Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

JPeso

Members
  • Posts

    12,456
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JPeso

  1. The more you pay on top of market value, the less margin for error there is. If you're wrong - and we all are, a lot - you surrendered massive value. Nobody's hit rate is anything close to 100%, and smart owners realize that, and act accordingly.If you pay for Spiller like he is top 5, here are your scenerios:1. You are right: Spiller is worth what you paid for him; even trade.2. You are wrong: Spiller is not worth what you paid for him; you lose.I am not advocating paying top 5 right now if his market value is much lower (which I dont think it is). I am "ranking" him in the top 5. I think JPeso was saying the same thing (at least thats how I interpreted him saying that market was much lower but that he is actually top 5).Right, last offseason, you wouldn't pay RB5 price for spiller last year because you wouldn't have had to do that (unless you played against someone who didn't think the secret was a secret). But at RB15 cost, certainly, or..what if you paid RB10 and put your league in a tizzy with a lopsided deal out of favor. Spiller is an interesting one because of the time he has been chained up; he has presented several opportunities for a call for or against his value: - rookie draft over Mathews - rookie draft over Best - anytime during his rookie year - year 1 offseason - anytime during his second year - year 2 offseason Spiller can either win you titles right now and next and next and who knows, or you can sell him to someone for (rightfully so) big money if your team can hack losing a lord like that.
  2. Miles Austin + a new hamstring = DT, talent/production wise.No chance, and I was admittedly higher on Austin at his prime than I should have been. Healthy hammy or not he cannot hold DT's jock.
  3. So Miles Austin + "a little more talent" = DT?
  4. This actually makes Jennings all the more important to base this off of and why I specifically used him. He was viewed as uber-stable as he did it for more than a year.
  5. But what if the best player in the deal simply isn't viewed as such at that point in history? I think this is off topic. We're assuming the "best player" is a stable elite player, and the other side is a bunch of non-elite "stuff". It's a good point about staying ahead of the curve, but no one said follow market value religiously. I'm sure most have rejected offers with good market value just because it didn't fit their strategy or mood. I think that's a bad example. I had an orphan team I took over in 2010 and picked Jennings in a contraction draft 2 or 3 spots ahead of Thomas. Jennings 2010 and 2011 points mattered. While I'd love to have Thomas in that league now, I wouldn't give back the banners. Virtual as they may be. If you stick with Jennings, you know why you're making that choice. If someone offers you a top 4 pick for Roddy White or Andre Johnson (or perhaps Decker is a better example - still young but window of possible eliteness is small) it is still a reasonable strategy to turn it down. Really whether you should do a trade or not should be based on 1) team strategy, 2) personal dogma, and 3) market value. In that order.First point - what you, me, and a third owner consider to be stable are probably all different. Predicting stability isn't something everyone is good at doing. If you think I'm off topic, by all means you are entitled to that opinion.Second point - let's say it was Greg Jennings and Dez Bryant who was providing more short-term. Hypothetically speaking...say you dealt Jennings + 1st for Dez when Jennings was marketed far higher than Dez, it didn't cost you a title and it sure isn't costing anything now. Similarly, the year before that, say you dealt Jennings + 2nd for Nicks, won the title that year, dealt Nicks in to Dez the next season. In both cases you dealt the best player with a high assumed stability. If you don't agree with the comparison, that is fine and I can find another others."Best player" and "stability" are relative terms. The deciphering of such terms, I'd argue, are fantastic indicators of pack separation.
  6. But what if the best player in the deal simply isn't viewed as such at that point in history? For instance, siding with Greg Jennings over Demaryius Thomas two years ago. Jennings was the ore valuable market piece, sure, and was certainly considered the better player, but playing dynasty robotic without the use of your own eyes and valuation system leads you to mediocrity. I've never competed with you so I do not suggest you are a mediocre owner, but this logic is flawed for dynasty and much more applicable to a redraft setting.ETA - The exception, of course, is if you rely on raping leaguemates with 50% of your trades and then playing by market with the other 50% of your trades. Once your teams are strong, the former is damn near impossible regardless of the relative strength/weakness of your leaguemates.
  7. I drafted Greene in one start up that I royally effed up when I tried to draft 100% by the market and then trade what I didn't like after. Greene was one of my choices. Immediately after drafting him, as I watched more and more, I became sick to my stomach with what I had done. I felt dirty. Luckily I was able to dump that slime for what turned out to be the 1.1 before week 1 of his rookie year to a guy that believed in him. I, too, fell in to the trap of suggesting he was near Rudi. Rudi actually was a decent runner though. I understand being wrong on a player, I am wrong plenty of times, but trying to defend being wrong on the guy after what we know now is nothing short of stubborn and irrational. The thing with cats like Greene, if they turn a short-term profit quickly, it's all well and good. But as we get years in to the RBBC approach, these guys have less and less opportunity to turn the short-term profit (either in scoring or in trades), thus the market for these guys is relatively non-existent. Who wants a guy that will average 10-12 points per in PPR? I sure as hell do not.
  8. I like him, but isn't he facing Cromartie this week? Is that a tough matchup?:yes:I'd still consider starting Britt. Just not over someone like Marshall.He's teasing me in a few spots this week. Matchup and all, I'd really like to just roll him out there and let him work. No nails by Sunday at 1.
  9. Fred deserveD his playing time, sure, but he's not been nearly effective as last year. He plods and misses holes. He deserves 25-30% of the share of a backfield with Spiller. With no Spiller, sure, he's still capable of being a lead back, but you don't waste a top 5 talent like Spiller.
  10. The year is not over for him to get damn near that, and considering you weren't having to spend top 3 to get him in most redrafts, I'd say he's still been a value and will prove to be when it counts 14-16 as well.
  11. I was able to bring myself to sit Jones in one league for Dez. Outside of that, I trotted him out of his stable and he went to work for the greater good. I'm extremely comfortable here.
  12. Ponder has to get his #### together.
  13. I'd love to hear if you have any luck. I guess it all depends on your league format (redraft, keeper, dynasty), but as a Spiller owner in a keeper league, I would have to absolutely blown away with an offer to part ways with him. Maybe I'm biased, but I don't think there's one RB out there with more upside than Spiller.In a keeper format, this might be the last chance at getting him. Full workload, prime time game, good match up...At this point, I think you might have to offer too much for Spiller. Any savvy Spiller owner knows what kind of talent they have with this player.What is too much? 75% of what would need to be offered for Foster? 90%? 100%?The only RB i'd trade him for straight up would be Foster and ADP. I'd consider Doug Martin as well, but luckily I own Martin in the same league as Spiller. I've held onto Spiller this whole time waiting for an opportunity like this, no way I'm selling him now unless someone is willing to buy very high.Disclaimer: Redraft league You are nuts. ADP/ lynch/ rice/ even mcgehee/forte/shady probably have more value in a redraft due to the rbbc. Don't make the same mistake as owners who shipped Doug martin for spiller after kc saying "no way valley stays with old ### Freddy jackson after this!.."But he's outscoring all but 5 RBs SHORT-TERM...WITH FRED. The numbers don't lie. AP/Rice/McCoy/Foster/Martin I can understand from a redraft setting. After that?
  14. At what point is this argument not considered hype anymore for you?
  15. I'd love to hear if you have any luck. I guess it all depends on your league format (redraft, keeper, dynasty), but as a Spiller owner in a keeper league, I would have to absolutely blown away with an offer to part ways with him. Maybe I'm biased, but I don't think there's one RB out there with more upside than Spiller.In a keeper format, this might be the last chance at getting him. Full workload, prime time game, good match up...At this point, I think you might have to offer too much for Spiller. Any savvy Spiller owner knows what kind of talent they have with this player.What is too much? 75% of what would need to be offered for Foster? 90%? 100%?
  16. Mid-level would be top 6-7. I don't think he's been that. Low-level RB1 is where I would guess his stats place him, while splitting time with Jackson.I play in PPR. Spiller is RB6 in PPG, RB7 overall. 26, 32, 14, 5 (8 carries for 33, 2 catches for 5) , 2 (7 carries for 24), 21, 16, 15, 17. So, while we can say weeks 1 and 2 were pre-Jackson, we can also say that the low two numbers are due to being limited with his injury. I'd say he's right around 16-17 with Jackson and the silly workload we're seeing, on par with his current PPG. Without Jackson he's a 24+ point back.
  17. Only hope here is Jackson misses the game, Spiller performs like weeks 1 & 2, and Gailey flips their workload in Spiller's favor (60-40 going to CJ). Otherwise, Gailey seems too stubborn to change the status quo. If Spiller gets around 60% of the touches, I think he's a low RB1 for the rest of the season. But he's already been a mid-level RB1 with less than that.
  18. Those offers aren't very good, I'm not surprised they got quickly declined.Yes I think I was offering a little low on them, . Just gone back with Brady, BJGE and Decker for CJ and Cam in my PPR league, which I think is an overpay but everything I'm reading here says CJ is top5 going forward so its buy now or neverThat's even worse than your initial offer.
  19. Any other Spiller owners still getting putrid value offers on him? Even worse, the comments in the proposals always seem to state he is in a committee. I guess RB7 in PPG in PPR still isn't enough.
×
  • Create New...