spots is never a good thing. At WR he only had 1 score as well, so 2 zeroes there. All in all, he was doomed with the following lineup getting 0 points for him:

Manning, Gates, Moreno, Colston, Crabtree, and Donald Brown.

Snellman wins week 2 immunity.

Brady had 39 points, Blount and Turner had 20 apiece, and Aaron Hernandez and Eric Decker blew up for him. Probably a good thing he has immunity, as he has only Kyle Rudolph at TE for the next few weeks.

My Team:

After winning the amnesty last week, I finished middle of the pack this time around.

Brees was stellar as usual, but missing Lloyd hurt me a bit. Keller looks to be a stud so far, and DeAngelo looks like complete crap. Still, i will take the advance for 1 more week happily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to need immunity this week the way it looks. Hopefully Hernadez's injury is early reports of a couple weeks and not the later reports of longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB: B+ Cam will play and his running stats will help. Volek would be a wasted pick on a thin roster.

You would rather have Phillip Rivers and Cam Newton than Bradford and Schaub??
Rivers and Newton.

Last year Rivers outscored the Schuab/Bradford 8 of 16 weeks - push.

Last year Rivers scored 423 (included Clausen's 11 pts in wk 10 for River's bye) v. S/B total of 404 - advantage Rivers.

Last year posted 20 or more points in 12 wks v. 12 for the S/B combo - push.

Last year adding Bradford to Schaub netted you 6 (wk 1) + 2 (3) + 3 (4) + 21 (7 Schaub bye) + 9 (8) + 5 (11) + 13 (12) + 2 (16). Tossing out the bye week, that's only 40 pts Bradford added over 15 weeks.

Bradford should improve but adding Newton to the equation should offset this.

Just for discussion, Bradford would have helped River's by 32 points (excluding bye) and Schaub would have helped Rivers by 54 pts.

Adding that second QB when your primary doesn't get hurt usually doesn't add many points. I did this excerise earlier for addig Flacco to Brees and as I recall Flacco improved the total by 15 points.

Anyway, that's why you got a B- (4-5 teams will outscore you) and he got a B+ (2-3 teams will outscore him). A B- is a high grade in my book.

I disagree, I would much rather have Bradford and Schaub as a duo compared to Rivers and Newton. I think your logic is faulty at best. Your lucky if Newton will help 1 or 2 weeks this year, Panthers are a very bad team. Where as Bradford could easly help out half the scoring weeks. You are way underestimating Bradfords value in my opinion.
Please provide details where my logic is faulty. Everytime I run the numbers, the second QB is marginalized. At QB, a stud and a dog getting reps always out performs two average to slightly above average qbs.

Some thoughts...

1. If Bradford helps out in half the scoring weeks, then Schaub was drafted too high.

2. QB is a unique position. A bad week for good QBs is 200 yd and 1 td. When your base is 16 pts it's hard for a backup to be a big contributor. Much easier to shut down a WR/TE and then RB in these leagues. Even when you have a stud like Foster or AJ from last year, your backup has another roster spot or two to shoot at surpassing.

3. Newton's role should only be 1-2 weeks given where Rivers was drafted and his past performance.

To answer number 1. Not necessarily. Bradford and Schaub could both be playing at a high level and they switch off back and forth each week, giving a person a damn good score each week. Plus I would rather have Bradford covering my main QB's bye week over a rookie QB on a bad team in a lockout year.
:popcorn:
He had one good game against a bad defense. If he does the same thing against a good defense like the Ravens, then I will admit I was wrong. :popcorn:;)
Schaub, Matt HOU QB QB 17.00 23.70 36.65 13.00

Bradford, Sam STL QB QB 9.40 24.05 16.50 14.20

Bradford has netted Lhucks .35 + 1.2 = 1.55 pts.

Rivers, Philip SDC QB QB 28.75 32.10 13.30 23.15

Newton, Cam CAR QB QB 40.90 38.90 17.60 40.20

Looks like we were both wrong about Cam. Rivers has still cover Schaub/Bradford in 3 of 4 weeks. Cam has doubled that duo up three time and been doubled up once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB: B+ Cam will play and his running stats will help. Volek would be a wasted pick on a thin roster.

You would rather have Phillip Rivers and Cam Newton than Bradford and Schaub??
Rivers and Newton.

Last year Rivers outscored the Schuab/Bradford 8 of 16 weeks - push.

Last year Rivers scored 423 (included Clausen's 11 pts in wk 10 for River's bye) v. S/B total of 404 - advantage Rivers.

Last year posted 20 or more points in 12 wks v. 12 for the S/B combo - push.

Last year adding Bradford to Schaub netted you 6 (wk 1) + 2 (3) + 3 (4) + 21 (7 Schaub bye) + 9 (8) + 5 (11) + 13 (12) + 2 (16). Tossing out the bye week, that's only 40 pts Bradford added over 15 weeks.

Bradford should improve but adding Newton to the equation should offset this.

Just for discussion, Bradford would have helped River's by 32 points (excluding bye) and Schaub would have helped Rivers by 54 pts.

Adding that second QB when your primary doesn't get hurt usually doesn't add many points. I did this excerise earlier for addig Flacco to Brees and as I recall Flacco improved the total by 15 points.

Anyway, that's why you got a B- (4-5 teams will outscore you) and he got a B+ (2-3 teams will outscore him). A B- is a high grade in my book.

I disagree, I would much rather have Bradford and Schaub as a duo compared to Rivers and Newton. I think your logic is faulty at best. Your lucky if Newton will help 1 or 2 weeks this year, Panthers are a very bad team. Where as Bradford could easly help out half the scoring weeks. You are way underestimating Bradfords value in my opinion.
Please provide details where my logic is faulty. Everytime I run the numbers, the second QB is marginalized. At QB, a stud and a dog getting reps always out performs two average to slightly above average qbs.

Some thoughts...

1. If Bradford helps out in half the scoring weeks, then Schaub was drafted too high.

2. QB is a unique position. A bad week for good QBs is 200 yd and 1 td. When your base is 16 pts it's hard for a backup to be a big contributor. Much easier to shut down a WR/TE and then RB in these leagues. Even when you have a stud like Foster or AJ from last year, your backup has another roster spot or two to shoot at surpassing.

3. Newton's role should only be 1-2 weeks given where Rivers was drafted and his past performance.

To answer number 1. Not necessarily. Bradford and Schaub could both be playing at a high level and they switch off back and forth each week, giving a person a damn good score each week. Plus I would rather have Bradford covering my main QB's bye week over a rookie QB on a bad team in a lockout year.
:popcorn:
He had one good game against a bad defense. If he does the same thing against a good defense like the Ravens, then I will admit I was wrong. :popcorn:;)
Schaub, Matt HOU QB QB 17.00 23.70 36.65 13.00

Bradford, Sam STL QB QB 9.40 24.05 16.50 14.20

Bradford has netted Lhucks .35 + 1.2 = 1.55 pts.

Rivers, Philip SDC QB QB 28.75 32.10 13.30 23.15

Newton, Cam CAR QB QB 40.90 38.90 17.60 40.20

Looks like we were both wrong about Cam. Rivers has still cover Schaub/Bradford in 3 of 4 weeks. Cam has doubled that duo up three time and been doubled up once.

:thumbup: I was wrong and I admit when I was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.