Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Just Win Baby

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Just Win Baby

  1. Hines was there last season, though, and Taylor was outstanding during the second half of the season. From weeks 9-17, in PPR Taylor was #4 in RB points (162.8), despite missing a game and despite the fact that Hines was #11 in RB points (114.3). Among RBs who started at least 4 games in that stretch, Taylor was #5 in ppg, behind only Montgomery, Kamara, Cook, and Henry.
  2. But your post said how long will people chase 2019. My point is, he's the same guy with the same opportunity for the foreseeable future. "How long will people chase" makes it sound like they are chasing production he will not replicate. But there is no reason to think that IMO.
  3. I could be wrong, but I don't think he was lightning in a bottle at all. At least not unless he proves to be unable to stay on the field. His production has been impressive since the first time he got opportunity. And he has virtually no competition on the roster for touches. And he is playing in the Payton/Shanahan offense. As for Lindsay/Cohen, were either of them ever RB6 in a full season?
  4. What do you mean, exactly? My last post in the Ekeler thread: Sure he will. What is the alternative? The other RBs are Justin Jackson, Joshua Kelley, and Larry Rountree. Ekeler was RB #13 in ppg last season (PPR); #6 in 2019, and #25 in 2018, despite the fact that Gordon was also #5 that season. Last season, though he was RB #13 in overall ppg, he was RB #7 in total points (PPR) in weeks 1-3, then got hurt in week 4 and didn't play again until week 12. He was RB #6 in total points in weeks 12-17. So in the 9 healthy games he had last season, we was RB
  5. Same league. Startup draft starts tomorrow. It is a third-round reversal draft, so I originally had 1.1, 2.12, 3.12, 4.1, and so on. Another trade: Gave up 2021 Draft Pick 1.02; 2021 Draft Pick 2.12; 2021 Draft Pick 3.12 Got 2021 Draft Pick 1.10; 2021 Draft Pick 2.03; 2021 Draft Pick 3.03 Combining the two trades, I think I got pretty good return for moving from 1.1 to 1.10 (-9 spots): Moved from 2.12 to 2.3 (+9 spots) Moved from 3.12 to 3.3 (+9 spots) Moved from 10.1 to 8.2 (+23 spots) I didn't really want a QB at 1.1 or 1.2 due to the depressed QB scorin
  6. @Dan Hinderyfor an atypical scoring system, I don't get intuitive results. 12 team Superflex dynasty. Start 1Q 1R 2W 1T 4F 1SF 1K 1DST. PPR by position: 0.75 RB, 1 WR, 1.25 TE. QB scoring drastically reduced: 1/30 passing yards, 2.67/passing TD, 1/15 rushing yards, 4/rushing TD. All other scoring not noted is normal. WIth the slider on 5 (balanced), here is the top 20: QB Mahomes QB Allen QB Murray QB Jackson QB Herbert QB Prescott TE Pitts QB Burrow QB Lawrence TE Kittle QB Lance QB Wilson WR Jefferson
  7. Using the Superflex draft value chart for June by @Dan Hindery: Lance (2.8) = QB9, value 40 Hockenson (4.9) = TE5, value 18 Claypool (6.9) = WR24, value 19 Result = +3 for @oukurt Ridley (3.5) = WR8, value 34 DJ Moore (5.4) = WR13, value 28 Gaskin (7.4) = RB26, value 10 Result = -4 for kurt Wasn't sure how to value the draft pick, so I looked at the top 12 rookies drafted in your startup: Pitts (1.6) = TE1, value 30 Lawrence (1.11) = QB8, value 43 Fields (2.7) = QB11, value 36 Lance (2.8) = QB9, value 40 Harris
  8. I love the passive aggressive "sorry it caused you harm." It didn't "cause me harm." I just don't want to see that stuff in the Shark Pool. If I want to see it, I'll go to ACF. Thanks for adhering to the standards of the forums.
  9. Prime example of what I just posted. With all due respect, this thread is not the Assistant Coach Forum. Reccommend you take these posts over there.
  10. Seems like this thread has turned into an ACF-like thread. Is that the intent here? I liked it better when it wasn't that.
  11. @ZWK, any chance you will post your updated RB rankings soon? And post-draft WR and TE rankings?
  12. My immediate thought was: "Do you believe in miracles?!" My second thought was of this ESPN video from the turn of the century: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldQwkO3Rxr4. I am not a big fan of ESPN nowadays, but that was well done. It contains many of the moments mentioned in this thread.
  13. Disagree. If Notre Dame is a top 4 team, they should get a top 4 seed. If #1 Alabama beats previously undefeated #2 Georgia in the SEC championship game, leaving Georgia with a single loss in that game to the #1 team in the country at a neutral site, Georgia should get a top 4 seed. To do otherwise is silly. Without implementing the requirement that the top seeds be conference champions, it is very likely that the top 4 seeds will almost always be conference winners. But when they shouldn't be, they shouldn't be. This is not rocket science. To say the bolded ignores that the best two
  14. So looking like it may go to 12. Two fun things from it: 1) No potential for ND getting a bye. 2) At some point, southern teams are going to have to come north in the dead of winter. That will be interesting. Surprised there isn't more discussion about this. IMO requiring the top 4 seeds to be conference champions is dumb. It should be the top 4 teams, period. I also think it would be better if the second round games were hosted by the higher seeds rather than at neutral sites.
  15. Yeah I agree. I know it generated a bit of discussion already but Aiyuk as a top 10 WR shouldn't be considered a hot take or something. It's ok to disagree (I just spent a future 1st in our Shark Pool startup to move up and get him) but all you did is say he has a chance. And more or less that you like him. As a general bet we should all be taking the field and betting the under, but here on Earth we have to put *somebody* in our lineups and if we're talking about who *could* be a perennial top 10 WR, Aiyuk seems a really good candidate. I have some concerns about targets shares on
  16. Falling back on "he has a chance" simply puts him into a group with a lot other guys who "have a chance." Wherever you would put his odds of achieving that, I'm guessing I would take the under.
  17. Put some numbers to it. "Tilted the field" means what, exactly? How many yards per game did his team gain with him as its returner rather than a league average returner? Now compare that number of yards to the number of yards fringe HOF players contributed to their teams (e.g., Reggie Wayne, Tiki Barber). Or compare that number of yards to the yards gained by teams due to the above average play of offensive linemen, through quality pass blocking and/or run blocking... guys who will not have a shot at HOF were more impactful. Or compare that number of yards to the yards not gained by oppoe
  18. I agree with your no answer, but not because it's too difficult to get appropriate compensation. Chark had a breakout season in 2019 with poor to average QB play and then a disappointing fantasy season in 2020 with bottom of NFL level QB play. He played 13 games with these QBs: Minshew (8), Glennon (4), and Luton (2). (Minshew and Glennon both played in game 14.) Per PlayerProfiler: Chark had 544 completed air yards (#34 in NFL) but 756 "unrealized air yards " (#9) Chark's catchable target rate was 70.2% (#91) and his target accuracy was 6.54 (#98) These metrics help to
  19. Agree 100%. Several years ago we had some great discussions about this in the Shark Pool. I think it is demonstrable that players who are fully or primarily special teams players deliver significantly less impact than quality starters on offense and defense, and we showed that in those previous discussions. I remember specifically going through this for Tasker and Vinatieri, among others. There are only three ways any kicker, punter, gunner, or returner should ever make the HOF: Some kind of pioneering/innovation aspect to his play that changed the game. He happened to also ex
  20. I am not sure I agree here. By that I mean the best player to have isn't necessarily the #1 overall guy if next year he drops to #50 and then the year after back to #30 then to #1. I am assuming you are looking at a non-QB based on your statement but is that really the best way to go? I want consistency for a long time if I am starting my team and getting the #1 high floor and high ceiling QB for the next 8 years seems like a good way to go. I just don't see a RB or WR that would be a better selection for that pick. If I was trading the 1.01 in a startup I would w
  21. Yeah, I mentioned that QB scoring is significantly depressed... for example, Mahomes ranked as #14 in ppg in 2020 and tied for #25 in 2019. He would certainly provide stability for the long term, but that is not the level of performance I want from the 1.1 pick.
  22. 12 team Superflex PPR league, but QB scoring is significantly depressed. Start 1Q, 1R, 2W, 1T, 4F, 1SF, 1K, 1DST... so 96 RB/WR/TE players will start every week even if a QB starts in every Superflex spot. Startup draft begins in a couple weeks. Gave up 2021 Draft Pick 1.01; 2021 Draft Pick 10.01 Got 2021 Draft Pick 1.02; 2021 Draft Pick 8.02
  23. I agree with this, and so do most others. Probably one of the few things we can unanimously agree on. So groupthink is to not like groupthink... so we should like groupthink?
  • Create New...