Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Catbird

  1. Gage is a lot easier to move into more of a time share with, or even pass up over the season, than Julio.
  2. The projection clearly takes Miller's injury into account (and then some). Projecting 942 yards for a guy who has 941 yards for the first 3 years of his career and is in probably as bad a QB and overall offense situation as exists in the game, is a huge reach. With his injury propensity, imo, a good over/under would be about half of that.
  3. Those who have owned and watched him put up 4 weak years for a WR 2 with Rivers and Herbert at QB, only surpassing 760 yards once know not to project him for fourteen hundred yards. He's a clogger you have to hold because no one will give you his value and yet he isn't ever an asset unless Allen is hurt. I'll toss my darts elsewhere.
  4. Just saying, but if an assaulted woman just wants justice, she would be a LOT more credible (and more likely to be believed) by going to law enforcement and not having a civil suit pending (which badly cuts into her credibility on motive for pursuing it). I am often left wondering why victims of violent crime, where the perp has resources making a civil case meaningful, don't let the criminal system go forward first and wait - something like 85% of crimes charged turn into plea convictions if not convictions at trial - so that when they have to testify there is no civil suit pending to hurt their credibility and so that when they do pursue the civil case they already have a ''beyond a reasonable doubt" conviction of record (which can often slip into the subsequent civil case depending on local rules and attorney skills) to help convince the civil fact finder of guilt.
  5. It seems to me the likelihood of settlement is heightened by the GJ scheduling. You would think Watson would want to have it settled before the GJ meets so that the women will have been paid and have far less reason to try and push the more extreme asserted facts under intense interrogation with the money already in their pockets and nothing more to gain. For the women, you would think they risk losing a lot of the pressure on Watson to settle if some (and particularly if all) charges are dropped by the GJ. This is unlikely as GJs virtually always bring a true bill, but it would be pretty devastating if in any cases they didn't. One thing we don't know is how strongly the DA feels about bringing charges. If some women haven't openly discussed their facts with investigators or sound less than truthful, or even if the DA doesn't see it as worth taking up the time it will with publicity and media attention, that can have a huge impact on what evidence gets brought to the GJ and how credibly the DA presents it. __________________ Unrelated thought: Risking the anger of many, I think the 'What were you wearing?' question is slightly different in a situation where two people who don't know each other have already agreed to meet, where what they are wearing is only chosen for that meeting and where that private meeting is in a circumstance which is already kind of sexually undefined in many people's mind and where both might be reading the nature of their interaction, in part, from such clues. I imagine that women in this work regularly deal with men who want a more sexual interaction than the masseuse intends. It seems to me that both participants here can give strong clues about what they anticipate happening by what they choose to wear. I just think what both chose to wear here is more relevant than what a women wore to town shopping or going to a party before she is threatened or assaulted. (I'm open to being educated if this is an ignorant view?)
  6. Same response here. I like to be able to go to a player thread and read everything in chronological order about the player. Its not difficult to go to any particular injury or suspension or discussion of his hold on his job. If issues overlap, that just shows a better picture of what his situation is. I want to open the last couple of pages in a thread and have the most current information about all that's newsworthy with that player. I am okay with discussions being in separate threads and linked back to the main thread, but it isn't as useful to me as keeping them all together. If you look at the pool several times a day like most of us, you generally know pf anything major involving a particular player and if something new comes up it's right there and you are pretty up to date (or can go do more research). Two good changes, if doable, would be to have the player's name in every title (as mentioned above) and to allow the most recent poster to re-name the thread (keeping the player name). That would keep new issue ID easy and obvious. I don't think the naming right would be abused any more than it is now and it wouldn't be still sitting there outdated several months after the fact. Its not a huge issue to me. I'll still be here however this works out. I just favor having as many player threads as possible on the first and second page, and fear that splintering each player into all the threads that their fans deem newsworthy would reduce the players per page and force us to go through many more pages of threads to get the same breadth of coverage.
  7. For a Jets fan, you are about as negative as you possibly can be. Some good things seem to be happening. You seem to be looking for the worst. I understand being realistic and not thinking they are playoff material unless and until they show they can be, but being negative on Carter, Wilson and Moore at this point seems an Eeyore view.
  8. I started in 1985, and know the league (still going strong) started at least the year before, but I believe 1983 in Denver. Its always been and remains16 team and SF. Opening lineup: QBs Bill Kenney, KC Mark Malone PIT RBs Greg Bell, BUF George ROGERS, WAS WRs Tony Hill, DAL Billy "White Shoes" Johnson, ATL Henry Ellard, LA TE Eric Sievers, SD K Mike Lansford, LA Bench: Eddie Lee Ivory RB GB Ted Brown, RB, MIN Ken Lacy, RB, KC Kenny Jackson, WR, PHI Jerry Bell, TE, TB Apparently finished 8-6
  9. Testimony IS evidence. Nearly all criminal cases depend, at least in part, on testimony as to the facts. 20+ people telling the same story and feeling themselves threatened and coerced in a vulnerable setting by a professional football player will be believed. I think nearly everyone involved is rooting for a settlement. The league would be able to penalize DeShaun and begin effective damage control. Obviously, Watson doesn't want it to crush him financially, but taking the focus off the occurrence and what evidence will be coming out will make his life easier and make it much more possible for teams to trade for him. The Texans can get a better trade price and be able to take a step out from under this over-whelming cloud. They can't work very hard on trading Watson before that without accepting a minimal return. The women most likely want to get compensated - I'm thinking that is why they responded when the attorneys were tracking down cases. Some may want their day in court (either so they can make more money through their book or because they truthfully want to opportunity to tell what happened and what he did). With a settlement they can do a book anyway telling the untold story and a settlement takes away the chance of getting little or nothing and all the stress of testifying about other facts that may get uncomfortable in their line of business. The lawyers ALWAYS want to settle and get paid. They will be getting at least 7 times what each of the women will (assuming 1/3 of 20+ settlement figures). I think it's now mostly about a figure the women will accept that Watson can pay. The plaintiffs are probably hoping to benefit from football picking up and the increased focus and so pressure on Watson. I think it's very likely to settle, and I think that hope has the team and the NFL holding off. Plaintiffs like the added pressure. If they settle and there isn't a felony criminal charge filed or that gets pled out to misdemeanors, the league can probably get away with a 9 game (just over half season) suspension and start sweeping the rest under the carpet. Just my guess.
  10. In April, I traded Hunt, Shenault and a late 1st (1.31 in a 32 team league) for James Robinson, a 2nd and a 3rd. This turned out to probably be the ATL Falcons of D32's best trade ever.
  11. Worldwide, more than 10,000 people have caught Covid and died (not to mention how many more have suffered apparently permanent brain and/or physical injuries) for every one who has suffered any life threatening effects from getting vaccinated. Choosing between is just natural selection at work. Beasley is one thing, but losing Nuk would cripple both the Cardinals and Murray's value, although it could be a small plus for Kirk, AJG and possibly Isabella.
  12. Because he won't be in a timeshare with a guy who is better than him and an RB1 candidate?
  13. A lot depends on how you are looking at it. If its today's game, luck will usually decide it, although skill will generally give one team an advantage going in. Over time, however, the players who win your league the most, those who make the finals often and quarter finals nearly every year are more skilled than the guys who seldom make the playoffs. Luck can conceivably impact this for stretches and can even create dramatic winning and losing streaks, but it is not hard to see what good moves a skilled player makes (great trades they make, waiver pickups, productive ends to drafts) when they are successful. Unfortunately, I too seldom see those moves BEFORE someone makes them, and so fail to gain the advantage they do. It is hard for me to believe that someone who is trying hard in a league can't see skill (which I use to include hard work) making a real difference over time. Does anyone think the repeat and 3-peat league champions aren't doing it better than the cellar dwellers? Do you think their year after year or two out of every three year dominance is just an endless run of blind luck?
  14. The other huge thing here is that guys will not do what ADP suggests they will or anything vaguely like it. A third of them will lose significant time to injury. Others will be diminished by teammate injuries or teammate breakthroughs. Guys will regress where everyone thought they would thrive. Guys you've barely heard of will get a chance and turn out they are far better than assumed. If you ever look at a list of pre-season ADPs and compare it to post season, the two will look like almost random listings with little or nothing in common. It is easy to think ADP is something real that states player value. Its really just a lot of people's best guesses. It will turn out that less than 20% of players will end up within 25 slots of the WR or RB they were supposed to be. If you "reached" for any of the 10 or 20 (or 40 or whatever) RBs that it turns out finish better than who you had atop your RB list at that moment, you improved by "reaching" for them. Know what the ADP suggests as consensus best guess, but have no qualms about picking anyone in the fairly close range of players you trust or believe in. If you look at a list of player projections, ADP may have a range of 15 players listed in order, but per game projections may have all 15 of those at 7.4 points per game or maybe some at 7.4 and the others at 7.3. There is no meaningful difference between the whole bunch. If you think one guy looks better than those around him, or you like one guy's work ethic or strength or hands or whatever, go with it. I try not to leap wildly from ADP, but I look favorably at the next guy or two I like whenever my turn comes up. I also tend to feel even freer to "reach" when that reach is to a lesser known player. I think ADPs, by nature, give extra support to the better known players.
  15. I think you're napping a little bit on Firkser, who I think has shown more likely potential and better ceiling than Uzomah - although I agree that neither is likely to ever be a TE1.
  16. You know your guys, but I am sure everyone will wait under the circumstances. I would send that out as a suggestion. If anyone has a huge problem, I would cover for their prize (it doesn't sound like that will be any huge amount). If the worst happens and he hasn't paid off the others, I would explain that and assess enough funds divided equally between the others to pay the uncollected prizes and just call that a cost of league maintenance. If someone won't do that, you have several choices, but I bet everyone will. Paying the difference yourself should be he last option..
  17. I think there are many paths to skill-based success. I hear TeeZee's study of the players physical and mental. I think others have great success reading what scouts report. Some study and develop a talent for reading rookies and excel in their rookie drafts. Others focus on established players and maybe analyze NFL teams structures for where change can be anticipated, Some emphasize player development and career tracks to project future results. Some spend the time to develop targets vacated and available as one way of distinguishing from compiled ADP. Most who are good get really good at a one or a few of these or other ways to calculate beyond the general patter and assumptions. If we get good at any particular system, I think we tend to believe our approach is the only good system because chances are we aren't also good at other whole approaches. Maybe we have tried to, for example, evaluate rookies from college performance numbers and not had success in rookie drafts and then instead find a way to look at older players and capitalize on where careers are heading and find success at that. I think a guy like that tends to think success at rookie drafts is luck and evaluating between older players, skill. You may believe that some people just have permanent good or bad luck. I don't believe any source is pulling the strings to help some guy's fantasy team, so I think that evens out. If you don't have a more successful strategy and analysis than average, I believe over time you will be less successful than average (unless you develop one). These guys tend to think no one really knows more than they do, so losing must be luck. Guys who win more (that can be by a small percentage in very good leagues and by a higher percentage in less competitive leagues) generally know they can have more than their equal share of success and don't think its primarily luck. I'll admit that I've had success that I didn't deserve on several occasions. Good luck can certainly exist in an opponent's player or players getting injured or having terrible games at key moments and I can have similar bad luck in a particular playoff or weekend, but I think more skilled managers tend to make playoffs and win more than their equal share of championships and that just because others don't know how the more skilled are succeeding doesn't mean they aren't more skilled..
  18. Nice offer. If his purpose is to help, why wouldn't he call Tebow and offer it rather than declaring it to the world?
  19. I have a slight bias against coaches sons. I feel they likely got to the top in part because of the years of focused coaching mixed with physical attributes. For players coming into the pros, if 2 guys seem equal and one is a coaches son, I am inclined to favor the other guy because I figure in the pros all coaching advantage will be equaled out and so the guy who made it more on attributes other than coaching will end up ahead. So, unless Van shows something special physically (which I don't think he has as yet), I'm not investing.
  20. I think the concern here is more with Fields than Dalton. No need to put the kid in a situation where he 'loses' a competition when the reality was that he had very little or no chance to win and start. I doubt it makes a noticeable difference to Field's development, but I think it benefits a rookie QB to watch some games through an experienced QBs eyes and see how the older players handles a lot of choices and unanticipated occurrences. I think it just shortens the learning curve and helps cut down on the rookie mistakes.
  21. I'm just looking at player rankings. I set the filters for a 12 team league, .5 PPR listed the league's numbers for starters (1 QB, 2 RBs, 3WRs) and it sorted and replied with the results I listed. If its not showing this to anyone else, its probably something I entered incorrectly?
  22. Thanks for providing this! I do have ranking problems with Mahomes being the #1 pick in a 1 QB league with .5 PPR and with 3 QBs (and both early and mid first round rookie draft picks) going in the first 11 highest valued players? I didn't get any further.
  23. At some point fairly quickly in a rookie draft the RBs who have the resume and obvious talent to be an NFL starter are gone. At that point you hopefully have starters and at least 1 or 2 solid or high potential developing backups/. The question Rhamondre raises is what else do you want to draft when everything (4th round NFL draft or later?) has warts. We are typically picking from guys who seem to have all around talent who never showed much in college, 3rd down backs who may fill that role immediately, very lightweight runners who performed well in college or guys with skills that couldn't show how good due to injuries. Stevenson's warts include a long (although very productive) wander through college, little time as a 3 down lead back, a marijuana bust and suspension and being picked by the Pats. His skills, though, are probably the best suited to a 3 down back of anyone left after the sure 3, Sermon and maybe Carter. I am generally a talent over situation guy when it comes to backups. This guy will probably just be a Blount-esque RBBC member - if he even gets to the top of that sub-group - but he has 2 things: he has the range of skills to be an NFL 3 down back and, as outlined by Rockaction, without Brady and with Cam not long for anything, BB may be more open to the value of not letting the defense know on every play whether you are going to pass or run. If not, maybe he just becomes Blount and a guy you can stick in to cover for injuries and byes. Not a terrible return for a 3rd round pick.
  24. I'm not in disagreement here with the Evans side, but my basic view is that if you aren't building, you're standing still. Even if you're real good, that's how you get caught from behind or left posing.
  25. I agree the Darnold to Moore connection isn't going to be very productive.
  • Create New...