Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

FreeBaGeL

Members
  • Posts

    22,328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FreeBaGeL

  1. SSOG, I wonder about late first round picks though. Does anyone have a list of QBs taken in the 1st round after pick 12?
  2. If you're not seeing any ropes thrown to tightly covered guys then you aren't watching the right highlights. He's definitely demonstrated that he can do it. To be a good pro he'll have to do it a lot more consistently of course, but he can throw a spiral.Yeah, I don't get it. At the end of the 2009 SEC championship game between Bama and Florida where the winner went to the national title, UF had a 3rd and 5 or so with a slim lead late in the 4th quarter. Did they have Tebow smash the ball up the middle with the season on the line? No, they had Tebow throw it deep, and he hit a well covered Louis Murphy down the sideline with a *perfectly* thrown, beautiful pass to seal the game.Then, in the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP game against Oklahoma he threw two unbelievable seam routes in heavy coverage, thrown about 600mph, into impossible to beat coverage, perfect spiral and all.I can get that lots of people didn't see lots of Tebow games here and are just going off what they see in a few highlights that ESPNers and youtubers pick out (which are naturally going to cater to the plays where a QB lowers his shoulder and runs someone over so they can get all pumped up), but seriously, these were huge games on a national stage. What respectable football fan didn't watch those games?As for the other part of your post about what you see in highlights, I already covered that. Seeing a QB run the ball and lower his shoulder and run over a linebacker is exciting to a casual football fan, which is what those things are directed at. Your casual football fan doesn't see anything special in a video where a quarterback throws an in route on perfect timing to hit the guy out of his break. Lots of QBs do that, not many run the ball up the middle against a loaded defense from the 5 yard line. The super fantasy football analyst isn't what these things are catered to. They're not scouting videos. They're some college kid in Gainesville putting together a youtube video to taunt their SEC rivals by showing them that their linebackers get run over by a quarterback.Really, what you posted here is *eerily* similar to what people were posting about Percy Harvin last year, and I said the same thing to them. No one saw how good Percy's hands and ball skills were because the highlights were of his big runs, because that was what was exciting and what was different. They all talked about how he was a "raw" receiver who was going to have to learn all that stuff while I explained to them that he was already ahead of everyone else in the draft not named Crabtree in those categories.
  3. After year 1 we all tend to come to the same conclusion for RBs, which it makes it difficult to get anything worthwhile for, say, Knowshon Moreno. Personally, I don't like Moreno, but if I owned him I'd probably keep him and hope for a DeAngelo type breakout.I disagree. Half the people are down on Moreno right now, and half see a guy that was "still learning" that put up 1200 yards and 9 TDs as a rookie and who's only competition going forward is a 31 year old journeyman.The latter sounds nice and logical, but deep down we know that it doesn't change the fact that he's just not that good. Half the people out there suppress what we saw with our eyes and only look at the "logical" latter part of the argument, still value him highly, and that leaves half a league full of buyers if you have him. His value is roughly the same as it was at this point last year, so you essentially have an out, with no loss. Two years from now, it's likely that you'll wish you had taken that out when you had the chance, because there are still plenty of buyers out there. His value may seem "low" as "only" the #12 RB or so right now, but that's about where it was last year, and that's what people that held onto Bush, Benson, McFadden, et all lost out on. Great thread and lots of good points. So Moreno, despite being himself a former 1st round pick and then being drafted as a fantasy 1st rounder and then putting up 1200/9 td's in his rookie year - you guys are recommending sell? Hate to be the numb skull but what are you who say "sell" seeing? So far, the plan looks to be working: [*]Broncos drafted high. [*]A fantasy team drafted high [*]Moreno broke out as a rookie Was all of this a fluke and he is headed for the crapper? Some are recommending sell while value is still there because they are saying that he doesn't have the goods. So was that the same thing people said about Cedric Benson after his Bears experience or about Mendenhall right before he broke out? Looking at how the Moreno plan is playing out, what is it the Moreno is lacking that compels people to want to dump him while his "first round" value remains high? And what pray tell, are people in search of if there is an opinion that he does not have the goods after just one very good rookie season? Thanks. @Mister CIA See?
  4. After year 1 we all tend to come to the same conclusion for RBs, which it makes it difficult to get anything worthwhile for, say, Knowshon Moreno. Personally, I don't like Moreno, but if I owned him I'd probably keep him and hope for a DeAngelo type breakout.I disagree. Half the people are down on Moreno right now, and half see a guy that was "still learning" that put up 1200 yards and 9 TDs as a rookie and who's only competition going forward is a 31 year old journeyman.The latter sounds nice and logical, but deep down we know that it doesn't change the fact that he's just not that good. Half the people out there suppress what we saw with our eyes and only look at the "logical" latter part of the argument, still value him highly, and that leaves half a league full of buyers if you have him. His value is roughly the same as it was at this point last year, so you essentially have an out, with no loss. Two years from now, it's likely that you'll wish you had taken that out when you had the chance, because there are still plenty of buyers out there. His value may seem "low" as "only" the #12 RB or so right now, but that's about where it was last year, and that's what people that held onto Bush, Benson, McFadden, et all lost out on. Bush never lived up to the hype, but hes been pretty good in PPR's. Cedric Benson is just as valuable now than he ever was, and its far too early to call Mcfadden a bust. None of them have, or likely will ever have anywhere near the value that you could have gotten for them early on in a dynasty league, when we could recognize that they were very likely to end up as busts. Not even close. But you're making my point for me here. You're trying to create an argument to convince yourself that these guys weren't dynasty busts, when deep down you know that they were.
  5. After year 1 we all tend to come to the same conclusion for RBs, which it makes it difficult to get anything worthwhile for, say, Knowshon Moreno. Personally, I don't like Moreno, but if I owned him I'd probably keep him and hope for a DeAngelo type breakout.I disagree. Half the people are down on Moreno right now, and half see a guy that was "still learning" that put up 1200 yards and 9 TDs as a rookie and who's only competition going forward is a 31 year old journeyman.The latter sounds nice and logical, but deep down we know that it doesn't change the fact that he's just not that good. Half the people out there suppress what we saw with our eyes and only look at the "logical" latter part of the argument, still value him highly, and that leaves half a league full of buyers if you have him.His value is roughly the same as it was at this point last year, so you essentially have an out, with no loss. Two years from now, it's likely that you'll wish you had taken that out when you had the chance, because there are still plenty of buyers out there. His value may seem "low" as "only" the #12 RB or so right now, but that's about where it was last year, and that's what people that held onto Bush, Benson, McFadden, et all lost out on.
  6. This is key right here. When we draft a guy that high, we tend to fall in love with them. You can't let that happen.I've been fortunate enough to end up with an absolutely loaded team in my main, extremely competitive dynasty league. Apart from extreme amounts of luck, I think the most important thing I've done is a 3-step process.1. Trade for 1st rounders of teams you think will have a high pick early on in the season, before it's a sure-fire top pick2. Trade away any 1st round pick that ends up outside of the 1st tier of rookies (usually the top 3 or so) if I can get fair value for it3. Trade away any player acquired with a 1st round pick that doesn't blow me away in year 1Step 3 is the hardest part. In the last 5 years I've ended up with 4 top three picks, none of which were my own, and none of which I acquired after week 5 of a season. With those picks, I've taken Cedric Benson, Adrian Peterson, Reggie Bush, and Beanie Wells. I traded Bush and Benson at high value after year 1, and didn't lose a thing from them. Peterson obviously I kept, and I'm holding Beanie as well because he looks like a manbeast out there (if I had taken Moreno last year, I'd be selling). Trading Bush and Benson was the hardest thing to do in this whole process, because I had grown very attached to them (especially Bush), since when I have a hot young rookie I tend to follow them on Sunday Ticket pretty closely. However, it's necessary.I'm sure that occasionally there are guys that don't impress early but end up working out, but not many and certainly not anywhere near the number that didn't pan out. Typically, if a top tier rookie is going to be a stud, you're going to be able to see it immediately. Yet still, the suitors are just lining up to take that formerly top rookie player off your hands at elite value even after he looked bad in year one.Realistically, when a top rookie looks bad early in his career, we all know he's probably not going to work out. But we keep reading this theorycraft on message boards, and putting these logical sounding arguments together that just prove that no, this guy is going to be awesome, just don't give up on him yet. Deep down though, even those guy's biggest supporters have this little feeling that they know things aren't going to work out for him, but just don't want to admit it to themselves.
  7. Tebow's accuracy and ability to thread the needle is fine (just ask Oklahoma, two of those seam routes he threw in between 6 defenders in that NC game weren't replicable by many college QB's), it's his ability to read the field that will hold him back.There were way too many times at Florida where Tebow dropped back and just looked around trying to figure out what was going on.Fortunately, that is one thing that, while difficult, is possible to learn.
  8. This may seem like an odd question, but what are your guy's thoughts on the Jets defense from a dynasty perspective? Generally, defenses don't hold any value because they're too difficult to predict. But with the Rex Ryan connection, a young shutdown corner, and what we saw of the defense last year, is this Jets defense akin to the Ravens defense from the early 2000's that was reliably dominant from year to year? Because something like that does hold value. What would people give up for a defense like that in a dynasty league. Just consider the defense here, not special teams.
  9. I think 1.03 and Ward is a pretty good return for Wayne at this point.
  10. If PPR is in place to bring WRs' value more in line with RBs' value, wouldn't more NFL RBBC bring the value of RBs down, thus eliminating the need to prop up WR value?Initially, PPR was viewed as a way to prop up WR value in comparison to RB value. It is not that way today in practice, i.e. reality. There is simply more available talent at the WR position these days and the position has become more of the focal point of the league, along with the QB position, of course, with all the rule changes and pass attempts vs run attempts. Simply go back in history of the NFL and you will see that over time the run vs. pass ratio has steadily shifted away from favoring the run to favoring the pass. The curve is not flat and will show an uptick leaning towards a greater pct of passing plays vs. running plays. I can state this with confidence without even looking at the actual numbers (trend), just by recalling how things were in the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, and now today, 2010. Exponential growth league-wide in pass attempts. Unless you have a horrible QB as your starter, when NFL teams look to achieve that so-called "balance" on offense, what they really mean is somewhere around a 58% to 42% ratio, pass-to-run. Nobody is even looking to go close to 50-50 anymore, which would be the strict definition of "balance" on offense. When I watch NFL games, more often than not I find myself much more interested in how the passing games are producing as opposed to the running games. Why? Because in most games, I'm more likely to not have a RB of significance in a given game as opposed to a WR of significance. Whether I'm playing non-PPR or PPR, that would be the case due to the aforementioned shortage of "tote-the-rock" RBs. The (NFL) LEAGUE man!.....Let the LEAGUE dictate things, your fantasy experience will be much more enjoyable. The current LEAGUE points to PPR. Once I discovered PPR a few years back, non-PPR was simply boring......Anyway, I'm done with my campaign. As has been mentioned several times, everything you're saying here points to a natural shift in value towards WRs without any scoring change at all, which makes PPR (and the mucking up of things it does without even going across positions) unnecessary.Also, for me, I still enjoy RB heavy leagues just for the simple fact that it's more fun to watch and root for running backs, as they touch the ball a lot more often. If I have Adrian Peterson on my team I get to see him be involved in ~30 plays by watching a Vikings game. If I have even one of the top WRs I'll be lucky to see them 10 times, and even then it's just as the ball gets to them as they're off screen for the majority of the play.
  11. There are ways to deal with the relative value of running backs that don't involve creating a scoring system that makes guys like Reggie Bush valuable FF commodities.A very simple way is to adjust starting lineup requirements. Starting 2rb and 3wr should do the trick.The problem with PPR is firstly that it over corrects, secondly that it adjusts players values relative to their piers at the same position (not just across position) in ways that don't make sense, and thirdly, as SSOG pointed out much more eloquently, it's just stupid Plus, even if it was some grand new scoring system that solved all the world's problems, it would still be silly to make a comment like you made. You know, there are people out there in the world that don't just bail on their dynasty leagues every couple years, and are still going in leagues that were created years and years ago. Obviously you can't change a scoring system that drastically mid-stream, because people have built their teams around a particular scoring system.But that's really kind of besides the point, because even if I were joining a new league this year it probably wouldn't be PPR. What's next, QBs are undervalued so we're going to start giving them points for completions? Then a few years later maybe we can start giving running backs points for carries when their value falls behind.
  12. Yet all of those guys had by far their best year's rushing the football in their first couple years and then steadily declined from there.Mcnabb put up 99 FP in his second season, then followed that with 60, 80, 53, 40, 11.Mcnair put up 128 FP his first season, then followed with 80, 88, 40, 70, 60, 27, 18Culpepper put up 120 FP his third season, then 64, 56, 21, etc (injured)I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if Rodgers never matches last year's rushing numbers again. And even if he does, so we're talking 200yds and 4 TDs a season here, which is significant, but nowhere near significant enough to justify giving up a top 12-15 dynasty RB for. See, I think the whole scheme thing you bring up says the opposite about the upside part. Rodgers has been playing in a scheme that's extremely friendly to fantasy QB numbers, while Rivers hasn't, yet Rodgers they've both put up basically the same passing numbers. What happens if the GB brass decide to draft a RB early next year and start pounding the ball, or their defense improves and they start playing more conservatively on offense? What if San Diego finally realizes that Rivers is their ticket to winning it all and really lets him open things up?Even if those things don't change, Rivers has been keeping pace. The idea that they could change gives Rivers much more upside, imho.As someone pointed out above, even with the rushing numbers Rodgers and Rivers' fantasy points are basically even on a per attempt basis. In their passing numbers alone, Rivers is way ahead on a per attempt basis. Situations change, there's no guarantee that those attempt numbers don't even out or even completely flip flop in the immediate or distant future, and as mentioned above his rushing numbers will likely start to decline very soon which is the only thing keeping him even with Rivers on a per attempt basis.Rodgers is definitely the guy to own in a dynasty right now, but I don't think there's any way the difference between him and Rivers is a guy like Matthews.
  13. Do you really have Rodgers that far above Rivers that you think the difference in them is a guy like Matthews? Over the last two years Rivers actually has more passing touchdowns and only about 100 fewer passing yards than Rodgers, and he did it all on basically 150 less attempts. Obviously Rodgers has the rushing advantage, but as we've seen with lots of guys before that doesn't tend to last forever with quarterbacks. Plus Rodgers spent the last two years in a pass heavy offense with Rivers in a run heavy one, and there's no guarantee things will stay that way.
  14. I'm not the one to ask, since I'm lower on Jennings than most.Not lower than HK
  15. Just another thing I was trying to tell people about Harvin last year that the haters wouldn't listen to. It's amazing how badly some people mislabeled this guy because of 1 or 2 highlights they saw rather than his actual body of work.
  16. I don't agree at all. Bowe is a guy I want no part of. First, last year was his third year, an important year, and he took a big step back. Second, he now has a violation of the league's substance abuse policy hanging over him. The next violation will be for a lot longer than the four days he was suspended this time. And what most concerns me about these kinds of things is you have to wonder how much of his earlier success was drug induced. Roids bother me much more than maryjane or drinking offenses.How are you not agreeing with me? Lots of people ( e.g. Instinctive ) still think Bowe's the "next big thing". Why wouldn't you try to capitalize on that by adding a piece and getting a solid Tier 2 receiver in return?Maybe I didn't understand. If you are saying 'get him cheap while his value is low,' sure, depending on how cheap. My point of view is that he is definitely not a sure thing to be the next Roddy/Jennings/Vincent. There is an outside chance of that, which gives him value. The question as always is what is his relative value at this time?He wasn't saying Bowe is going to turn into the next Roddy/Jennings/Vincent. He was saying that Bowe would be a great guy to use to trade for Roddy/Jennings/Vincent.
  17. Huh. I see him as a "next big thing" type of player. He'll have a solid ground game around him, an up and coming OLine, a young QB, and a slot WR that should alleviate pressure. He could have some pretty big things in store. Wasn't last season only his 2nd year?It was his 3rd.
  18. Safety speed? Maybe a high school safety.Tebow is 236 pounds with a 4.71 forty time. At best his athleticism is comparable to that of a slow, undersized NFL TE. He will not be a dynamic runner against NFL defenses.Wasn't his 3-cone and vertical ridiculous? I don't recall the specifics, but I thought I remembered people saying they were the best ever for a QB and among tops even among WRs and RBs.Tebow doesn't have elite top end speed. He's not going to break off those 50 yard TD runs like Vick did. But he does have very good agility and burst, which he doesn't get enough credit for, and which combined with his strength is plenty for picking up those solid chunks like Miami tries to get out of the wildcat (which is basically what Tebow did on his running plays in college).
  19. For starters, if Tebow hadn't gone to Florida he would have gone to Alabama, so the success of his team likely wouldn't have changed much.But really, I don't see how anyone can take your post seriously with the comment about Locker performing better in his freshman year at Washington than Tebow did in his heisman year. Locker's freshman year: 47.3% completion percentage, 2062 yards, 6.2ypa, 14td, 15int, 105.0 QB rating 388yds rushing (3.5ypc), 7 TD Tebow's heisman year (also his first year as a starter): 67.8% completion percentage, 2895 yards, 9.2ypa, 32td, 6int, 172.5 QB rating (highest ever for a heisman winner) 895yds rushing (4.3ypc), 23 TD I know stats aren't everything, but seriously what the hell? You have to watch them. Put Tebow in Locker's place, with no offensive line, no running game, no receivers with any talent, and no defense so he's constantly behind. Then put Locker on Florida, with a great OLine, great running backs, great WRs, and a shut down defense. My argument is that Locker would perform better in both situations.There's no doubt Tebow played with superior talent around him. But you were strictly comparing Locker's freshman year to Tebow's heisman year and to claim that any amount of surrounding talent would make THAT big of a difference is crazy.Besides, you're definitely falling into that trap of just assuming that because the Gators had the name Florida next to them they were great in all those positions. You probably don't realize that in Tebow's heisman year Florida's defense and offensive line were likely much worse than Washington's. Their defense was the worst I've ever seen out of a Gator team and that includes the pre-Spurrier years. The offensive line was the dumbest group of 5 guys you could find to put together. If you need proof, just watch the LSU or Michigan games where simple stunts or 1-man blitzes would consistently lead to a guy coming through unblocked and Tebow having to get rid of the ball immediately or run for his life. As much credit as Roethlisberger gets for his ability to play with a poor O-line, Tebow's ability to do so that year was really overlooked. Granted, he had great WRs that year. But during his senior year, he did not. Florida's WRs were horrible in 2009. Their already weak WR corps was made truly pathetic when two starters went down with season ending injuries before the season even began, leaving a bunch of guys who were considered poor depth to actually be the starters. It got to the point where they were starting running backs at WR, and they had some very key drops this year. Hernandez at TE was the only reliable player, and even he had a huge drop in the Alabama game. Tebow did play with all those things you mentioned, just not at the same time. I get that Tebow had better talent around him, but you're acting like this was the 2007 Patriots here. It wasn't, that offense had major holes in it every single year.
  20. For starters, if Tebow hadn't gone to Florida he would have gone to Alabama, so the success of his team likely wouldn't have changed much.But really, I don't see how anyone can take your post seriously with the comment about Locker performing better in his freshman year at Washington than Tebow did in his heisman year.Locker's freshman year:47.3% completion percentage, 2062 yards, 6.2ypa, 14td, 15int, 105.0 QB rating388yds rushing (3.5ypc), 7 TDTebow's heisman year (also his first year as a starter):67.8% completion percentage, 2895 yards, 9.2ypa, 32td, 6int, 172.5 QB rating (highest ever for a heisman winner)895yds rushing (4.3ypc), 23 TDI know stats aren't everything, but seriously what the hell?
  21. If I thought that McCluster was a credible threat to Jamaal Charles' playing time, I wouldn't be trying to acquire him on the cheap, now would I? You don't have to convince me. I never said that Jamaal Charles should be facing a downgrade because the Chiefs brought in an over-the-hill veteran and a utility player, I'm saying that Jamaal Charles will be facing a downgrade because the Chiefs brought in a pro bowler and a early-second round rookie.I really don't understand what the 2nd-rd rookie has to do with a discussion of Charles, given that the team has already admitted that they brought in "the rookie" to play WR. Can you say more?McCluster played RB in college. Most had him graded as a RB leading up to the draft. Even if the Chiefs acknowledge that he's a slot receiver, there will still be owners in your league who believe that adding McCluster is bad news for Charles.But shouldn't I expect more from SSOG? I think you're missing the point entirely. SSOG isn't saying that he thinks McCluster is a threat to Charles (the opposite actually), rather that he DOESN'T think he will but acknowledges that others will, lowering Charles' value in THEIR eyes, making him a perfect target.
  22. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/olMaybe I'm just misreading this, but it doesn't seem to show us anything about fantasy.KC and SF ranked 30th and 32nd, yet produced stud fantasy running games. Meanwhile New England, Denver, Philly, Green Bay, and Atlanta were all top 10 and gave us mediocre or poor fantasy rushing results.
  23. Late 1st round rookie picks are overvalued?Isn't that one of your mantras?It's certainly true this year. Basically everything after the top 8-9 picks is a crap sandwich. That's not always the case though. There have been years when high second round picks like Chad Johnson and Sidney Rice would've been available in the 10-15 range of rookie drafts. This isn't one of those years though with a junky QB class and only 4 WRs chosen in the first two rounds.That's a good one, too.But I think this year's lesson is another one on which you and I see eye-to-eye every year. Running backs with mediocre talent and pedigree have zero job security and very little Dynasty value from season to season. Once in awhile you'll flirt with a top-10 season out of guys like Chester Taylor, LaMont Jordan, or Steve Slaton. At that point, it's time to flip them for whatever value you can. Who were the biggest losers in the draft? Fred Jackson, Steve Slaton, Jerome Harrison, and Justin Forsett. We predicted in here that all four of them would lose their value, and explicitly told Harrison and Forsett owners to sell hard after their late-season success. All four of those guys have had cult followings around here despite their obvious limitations and fleeting value.Typically, but not always. People were saying the same thing about Ryan Grant 3 years ago. And 2 years ago. Yet here we are and they still haven't really brought in any competition.
  24. WR are significantly more useful for winning championsips in a dynasty. As logn as you have strong WRs and a top QB, you'll always be good enough to try and snag that Jerome Harrison or Jamaal Charles from somebody for a playoff run. That Nick Goings or Ryan Grant type player who has an incredibly easy week 13-16 schedule and isn't worth much to most. Or you'll finish as an early out in the playoffs and end up with a mid-latye first rounder that snags you Ray Rice or Steve Slaton and you win the playoffs next year when they blow up. WR= cash money in dynasty Because there's no such thing as WRs/QBs that were on the waiver wire and break out during the season? They're ever bit as easy to find, and there's less competition for actually getting your hands on them when they do emerge.
  25. Vick played weaker opponents, and was so silly fast it was like defenders were in molasses. Tebow definitely spent more time in the pocket, and wasn't running away from many defenders in the SEC. The problem and criticism Tebow faces is he was in a spread offense, running the option. He is a question mark. However, that's no more than any QB going into the NFL. The comedy is I don't think Tebow is less prepared than Vince Young was. I'd say he is far ahead, but the level of silly criticism of Tebow is just way over the top for an elite athlete and college player. I don't get why people hold this against him. It's not like this is the Nebraska offenses of old where passes are trick plays where they start out running the option and then throw the ball. Yeah, there was the jump pass but that was what, 3 passes in his entire career?A typical passing play for Tebow was taking the snap, dropping back in the pocket, and throwing the ball. Just like anyone else. And he threw A LOT of passes this way. I don't have the numbers here, but I would imagine it was far more than most quarterbacks that are drafted. What does it matter that on running plays it was often Tebow running an HB dive rather than a running back? The passing plays were the same as anyone's. Yes, it was the "spread", but Florida's offense is actually set up VERY similarly to New England's. Speedy deep threat on the outside, with quick little guys in the slot running routes underneath. It always makes me laugh when people compare Florida's offense to someone like Nebraska of the 90's. The offenses could not possibly be more different. The Florida offense has FAR more in common with New England's than it does Nebraska's.
×
  • Create New...