Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
spider321

Dynasty Value Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

I hate this guy because his usage numbers kept telling me to not play him but he kept producing anyway. He no doubt will regress next year. But he's still a nice WR4 to have. I think he's a good candidate to do a trade down in value but turn a 4th into a late 2nd/early 3rd type of deal.

 

I did something like this with Hill recently, although got a better return -- I think that most Hill owners are asking for 1sts and there are a few non-Hill owners who might be willing to get into that range.  My deal was in a 48-team league with 4 copies of each player but the deal (in 12-team terms) was Hill, 2.11, and 3.1 for 1.10.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

All these guys seemed to come out of nowhere. I don't think any were top 200 players in startups before the season. Anyone buying? You could include Mike Wallace too, but I think his low preseason rating was due to bad taste not a true surprise. I like Tyrell due to "Keenan Allen coming back" discount.


18. Tyreek Hill
19. Tyrell Williams
20. Terrelle Pryor
24. Pierre Garcon
29. Kenny Britt
30. Adam Thielen
33. Cole Beasley
40. Cameron Meredith
41. Marqise Lee
45. Quincy Enunwa

 

I like several on this list and would be interested if the price was right.  My top few from this grouping that I like are: Hill, Thielen, Meredith, Williams and Pryor.  Probably nots from the list: Garcon, Britt, Beasley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

I hate this guy because his usage numbers kept telling me to not play him but he kept producing anyway. He no doubt will regress next year. But he's still a nice WR4 to have. I think he's a good candidate to do a trade down in value but turn a 4th into a late 2nd/early 3rd type of deal.

I understand his usage numbers are a concern, but I kinda of expect that as a rookie.  Would it not reasonable to assume those numbers would go up next year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Andrew74 said:

Everyone saying "sell Ware" - what do you think you'll get for him?  Everyone seems down in him after he fizzled out to low RB2 territory. 2nd round or 3rd round rookie pick?  Unless you can get "starting Chiefs RB" price, is t it best to hold and see if he can actually take that in 2017?

He currently has a high end RB2 ADP.  I'd be looking to test that and move him for a pick in the 1.08-1.10 range.  I'm certainly holding if a 2nd (or third) is the return.  I'm selling under the assumption that others are more confident in him holding the job than I am.  If that's not the case, I think you're right. 

 

EDIT: His ADP has him going before Ajayi, Cobb, Reed, Kelce, Baldwin, Shepard, Luck, Newton, McCoy and Eifert.  If that holds, I think he's a big sell. 

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

Lacy seems like a blue light special. Everything about him is so disgusting right now. Except for the fact that he is actually kind of a good NFL RB.

I don't disagree.  As a fan of his game, I'm rooting for a bounce back.  But him putting the weight back on, prior to the injury even, scares the hell out of me.  I think his name value will keep his price above what I'm willing to pay.  I'd rather go after a guy like Abdullah.  (Although, checking Lacy's December ADP, I'd take him over some of the guys going ahead of him.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

All these guys seemed to come out of nowhere. I don't think any were top 200 players in startups before the season. Anyone buying? You could include Mike Wallace too, but I think his low preseason rating was due to bad taste not a true surprise. I like Tyrell due to "Keenan Allen coming back" discount.


18. Tyreek Hill
19. Tyrell Williams
20. Terrelle Pryor
24. Pierre Garcon
29. Kenny Britt
30. Adam Thielen
33. Cole Beasley
40. Cameron Meredith
41. Marqise Lee
45. Quincy Enunwa

 

 

Couldn't agree more on Tyrell.  

Beasley's legit.  When the Cowboys start throwing the ball more, we should see the steady WR2/3 production we saw in the first half of the season.  Buying. 

Britt looked really good, the few times I watched him play.  I'm buying as a cheap WR3/flex option.

I've always had a soft spot for Lee and will be buying.    

Garcon had a great season and I think the Skins want to keep him.  I'll buy.

Kicking the tires on Hill.  Willing to bet on talent if his price is in the mid/low 2nd range. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

All these guys seemed to come out of nowhere. I don't think any were top 200 players in startups before the season. Anyone buying? You could include Mike Wallace too, but I think his low preseason rating was due to bad taste not a true surprise. I like Tyrell due to "Keenan Allen coming back" discount.


18. Tyreek Hill
19. Tyrell Williams
20. Terrelle Pryor
24. Pierre Garcon
29. Kenny Britt
30. Adam Thielen
33. Cole Beasley
40. Cameron Meredith
41. Marqise Lee
45. Quincy Enunwa

 

Oh boy this is a yummy list. The ones I like.....

 

Terrelle Pryor- He's a stud. I'm buying but only if I can get him for WR2 prices. I think he's a WR1 and could be elite if paired with a good QB. If he goes back to Cleveland I'm not as excited unless they get Romo or something.

Tyrell Williams- He fits really well with Allen. They are two different WR. It's a long shot (because of Rivers) but I see a path to SD #1 WR for him even with Allen but he has to improve his routes and relationship with Rivers.  He's a better talent than Allen imo.

Cameron Meredith- Size/speed/routes could be another WR1 on this list.

Adam Thielen- He is carving out a role with another great WR (Diggs) on the team. I'm a buyer for the right price but am worried about the Vikes offense in general.

Quincy Enunwa- He's elite after the catch. I like him a lot more in PPR.

Hill- I like him but am worried about Maclin. Hill's rise started with Maclin out. Maclin is legit good so I'm not sure Hill's production is sustainable. I mean he can't continue to produce at this level with so few touches.

Garcon- He's always been a great player. Like usual where he lands will matter.

 

It not worth overpaying for any of these guys but if there are some owners worried and thinking they are selling high I'd give up a late 1st for some of these guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Braktastic said:

I understand his usage numbers are a concern, but I kinda of expect that as a rookie.  Would it not reasonable to assume those numbers would go up next year?

Re: Hill, I was referring more to starting him during one of my failed playoff runs, where I didn't expect a big difference in usage week to week. Long term I agree it should be higher than the 30% he produced during the playoffs. That said, the history of ATH becoming slot WR isn't great. On the plus side, he's already outdone Austin's best year. His ADOT was low. Would be interested if he runs more deep routes next year, although with Alex Smith maybe that's not going to help much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Concept Coop said:

Beasley's legit.  When the Cowboys start throwing the ball more, we should see the steady WR2/3 production we saw in the first half of the season.  Buying. 

Is he legit like going to be Doug Baldwin or is he legit like he'll be reliable but replaceable from a fantasy standpoint? Terrance Williams also quietly had a good year from an efficiency standpoint. Why should they throw the ball more? Aikman never threw the ball more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, thriftyrocker said:

Is he legit like going to be Doug Baldwin or is he legit like he'll be reliable but replaceable from a fantasy standpoint? Terrance Williams also quietly had a good year from an efficiency standpoint. Why should they throw the ball more? Aikman never threw the ball more. 

I honestly don't expect the Cowboys to try to throw the ball more. They have found a formula that works for them and I don't see the Cowboys changing that. When Murray had his huge year, then they let him go, the offense collapsed and so did the defense. They got Elliot and got back to winning 12 games. I don't see this changing.

Williams is a free agent this season and I am not sure what the Cowboys plans are for him. If he goes to another team, maybe Beasley would see more targets? They don't play the same role in the offense, so I doubt that. I think they would just use another player in Williams role then and Beasley's targets to be the same.

I'm not a Cowboys fan though, so I would like to hear what Coop or other fans closer to the team think about the Cowboys in 2017.

To illustrate the Cowboys when they are running the ball well and when they are not:

2016 1010 total plays 483 pass attempts  499 rushing attempts
2015 969 total plays 528 pass attempts 408 rushing attempts
2014 1014 total plays 476 pass attempts 508 rushing attempts

Without the running game total plays went down pass attempts went up slightly and rushing attempts way down. A good RB and they are back to running 500 times.

It is hard to argue with the strategy here, although the league as a whole is passing the ball more, this has been very effective for the Cowboys as they won 12 games in 2014 and 2016 with a solid running game.

Edited by Biabreakable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

Williams is a free agent this season and I am not sure what the Cowboys plans are for him. If he goes to another team, maybe Beasley would see more targets? They don't play the same role in the offense, so I doubt that. I think they would just use another player in Williams role then and Beasley's targets to be the same.

I think Brice Butler can step into Williams role, and potentially exceed his production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Returning to the Lacy discussion, it seems like his value is pretty close to Doug Martin at this point, no?  Similar age, neither has factored in the passing game, both have baggage.  A lot of risk as it is possible that either of their teams could move on from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I think Brice Butler can step into Williams role, and potentially exceed his production.

Yep that makes sense. Not sure if Butler is any better than Williams, don't know much about him. I think Williams is ok but nothing special. I had some higher hopes for him earlier in his career.

Jason Witten might retire after this season and whoever replaces him at TE likely won't get quite as many targets as Witten did (95 targets). So I suppose this could lead to more targets for the WR next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Skeletore Eh said:

And he was quoting someone that was referencing 5th or 6th round startup value 

Not a big deal but he actually mentioned both startup value (which had been discussed as a 5th/6th round startup) and trade value (which had been discussed as the 1.4/1.5 rookie pick).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Mookie said:

Returning to the Lacy discussion, it seems like his value is pretty close to Doug Martin at this point, no?  Similar age, neither has factored in the passing game, both have baggage.  A lot of risk as it is possible that either of their teams could move on from them.

I think Lacy is a better RB and doesn't have the suspension over his head. Although I don't know how much of a risk an Adderall addiction is, as going to rehab for Adderall is a new one for dynasty (?). Martin almost definitely will be on a new team, since he is no longer worth the contract and can be cut. You could say Martin can restructure with TB. But I think that is less likely than Lacy back in GB on a prove it deal, in a timeshare with Montgomery. Not likely to be a team that overpays either like Jax did Ivory. Both will be looking to prove it and keep their careers going. I'd rather have a fat Eddie, but that's just my opinion. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

Is he legit like going to be Doug Baldwin or is he legit like he'll be reliable but replaceable from a fantasy standpoint? Terrance Williams also quietly had a good year from an efficiency standpoint. Why should they throw the ball more? Aikman never threw the ball more. 

He's a legit NFL player.  He's one of the better slot receivers in the league.  I'm not expecting him to ever be anything more than he was over the first half of this season, fantasy wise.  He's no Doug Baldwin, but he's talented.  He's a guy you can plug into your WR3/flex spot and use the savings to build advantages elsewhere.   

The Cowboys will throw because they'll have to or because they'll be a better team for doing so.  Things change fast and their current volume has nowhere to go but up.  Aikman isn't a usable comp--for me anyway, without doing homework that I'm not up for.  Any recent examples?

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

He's a legit NFL player.  He's one of the better slot receivers in the league.  I'm not expecting him to ever be anything more than he was over the first half of this season, fantasy wise.  He's no Doug Baldwin, but he's talented.  He's a guy you can plug into your WR3/flex spot and use the savings to build advantages elsewhere.   

The Cowboys will throw because they'll have to or because they'll be a better team for doing so.  Things change fast and their current volume has nowhere to go but up.  Aikman isn't a usable comp--for me anyway, without doing homework that I'm not up for.  Any recent examples?

How much is that really worth in the modern landscape?  Those guys are a dime a dozen.  Actually, they were a dime a dozen 10 years ago.  They're even easier to find now.

Not worth putting over guys that have legit WR1 potential as several of the guys behind him on that list do.  Beasely has been in the league 5 years now and he has one fantasy relevant half season stretch where he didn't even break 75 yards receiving.  The most appealing thing about Cole Beasely is that when I type his name on my phone it autocorrects it to Cole Beastly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I honestly don't expect the Cowboys to try to throw the ball more. They have found a formula that works for them and I don't see the Cowboys changing that. When Murray had his huge year, then they let him go, the offense collapsed and so did the defense. They got Elliot and got back to winning 12 games. I don't see this changing.

Williams is a free agent this season and I am not sure what the Cowboys plans are for him. If he goes to another team, maybe Beasley would see more targets? They don't play the same role in the offense, so I doubt that. I think they would just use another player in Williams role then and Beasley's targets to be the same.

I'm not a Cowboys fan though, so I would like to hear what Coop or other fans closer to the team think about the Cowboys in 2017.

To illustrate the Cowboys when they are running the ball well and when they are not:

2016 1010 total plays 483 pass attempts  499 rushing attempts
2015 969 total plays 528 pass attempts 408 rushing attempts
2014 1014 total plays 476 pass attempts 508 rushing attempts

Without the running game total plays went down pass attempts went up slightly and rushing attempts way down. A good RB and they are back to running 500 times.

It is hard to argue with the strategy here, although the league as a whole is passing the ball more, this has been very effective for the Cowboys as they won 12 games in 2014 and 2016 with a solid running game.

They're not going to change the formula until they have to, or until Dak is so good that it's to their benefit to.  But there's a lot of room for the PAs to increase and very little room for them to decrease.  Dak's development; a step back defensively; injuries to the offensive line, Witten, or Dez; Collins not being able to fill Leary's shoes; Green not being able to replace Free's (17 or 18), etc., etc.  I don't mean to suggest that any one factor is likely or pointing to an increase. 

I don't see a potential Williams departure having an impact on Beasley.  When Dez was out, they ran a lot more stuff for Beasley.  I suspect that should anything happen to Witten, he'd see a nice bump too.  Neither are likely, but Dez is Dez and Witten is declining on a big contract.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Not worth putting over guys that have legit WR1 potential as several of the guys behind him on that list do.  Beasely has been in the league 5 years now and he has one fantasy relevant half season stretch where he didn't even break 75 yards receiving.  The most appealing thing about Cole Beasely is that when I type his name on my phone it autocorrects it to Cole Beastly.

I never suggested he's worth more than anyone else on the list.  Just that he's a good NFL player and that I'm buying.  As for his career arch, he's ahead of Edelman and Amendola at this point in the process.  He outperformed Jason Witten this year.  

And "buying" is relative.  I'm not trying to argue that he's a world beater, has WR1 potential, or is anything more than he's already shown capable of being.  When I say I'm buying, this is what I mean (literally).  

X gave up Beasley, Cole DAL WR

I gave up Year 2017 Round 3 Draft Pick from Y 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I honestly don't expect the Cowboys to try to throw the ball more. They have found a formula that works for them and I don't see the Cowboys changing that. When Murray had his huge year, then they let him go, the offense collapsed and so did the defense. They got Elliot and got back to winning 12 games. I don't see this changing.

Williams is a free agent this season and I am not sure what the Cowboys plans are for him. If he goes to another team, maybe Beasley would see more targets? They don't play the same role in the offense, so I doubt that. I think they would just use another player in Williams role then and Beasley's targets to be the same.

I'm not a Cowboys fan though, so I would like to hear what Coop or other fans closer to the team think about the Cowboys in 2017.

To illustrate the Cowboys when they are running the ball well and when they are not:

2016 1010 total plays 483 pass attempts  499 rushing attempts
2015 969 total plays 528 pass attempts 408 rushing attempts
2014 1014 total plays 476 pass attempts 508 rushing attempts

Without the running game total plays went down pass attempts went up slightly and rushing attempts way down. A good RB and they are back to running 500 times.

It is hard to argue with the strategy here, although the league as a whole is passing the ball more, this has been very effective for the Cowboys as they won 12 games in 2014 and 2016 with a solid running game.

Word is the Boys will let Williams walk and address the need in the 2017 Draft.

Tex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Concept Coop said:

The Cowboys will throw because they'll have to or because they'll be a better team for doing so.  Things change fast and their current volume has nowhere to go but up.  Aikman isn't a usable comp--for me anyway, without doing homework that I'm not up for.  Any recent examples?

Was an easy comparison because of the team. Look at any team that dominated with OL/RB. 2006 Chargers, Rivers rookie season had only 460 attempts. His attempts went up but when/why? Because LT left the team after 2009. 486 in 09, 541 in 10. Great anecdotal evidence there, ha. I got lucky.

Aikman's role was different because the defense was top the whole time too. He didn't have to do much. Just timely passing. 

Edited by thriftyrocker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I honestly don't expect the Cowboys to try to throw the ball more. They have found a formula that works for them and I don't see the Cowboys changing that. When Murray had his huge year, then they let him go, the offense collapsed and so did the defense. They got Elliot and got back to winning 12 games. I don't see this changing.

Williams is a free agent this season and I am not sure what the Cowboys plans are for him. If he goes to another team, maybe Beasley would see more targets? They don't play the same role in the offense, so I doubt that. I think they would just use another player in Williams role then and Beasley's targets to be the same.

I'm not a Cowboys fan though, so I would like to hear what Coop or other fans closer to the team think about the Cowboys in 2017.

To illustrate the Cowboys when they are running the ball well and when they are not:

2016 1010 total plays 483 pass attempts  499 rushing attempts
2015 969 total plays 528 pass attempts 408 rushing attempts
2014 1014 total plays 476 pass attempts 508 rushing attempts

Without the running game total plays went down pass attempts went up slightly and rushing attempts way down. A good RB and they are back to running 500 times.

It is hard to argue with the strategy here, although the league as a whole is passing the ball more, this has been very effective for the Cowboys as they won 12 games in 2014 and 2016 with a solid running game.

No offense but this is such a false narrative it just disturbs me when I keep hearing it. Dallas never missed Demarco and their collapse last season had nothing do with inability to run the ball. Drafting Elliot did not return them to the Demarco Murray formula. The difference in this year vs last year is Dak vs they littany of scrubs they put out at QB.  There was no issues with the running game in the least last season other than it's harder to run when the defense does not respect the pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, menobrown said:

No offense but this is such a false narrative it just disturbs me when I keep hearing it. Dallas never missed Demarco and their collapse last season had nothing do with inability to run the ball. Drafting Elliot did not return them to the Demarco Murray formula. The difference in this year vs last year is Dak vs they littany of scrubs they put out at QB.  There was no issues with the running game in the least last season other than it's harder to run when the defense does not respect the pass.

So it is all about the QB then? The difference was because Romo was hurt? Not because of the running game? If you are going to say my statement is false, I would appreciate you backing up your claim with some proof that maybe I could learn from. Just stating your opinion about this does not make it so.

While that is certainly possible, defenses have to respect the pass because of Dak, but I don't see how that is any more plausible than my statement that you dramatically disagree with.

I will tell you why Romo being injured or Dak playing well may not have had as much effect on the play selection or success of the team though.

In 2013 the Cowboys ran 957 total plays 586 passing attempts 336 rushing attempts. Romo played 15 games, Murray in 14 games. They had an 8-8 season. So with the treat of the pass being there, why didn't they run the ball more?

2014 again Romo played in 15 of those games. Yet they threw the ball much less and ran the ball more. So if this is a product of having a threat of the passing game that makes this tick, why didn't they do it in 2013 also?

While you may not like the narrative, it is basically what people from the team and around the team have been talking about, even leading up to their selection of Elliot.

I am open to this idea being wrong. You just haven't shown me why it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Concept Coop said:

 

Kicking the tires on Hill.  Willing to bet on talent if his price is in the mid/low 2nd range. 

 

I don't get this price range.  If you had drafted Hill this year in the mid/low 2nd round of a dynasty rookie draft, you would be ecstatic about your return on that investment.  Why would any owner trade him for that now?

History tells us that over half the rookies drafted in the 2017 dynasty rookie draft will never have a season as good as Hill has already had.

It happens every year, but I still keep managing to get surprised by the unjustified inflation of draft pick value in the offseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Brisco54 said:

I don't get this price range.  If you had drafted Hill this year in the mid/low 2nd round of a dynasty rookie draft, you would be ecstatic about your return on that investment.  Why would any owner trade him for that now?

History tells us that over half the rookies drafted in the 2017 dynasty rookie draft will never have a season as good as Hill has already had.

It happens every year, but I still keep managing to get surprised by the unjustified inflation of draft pick value in the offseason.

He's not a developmental player. He's a veteran that's played below average for 2 straight years. Bengals beat writer says he is a backup next year.

https://twitter.com/pauldehnerjr/status/817057183749853184

You can replace Hill's 11 PPG in a PPR league very easily. Rashad Jennings, James White, Darren Sproles are guys people don't even want and they produced about the same. Fat Rob and T West were free at the beginning of the year. Why hold a guy like that when his name value is still somewhat high?

You can replace Hill for free (probably with a player already on your roster). The success rate of the 2nd is low but still higher than Hill's chance at bouncing back to what he produced 2nd half of his rookie year. If you believe that you should sell. 

You can treat your roster like lotto. You have to buy a lot of tickets to get winners but if the winners are big enough you are set. What is Hill's upside in 2017? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thriftyrocker said:

He's not a developmental player. He's a veteran that's played below average for 2 straight years. Bengals beat writer says he is a backup next year.

https://twitter.com/pauldehnerjr/status/817057183749853184

You can replace Hill's 11 PPG in a PPR league very easily. Rashad Jennings, James White, Darren Sproles are guys people don't even want and they produced about the same. Fat Rob and T West were free at the beginning of the year. Why hold a guy like that when his name value is still somewhat high?

You can replace Hill for free (probably with a player already on your roster). The success rate of the 2nd is low but still higher than Hill's chance at bouncing back to what he produced 2nd half of his rookie year. If you believe that you should sell. 

You can treat your roster like lotto. You have to buy a lot of tickets to get winners but if the winners are big enough you are set. What is Hill's upside in 2017? 

I think they're talking about Tyreek in this back and forth, not Jeremy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

So it is all about the QB then? The difference was because Romo was hurt? Not because of the running game? If you are going to say my statement is false, I would appreciate you backing up your claim with some proof that maybe I could learn from. Just stating your opinion about this does not make it so.

While that is certainly possible, defenses have to respect the pass because of Dak, but I don't see how that is any more plausible than my statement that you dramatically disagree with.

I will tell you why Romo being injured or Dak playing well may not have had as much effect on the play selection or success of the team though.

In 2013 the Cowboys ran 957 total plays 586 passing attempts 336 rushing attempts. Romo played 15 games, Murray in 14 games. They had an 8-8 season. So with the treat of the pass being there, why didn't they run the ball more?

2014 again Romo played in 15 of those games. Yet they threw the ball much less and ran the ball more. So if this is a product of having a threat of the passing game that makes this tick, why didn't they do it in 2013 also?

While you may not like the narrative, it is basically what people from the team and around the team have been talking about, even leading up to their selection of Elliot.

I am open to this idea being wrong. You just haven't shown me why it is.

They never struggled to run the ball, even with no Demarco or Elliot. Their RB's were 7th in league in rushing yards last season and  with over 4.5 YPC which they were 5th in leauge. They went for about 600 yards less than previous season and .3 YPA less but those are items I'd argue were in large part not having a viable QB that could help sustain drives or keep defenses honest but the running game was still a huge success my any measure and the one thing that went right for that team. They basically had the running game and nothing else. And I'm guilty of saying no Romo or viable QB was major issue but also Dez missed a lot of time and was a shell of himself.

You show me a team that is 7th best running team in the league and within 1/10th of a yard per carry from being third best in the league in that department and I'll show you a team that has no problem running the ball or making that a foundation and that with Randle and DMC handling the load.

This is why I thought at the time drafting Elliot was a big mistake, which I'm probably wrong about. I just thought that Dallas had showed they did not spend premium picks/money on a RB to have huge RB success.

I did not really mean to jump you and I know full well the team and their fans share same narrative of that reason they tumbled last season was loss of Demarco. Again I don't buy it, not when you are the 7th best running team in the league when you don't even have a QB or passing game as a threat the running game is not your problem.  I live in Dallas and again did not mean to jump you, I just grow weary of hearing this narrative . It's like the loss of Romo/Dez was not an issue the way I hear some people talk. It baffles me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, thriftyrocker said:

He's not a developmental player. He's a veteran that's played below average for 2 straight years. Bengals beat writer says he is a backup next year.

https://twitter.com/pauldehnerjr/status/817057183749853184

You can replace Hill's 11 PPG in a PPR league very easily. Rashad Jennings, James White, Darren Sproles are guys people don't even want and they produced about the same. Fat Rob and T West were free at the beginning of the year. Why hold a guy like that when his name value is still somewhat high?

You can replace Hill for free (probably with a player already on your roster). The success rate of the 2nd is low but still higher than Hill's chance at bouncing back to what he produced 2nd half of his rookie year. If you believe that you should sell. 

You can treat your roster like lotto. You have to buy a lot of tickets to get winners but if the winners are big enough you are set. What is Hill's upside in 2017? 

I was talking about Tyreek Hill, not Jeremy... as was the guy I quoted, I think (but I could be wrong).  As far as Tyreek's upside, I would say about WR15

Edited by Brisco54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

I honestly don't expect the Cowboys to try to throw the ball more. They have found a formula that works for them and I don't see the Cowboys changing that. When Murray had his huge year, then they let him go, the offense collapsed and so did the defense. They got Elliot and got back to winning 12 games. I don't see this changing.

 

Also I meant to add I agree with our basic thought ,the Cowboys formula is to run the ball and that is not going to change.  I have zero doubt their plan when they picked Elliot was to run him into the ground, Jerry said as much the night of the draft. Unless the OL starts crumbling they won't be changing this approach. I just disagreed, strongly as you might conclude, that the offense collapse last season had anything to do with Demarco leaving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Brisco54 said:

I was talking about Tyreek Hill, not Jeremy... as was the guy I quoted, I think (but I could be wrong).  As far as Tyreek's upside, I would say about WR15

Whoops sorry.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, menobrown said:

They never struggled to run the ball, even with no Demarco or Elliot. Their RB's were 7th in league in rushing yards last season and  with over 4.5 YPC which they were 5th in leauge. They went for about 600 yards less than previous season and .3 YPA less but those are items I'd argue were in large part not having a viable QB that could help sustain drives or keep defenses honest but the running game was still a huge success my any measure and the one thing that went right for that team. They basically had the running game and nothing else. And I'm guilty of saying no Romo or viable QB was major issue but also Dez missed a lot of time and was a shell of himself.

You show me a team that is 7th best running team in the league and within 1/10th of a yard per carry from being third best in the league in that department and I'll show you a team that has no problem running the ball or making that a foundation and that with Randle and DMC handling the load.

This is why I thought at the time drafting Elliot was a big mistake, which I'm probably wrong about. I just thought that Dallas had showed they did not spend premium picks/money on a RB to have huge RB success.

I did not really mean to jump you and I know full well the team and their fans share same narrative of that reason they tumbled last season was loss of Demarco. Again I don't buy it, not when you are the 7th best running team in the league when you don't even have a QB or passing game as a threat the running game is not your problem.  I live in Dallas and again did not mean to jump you, I just grow weary of hearing this narrative . It's like the loss of Romo/Dez was not an issue the way I hear some people talk. It baffles me.

I never suggested that wasn't an issue or that they were ineffective running the ball in 2015. I was talking about the volume. Obviously being able to convert some third downs more frequently helps extend drives. Defenses play better with a lead as well, but without good QB play the offense does not score enough points to put the defense in that position.

But all I was talking about is the overall offense and what to expect in terms of run pass ratio. Of course injuries and things change that best case scenario type of outlook. But I am only concerned with what Dallas is trying to do, or what they want to do, in terms of run to pass ratio of their offense. I believe that example is the 2014 and 2016 model more than the 2013 offense.

And that is all I care about, for the purpose of projections for their players next season, then looking forward.

Now as Dak matures, maybe they open things up a little more but if it aint broke why fix it?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Brisco54 said:

I don't get this price range.  If you had drafted Hill this year in the mid/low 2nd round of a dynasty rookie draft, you would be ecstatic about your return on that investment.  Why would any owner trade him for that now?

History tells us that over half the rookies drafted in the 2017 dynasty rookie draft will never have a season as good as Hill has already had.

That's fair--and maybe you're right.  He was undrafted in my leagues, so a 2nd round pick would still be profit.  I'm not willing to pay a first round pick for him, personally.  The talent is obvious, but the route to WR1 numbers is not to me.  He reminds me a bit of Cordarrelle in that way.  I moved him early in the year for a 3rd; maybe my current valuation is just as off.  Would you send a 1st for him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

That's fair--and maybe you're right.  He was undrafted in my leagues, so a 2nd round pick would still be profit.  I'm not willing to pay a first round pick for him, personally.  The talent is obvious, but the route to WR1 numbers is not to me.  He reminds me a bit of Cordarrelle in that way.  I moved him early in the year for a 3rd; maybe my current valuation is just as off.  Would you send a 1st for him?

We're discussing this in the Dynasty Trades thread, and I found that league scoring can have a huge impact.  I just did a check, Hill got 2.4 PPG from return yardage in two of my leagues that reward them.  He goes from overall WR9 to WR21 in full PPR without those (a little less impact in reduced PPR).  That can have a massive impact on his value.  In my return yards leagues, I cannot name 12 rookies I would rather have than Hill.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

What is Andrew Luck worth to you in 2016 draft picks?  6pt, start 1.

Edit: And is he a buy?

If I needed a QB he'd be near the top of my list to try and acquire. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

If I needed a QB he'd be near the top of my list to try and acquire. 

Would you pay, say, the 1.03?  It's crazy to think that a few years ago, multiple QBs were going in the first round of startups.  Today, the top guy is a 3rd/4th round pick.  I think he's certainly worth targeting now, but I would be hard for me to give up a premium draft pick for any QB today.  I'd add Newton to that list--buy low, but not at prices I'd have paid for him in the past.  

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Would you pay, say, the 1.03?

Yes I would. He's just entering his prime and will play for a long time (unless he gets killed behind that line, which is a possibility I suppose).

Edited by Andy Dufresne
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Would you pay, say, the 1.03?

I wouldn't but it's pretty close.  I have 1.03 in one league and I have it reserved for Mixon, assuming he doesn't have any disasters between now and then.  If Mixon weren't in the picture and QB was a big need I probably would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Brisco54 said:

I was talking about Tyreek Hill, not Jeremy... as was the guy I quoted, I think (but I could be wrong).  As far as Tyreek's upside, I would say about WR15

 Your evaluation seems about right but it's kind of crazy to see hill was a top 10 receiver this year and is being valued below that. 

15 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Would you pay, say, the 1.03?  

Very close, I think the 3 is the asking price if I have luck but in 12 team leagues I wouldn't pay a top 3 pick, probably 4 or 5. Depends on need and league scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hankmoody said:

I wouldn't but it's pretty close.  I have 1.03 in one league and I have it reserved for Mixon, assuming he doesn't have any disasters between now and then.  If Mixon weren't in the picture and QB was a big need I probably would.

I'm struggling with this but with getting 2018 picks in return.  Any thoughts on what Luck should be worth there?  (Start 1 QB league.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spike said:

I'm struggling with this but with getting 2018 picks in return.  Any thoughts on what Luck should be worth there?  (Start 1 QB league.)

Trading for picks a year out can be tricky.  I'd want at least two 2018 1sts for him.  That assuming I had a viable replacement.  I wouldn't make that move if I then had to send one of the picks for a QB. 

Edited by Concept Coop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Concept Coop said:

Trading for picks a year out can be tricky.  I'd want at least two 2018 1sts for him.  That assuming I had a viable replacement.  I wouldn't make that move if I then had to send one of the picks for a QB. 

You make sense.  I also have Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Alex Smith and Kirk Cousins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Yes I would. He's just entering his prime and will play for a long time (unless he gets killed behind that line, which is a possibility I suppose).

I would probably trade 1.1 for him if I was rebuilding (earned the 1.1). I don't feel confident about any of the WR. Why not secure a safe player and go from there. I like that his stats this year are basically a carbon copy of 2 years ago before the shoulder injury, same rating, same avg yards per attempt, slightly higher %.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, fruity pebbles said:

what kind of rookie pick is Jordy Nelson worth? 32 at the start of next season but coming off a very good year.

Struggling with this as well. Have been thinking about offering up a young WR3 type like Sterling Shepard who seems to have a low ceiling long term, wondering what I should be trying to get back it anything. Jordy is showing he can win without getting separation, which means his game will age well as long as he stays healthy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

Struggling with this as well. Have been thinking about offering up a young WR3 type like Sterling Shepard who seems to have a low ceiling long term, wondering what I should be trying to get back it anything. Jordy is showing he can win without getting separation, which means his game will age well as long as he stays healthy. 

Quick reaction is that as a contending Jordy owner I'd move him for pick 5 or earlier and wouldn't for pick 9 or later.  In the middle coin toss, have to get a better feel for rookies coming out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, djmich said:

Quick reaction is that as a contending Jordy owner I'd move him for pick 5 or earlier and wouldn't for pick 9 or later.  In the middle coin toss, have to get a better feel for rookies coming out. 

I would be pretty surprised if Jordy were pulling down a top 5 pick anywhere.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with needing at least a top 5 for Jordy. But, I won the championship this year and have a real shot again next year. I don't care if Jordy is 133 years old. If he's putting up numbers, I'm holding as tight as I can until my championship window closes.

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.