Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Proust Loves Cake

Members
  • Posts

    329
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Proust Loves Cake

  1. Do you pay attention better here on the FFA? And, if so, does that mean we are more interesting than True Detective? I guess I am one of the few who is really enjoying this season so far. And I do find it much more helpful to watch the show with subtitles turned on. I get so much more information. Totally agree. Not as good as the last season in both acting and direction, but it's better than 99% of what's out there. I'm hooked.
  2. I don't want to get flayed here but...she did in the books.cool. any other book stuff you want to share with us in this non-book thread? Sure. Jamie and Bronn never went to Dorne in the books. Why don't you post in the varsity thread? Why is it so hard to comprehend "books don't exist" in the thread title? I know that nothing you're saying amounts to a spoiler but it doesn't matter. Some of us watch the show and then read the books and don't want to know what does/doesn't happen. Someone posted that it was odd that something didn't happen. I thought it would be notable to point out that it's a good thing to note since it was written in the book that way. As you say, it's not a spoiler, so what's the big deal? As the show is passing the book in many respects, I didn't think mentioning the fact that books exist would still get to so many panties in a bunch. There's a whole thread about the Daredevil TV series and once in awhile someone mentions some context from the comics - amazingly it doesn't result in a bunch of whining. In any case, a thousand apologies, I'll stop upsetting you so much. Just. Go. Away.
  3. He seems to address the second part of your question pretty clearly here: I also like his earlier comparison to 2006 Stephen Jackson and 2007 rookie, Adrian Peterson. The example's strong because Jackson was no slouch and put up crazy good numbers the year (much like Bell in 2014) before we all had our first opportunity to draft AP (much like Gurley in 2015). Conventional wisdom would be take SJAX/Bell, they were young, proven, and you can't be 100 % sure how a rookie will translate to the NFL. Plus, working against AP was the valid perception of being stuck in a crummy situation in Minnesota (6 wins, Brad Johnson at QB). If it were 2007 and we were having this discussion, ghostguy would probably be telling us anyone would be nuts to take AP over SJAX. And while SJAX continued to have some very good seasons (much like I expect Bell could string together assuming nothing changes), it still would have been better to dismiss what the group or ghost guy said and take the rookie. The play at that time was to step aside a really good, productive back and with a little foresight, take the better talent--a generational talent--in AP, even though he had no NFL track record and SJAX had just come off a spectacular campaign.Is Gurley a generational talent? That's the unknown, but my eyes and spidey senses tell me yes he is. And I am not going to lose any sleep passing on Bell to find out with Gurley on my team and no one else's. that's kind of a terrible way of looking at it --- you just cherry picked some situation that already happened, removing all the risk out of the situation to make some kind of point. I'm just kind of skimming the conversation, so I might not have this right, but I think some guy's entire point was factoring in that risk that you just removed. what if we change peterson to trent richardson and sjax to anyone ---- aha! now he's right and you're wrong! I think you should take whoever you want to take, but what a lot of people do in these drafts when they evaluate players is discount the risk, thinking there opinion is rock solid 100%, which of course it never is. when a rookie enters the league, or when graham switches teams, etc, there's always risk that needs to be accounted for whether you think it's there or not. There clearly is risk. Gurley could bust like Trent. In the other hand, i can't deny that my own eyes confirm a lot of things talent evaluators a lot more trained, experienced, and expert than me say... That he is pretty darn close to having that AP skill set. He looks nothing like Trent. But there's clearly risk involved. But, the point I'm also making is that the tendency to undersell/minimize risk of "established" players. Bell has an inordinate number of red flags for me, including his usage last year which is not sustainable, as well as his own injury history / risk, and character concerns given he had already been suspended in his short career. So, while you're right that i and others might be at risk for Gurley to not live up to the hype, i have to trust what I've seen--that he's unusually talented--and that Bell is being overvlaued by folks who think last year will just keep happening over and over again.
  4. Fine. So am I. You were the one who created the shiny new things strawman in the first place, so take a deep breath and just accept that some folks are lower on Bell and higher on Gurley than you are. No need to make a big stink about it.
  5. He seems to address the second part of your question pretty clearly here: I also like his earlier comparison to 2006 Stephen Jackson and 2007 rookie, Adrian Peterson. The example's strong because Jackson was no slouch and put up crazy good numbers the year (much like Bell in 2014) before we all had our first opportunity to draft AP (much like Gurley in 2015). Conventional wisdom would be take SJAX/Bell, they were young, proven, and you can't be 100 % sure how a rookie will translate to the NFL. Plus, working against AP was the valid perception of being stuck in a crummy situation in Minnesota (6 wins, Brad Johnson at QB). If it were 2007 and we were having this discussion, ghostguy would probably be telling us anyone would be nuts to take AP over SJAX. And while SJAX continued to have some very good seasons (much like I expect Bell could string together assuming nothing changes), it still would have been better to dismiss what the group or ghost guy said and take the rookie. The play at that time was to step aside a really good, productive back and with a little foresight, take the better talent--a generational talent--in AP, even though he had no NFL track record and SJAX had just come off a spectacular campaign.Is Gurley a generational talent? That's the unknown, but my eyes and spidey senses tell me yes he is. And I am not going to lose any sleep passing on Bell to find out with Gurley on my team and no one else's.
  6. To this point exactly, play this game of ff long enough you realize the folly of trying to play the "situation" card for too long. Supporting casts, coordinators and coaches change so much, guys get traded, injuries, so many variables are impossible to predict. Safe to say if Bell enjoys the same supporting cast, the same coaches, the same scheme, doesn't get injured, doesn't get suspended, he is going to enjoy a long and productive fantasy career. For guys like AP, Faulk, Barry, etc, however, you just never had to worry about crap going on around them. They can run behind any line and so long as they got a fair workload and aren't stuck with some moronic coach who philosophically can't wrap his head around feeding his best players the ball, they're going to put up monster production. I can't say for sure that Gurley will be that guy, but he sure looks the part to me in a way that few have (and those few include the likes of those listed above). I'm not concerned about the ACL. It was a clean, uncomplicated tear, the recent reinjury rates are very low, almost negligible, and it's no more a concern to me than Bell or any other back who, by their nature, are vulnerable to a variety of lower extremity injuries. Situation is important for many players and it can accentuate the production of the elite guys for sure. But, to rely on that to remain a constant is ill-advised.
  7. Maybe it's different in a scenario where you're trying to trade to get Gurley, but I'm not talking about that. To this point, I've framed the discussion more in terms of scenarios where one already owns a dynasty pick high enough where they can select either Bell or Gurley. Clearly, if I can trade down I will, but unlike a stock market environment where you can pretty much buy and sell whatever flavor you want at any time, the same can't be said for trading out of a pick. First, you can't be guaranteed to get FMV from another owner. Second, you can't be guaranteed of getting the one commodity you want (which you can always do with stocks). I might trade out of a high position and get scooped on the Gurley by a guy who's now ahead of me. Stocks don't function like this. At all. So, the point is, if you believe Gurley will be a better dynasty producing running back than Bell, why would you take Bell? Because his perceived value in ADP or in consultation with you is higher? If you trust your own judgment and you can't manipulate a trade in your favor, why go with the guy you think will have a lesser career? That makes no sense.
  8. In redraft, Bell. I said that before. But, if you have the attention span to think in terms of 2016 beyond, the guy to get is Gurley, not Bell.
  9. Jameis belongs in that list above. Wow, hadn't realized how many awful quarterbacks won bcs championships.
  10. They never talked to the victim who about to haul his ### into court. You got your wish, now you gotta live with it. Wish? I could care less if Winston is playing in TB or the California Penal League. I just got it right that he was going 1st because I didn't let emotion and bias cloud my judgement. I got it wrong because I applied logic to the Bucs. #neveragain This might be true, but I think they did their homework on this one. Yeah, it's the Bucs though so who knows. This just in: Everyone does their homework. Some get 100%. Some can't score even a 70 with a stiff breeze behind them.
  11. They never talked to the victim who about to haul his ### into court. You got your wish, now you gotta live with it. Wish? I could care less if Winston is playing in TB or the California Penal League. I just got it right that he was going 1st because I didn't let emotion and bias cloud my judgement. I got it wrong because I applied logic to the Bucs. #neveragain
  12. Haha, Bucs. Congrats on wasting your 2015 draft.
  13. For the same reason they interview family and friends and others who have had significant interactions with a player. Friends and family vs someone who accused you of rape and supposedly only had a single encounter with you?? That makes so much sense. Well it doesn't if all you want to hear is confirmation of what a great person he is to make you feel better about making the pick. This is Due Diligence 101, and i don't care how many family members, friends they interview, they are not doing their due diligence if they fail to ask her to tell her side of the story.
  14. For the same reason they interview family and friends and others who have had significant interactions with a player.
  15. Bell won't be scoring 300 or near that due to a drug problem. And before you say he has no problem anyone driving a car and smoking weed has a major problem.You mean that same "problem" he just had before he scored well over 300? Yeah, it's a funny thing with the likes of Josh Gordon, Justin Blackmon, LeVeon Bell, etc. Hard to predict when in the course of their dynasty career they're going to get caught and then clipped again. They never post on FBGs when they're about to do something stupid, they just do it. But, no worries with Bell. I'm sure it's just a one-time thing and would never happen again. Well, so far it IS a one time thing, unlike those other guys who did stupid things about 10 times. I'm sure Gurley wil never obliterate his knee again either What an insane conversation this is Exaggerate much? An ACL tear is not an "obliteration" of a knee. I think it was Dr. Jene Bramel who noted somewhere that risk of re-injury of ACL in professional athletes is ~2%, which is consistent with what I've seen and heard elsewhere (with higher rates re-injury rates related to non-contact tears versus contact tears).
  16. Bell won't be scoring 300 or near that due to a drug problem. And before you say he has no problem anyone driving a car and smoking weed has a major problem.You mean that same "problem" he just had before he scored well over 300? Yeah, it's a funny thing with the likes of Josh Gordon, Justin Blackmon, LeVeon Bell, etc. Hard to predict when in the course of their dynasty career they're going to get caught and then clipped again. They never post on FBGs when they're about to do something stupid, they just do it. But, no worries with Bell. I'm sure it's just a one-time thing and would never happen again.
  17. I think it's valid to bring Richardson into the conversation just for the purpose of having people take a step back and see how highly touted Richardson was then (and for the year before he was drafted). Sometimes people get so caught up in the new and shiny <fill in the blank> that reason flies out the window.I'm well aware of the trappings of new/shiny. I wasn't wrong about TR, i honestly didn't find him terribly remarkable (though had no idea he'd be such an epic fail either), but Gurley hits me on a different level. Haven't been struck this much by a RB since AP and Faulk. I'm far less concerned about that issue as i am the pattern of some folks to misidentify or disproportionately attribute stats or productivity to how good a player is as opposed to considering situational factors. Bell is a good back and the other mistake is interpreting anything other than exclamation points about greatness as somehow meaning "he sucks." He doesn't suck. He's a good back who benefited from an unusual workload that won't sustain itself. And he's a knucklehead who already got himself in trouble with the league and will miss time because of it. I like his 14 game prospects next year and rank him higher in redraft than Gurley. But dynasty? I'll take Gurley. Sorry if that offends the Bell guys or the play-the-percentages guys.
  18. Le'Veon Bell's scouting ratings are about as relevant as Tom Brady's or Antonio Brown's at this point. It's very clear that they are outdated. Bell dropped the weight and is a totally different guy now. Everyone on this board noticed it and, for the 10th time, vaulted him up their dynasty rankings BEFORE he put up elite production. He has a burst and lateral agility that he never showed as a prospect. If he re-tested at the combine now he would perform much better. And none of that accounts for how overlooked his vision and receiving ability are, much like we can't just ignore how much Tom Brady's knowledge of the game and ability to read the field was overlooked as a prospect. This is a ridiculous statement. He had 80 receptions last year and outscored RB5 by ONE HUNDRED fantasy points. You could cut his reception total in half and he'd still be comfortably in the top 5. I agree that his receiving numbers will likely regress to the mean some, but he has to lose a LOT of receptions to drop out of the top 5. His rushing numbers were in no way unsustainable. If he can maintain that you could literally cut his receiving numbers all the way down to 40 catches for 400 yards and he'd still be in the top 5, comfortably. You're obsessed with trying to create an argument that's not there. People aren't arguing that situation > talent. They're arguing that you're vastly underrating Bell's talent. Maybe not quite as talented as Gurley but close enough that his other advantages (vision, receiving ability, past production) make up the difference.You're inventing a narrative that isn't there. The reality is that people were blown away with Bell's talent last year, not his production. Again, right out of the gates last year people were WOWing their eyes out watching him run, before the production came along to match. Yet you're content to ignore that and have decided that since he wasn't quick and agile 5 years ago at Michigan State he must not be quick and agile now, just like you must have assumed that since Tom Brady was considered to have an extremely weak arm as a prospect he must have had an extremely weak arm for his entire NFL career.Fat plodder Le'Veon Bell is as dead and gone as noodle armed Tom Brady or slow cutting Antonio Brown. He dropped the weight and got in shape and his burst now gets him through the holes that his elite vision have always seen but that his gut slowed him down too much to get through in time.Stop arguing like this is simply some matter of uber talent vs. average guy in a great situation because the only one you're arguing with about that is yourself.Well. If you say so.
  19. Partly because it's groupthink, but more likely tied to recency effects. People look at the most recent outlier data and generalize that the outcome will persist over time, especially in the absence of other confounding variables and competing factors. You are not alone in this simple approach. A lot of folks make this type of error in FF and in real life.
  20. I don't see it either with Mariota. I give him some benefit of the doubt for being a smart, hard-working kid with a lot of natural gifts. But, the practice and repetition around what he's going to be required to do in the NFL just isn't there. So, I would take a pass on him in the first 5 picks at least. As for selecting Winston, you have to be convinced that his entire personality structure will be get an overhaul. Beyond the likelihood that he will have some legal involvement at least once in his pro career that costs him time away from the team, he looks destined to be a sloppy, careless boob who, like Josh Freeman, Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russell and countless other examples of "talented" guys who don't get it, will flame out of the league in 3-5 years. Whoever takes him, wherever they take him, they're flushing that pick down the toilet.
  21. The better player is pretty obviously Bell. If you think Gurley is a better talent so be it. Talent rather clearly does not always translate to being a good player. Based on scout ratings, the better player is not pretty obviously Bell, if we're talking about talent. Gurley consistently has received much higher ratings than Bell. The better talent is pretty obviously Gurley. To clean this up a bit, I think we're both on the same page in saying we want the most productive player. It's sub-optimal to have a talented guy mired in an bad situation on a bad team. On the other extreme, it does no good to have a guy who stinks playing in a favorable situation. That said, history is pretty clear that the former is far superior to the latter. Think of guys like OJ, Dickerson, Sanders, even Faulk and AP on various iterations of the Colts and Vikings, respectively. Those guys were on bad teams, sometimes terrible teams, and produced at elite levels because their talents represented a variable that was independent of what the team or scheme around them supported. Bell is not that guy. He's just not. He is going to need 80 receptions each season to maintain top-5 production, let alone enjoy a year like he had in 2014. And, if you want to bet on that surviving over the long haul, that's lost money. He is a good and decent running back, but not a top-5 talent. Plug Gurley in anywhere, he is going to be a dynasty monster for years to come. I pretty clearly said talent does not always translate to being a good player because, well, it is proven to be so. You would be drafting Gurley in hopes that he can be Bell, assuming all the risk in doing so. No, I am not expecting Gurley will equal or "be" Bell. I think I've made that pretty clear. But, hey, if you're in the business of grabbing lesser players with the assumption that a good situation will always be a good situation and support that lesser talent, more power to you. PM me at the end of 2016 and update me on how that's working out for you with Bell.
  22. The better player is pretty obviously Bell. If you think Gurley is a better talent so be it. Talent rather clearly does not always translate to being a good player. Based on scout ratings, the better player is not pretty obviously Bell, if we're talking about talent. Gurley consistently has received much higher ratings than Bell. The better talent is pretty obviously Gurley. To clean this up a bit, I think we're both on the same page in saying we want the most productive player. It's sub-optimal to have a talented guy mired in an bad situation on a bad team. On the other extreme, it does no good to have a guy who stinks playing in a favorable situation. That said, history is pretty clear that the former is far superior to the latter. Think of guys like OJ, Dickerson, Sanders, even Faulk and AP on various iterations of the Colts and Vikings, respectively. Those guys were on bad teams, sometimes terrible teams, and produced at elite levels because their talents represented a variable that was independent of what the team or scheme around them supported. Bell is not that guy. He's just not. He is going to need 80 receptions each season to maintain top-5 production, let alone enjoy a year like he had in 2014. And, if you want to bet on that surviving over the long haul, that's lost money. He is a good and decent running back, but not a top-5 talent. Plug Gurley in anywhere, he is going to be a dynasty monster for years to come.
  23. Wait. So, what's your purpose of posting? Well, as outlandish as it sounds in this thread. To talk about football. Is that what your post above was? Talking football? Well, I also have to clean up CSTU falsely here and there as well.I mean he is trying to claim me as FSU fan. You have to draw the line somewhere. Exactly. I don't blame you, either.
×
  • Create New...