This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I have him in all four of my leagues. He's not going to set the world on fire, but he is a solid bye week replacement. And if Darrell Jackson goes down (which he has shown a propensity to do), he could be a solid WR3, possibly even reaching WR2 status.
The number of these kinds of posts never ceases to amaze me. We don't know the size of the leagues in which people compete. We also don't know the roster sizes, transaction restrictions, etc. that may result in players generally worthy of a roster spot being available on the waiver wire.Though nobody cares about my league (12 teams), Anaz Battle is available on our waiver wire and he is a player I'll be watching.
The number of these kinds of posts never ceases to amaze me. We don't know the size of the leagues in which people compete. We also don't know the roster sizes, transaction restrictions, etc. that may result in players generally worthy of a roster spot being available on the waiver wire.Though nobody cares about my league (12 teams), Anaz Battle is available on our waiver wire and he is a player I'll be watching.
'Taint my fault they can't find the Assistant Coach Forum.
Dropped Jacoby Jones for him. I have AJ so I improve my squad with the diversity. Plus I think Battle > Jacoby for this year.
I dumped jones for him and didnt think twice about it.....
Why even post in this thread if you aren't going to post something useful? I rarely post here, but posts like this get me fired up. Either offer something useful or don't post at all. Nobody cares about your arrogance and how perfect your league is.
Battle has been discussed here and there has been some pretty indepth analysis. I just think Broadway is tryin to say that this question is pretty borderline for the ACF.
Thanks for interpreting that for me. What I interpreted is "your league sucks, mine is better".Last post I will make. Not trying to hijack this.Battle has been discussed here and there has been some pretty indepth analysis. I just think Broadway is tryin to say that this question is pretty borderline for the ACF.
assuming you mean D-Jack, Gore, Davis, Battle? Targets from week1:Arnaz Battle SF 9 Darrell Jackson SF 8 Vernon Davis SF 5 Frank Gore SF 3 sure it is just week 1 but I'm not so sure it play out as expected...
My league has 12 teams with 16 players per roster. That equals 192 players. I don't see the problem with Broadway's post. As a matter of fact I kinda agree with it although he is on the WW in that 192 player league. I'm trying to figure out who I should drop for him.Why even post in this thread if you aren't going to post something useful? I rarely post here, but posts like this get me fired up. Either offer something useful or don't post at all. Nobody cares about your arrogance and how perfect your league is.
You get fired up because I mentioned that Battle is one of the top 180 fantasy players?Why even post in this thread if you aren't going to post something useful? I rarely post here, but posts like this get me fired up. Either offer something useful or don't post at all. Nobody cares about your arrogance and how perfect your league is.
He's fired up because you blindly say that Player X (Battle in this case) shouldn't be on the waiver wire without knowing anything about the league's scorind system, # of teams, rosters, etc. Perhaps the guy's in a 10 team start 2 WR league with a short bench. Or maybe he's in a 32 team leaague full of complete ##### idiots and LT is on the ww as well. His point is that posts like yours and "can I join your league" and the rest of those arrogant posts serve no purpose other than to get him fired up.Having said that, in a "typical" league, Battle should not be on the ww :(You get fired up because I mentioned that Battle is one of the top 180 fantasy players?
:IBTL: Given what I had to go on from the original post, I did the best I could.He's fired up because you blindly say that Player X (Battle in this case) shouldn't be on the waiver wire without knowing anything about the league's scorind system, # of teams, rosters, etc. Perhaps the guy's in a 10 team start 2 WR league with a short bench. Or maybe he's in a 32 team leaague full of complete ##### idiots and LT is on the ww as well. His point is that posts like yours and "can I join your league" and the rest of those arrogant posts serve no purpose other than to get him fired up.Having said that, in a "typical" league, Battle should not be on the wwYou get fired up because I mentioned that Battle is one of the top 180 fantasy players?
I dropped DJ for Battle earlier today. I'm going to hold onto Battle for a bit and see if he stays Smith's favorite target.
Having said that, in a "typical" league, Battle should not be on the ww
When I say "typical" league, I mean 12 teams, start 3 WR, no PPR and you're going to have at least 5 guys on your bench. That would mean that each team is going to have at a minimum 4 WRs on their team and most likely 5. That would mean he'd have to be ranked worse than 60 to not get drafted. I'm not saying he's top 20 material but given all of the preseason love for the 49ers he had to at least be on most people's draft boards as a late round flier. (I do not own him by the way but he was drafted late in our 12 team start 3 WR PPR league)
Are you way high on DJax and V Davis, or do you think SF will have 2000 passing yards this year?
More of the latter. Then again in one league we are technically only required to start 2 WR's, so don't take my advice on anything.I just don't see the TD's which is near everything in non PPR.
I think after watching the performance of DJAX on monday night, Battle could become a more targeted player, total of nine against AZ same as Jackson, I think of him as a poor mans Hines Ward, you could do worse for a bench filler. I had to drop DJ Hackett due to the unspecified layoff, grabed Arnaz and will keep him benched for now. Toomer and Battle were availible on the wire in my 16 team re-draft legue, took them both bypassing A. R. EL.
DJax has a slightly bad game on MNF and Battle has 1 big catch (and a fumble that people are ignoring, who DJax actually recovered to save the game) and all of a sudden Battle is the 49ers #1 WR. Jeez I love this week 1 overreaction. Lets just ignore DJax's whole career.
And I get yelled at?
The number of these kinds of posts never ceases to amaze me. We don't know the size of the leagues in which people compete. We also don't know the roster sizes, transaction restrictions, etc. that may result in players generally worthy of a roster spot being available on the waiver wire.Though nobody cares about my league (12 teams), Anaz Battle is available on our waiver wire and he is a player I'll be watching.
these, your league sucks if this guys available posts drive me crazy. battle is available in my league and i'm thinking about going after him. definately wasnt blown away to see him on the waiver wire.back to the question, i've never been a big fan of Djax and i think battle can be a playmaker for alex smith. he's an athletic guy, who may finally be figuring the WR thing out. all that said DJax is still the #1 and has the career #'s to back it up. what he doesnt have his the repoire with smith that he had with Hass, and drops arent going to help him get it. at this point battle seems worthy of a spot down near the bottom, nothing more.
I think you are misinterpreting... I just think most here think Battle is worthy of a pickup based on the targets he got in week1. And going forward think that he could play more of a role in the 49er passing game than originally expected - it's not like anyone is dumping Cotchery or Ward for Battle but some see those kinds of numbers as an upside - and point to the MNF game as justification - not the one big catch but the overall targets. As for D-Jax's whole career - it has been riddled with injuries - even more of a reason to take a look at Battle's upside. I like Jackson - he was one of my favorite Seahawks, and I appreciated what he did on Sundays, but I don't see him as a true #1 guy - he developed a chemistry with Hass that both players acknowledged. In SEA, he rarely flat out beat guys, he was more likely to find a hole in the coverage and exploit it (and he was very good after the catch), something that Smith will have to recognize before Jackson gets back to the same level in SF. And until both players prove that they can do that together, I'm doubtful as to his ability to be a dominate #1 WR.shadyridr said:
I don't know why I feel the need today, but I'm going to stick up for Broadway again. Most 10 team leagues with short benches don't have 180 players drafted. I don't really understand what your point is. Broadway never said that the OP's league sucked. He merely stated that Battle shouldn't be on the WW in leagues that have 180 people rostered. I personally would put the number at 200 or so, but his post was not unreasonable. I hate all the "your league sucks" "Do you play amongst 3rd graders" etc. comments too. I reread the posts and can't come up with anywhere that Broadway said that.Peter_Griffin said:He's fired up because you blindly say that Player X (Battle in this case) shouldn't be on the waiver wire without knowing anything about the league's scorind system, # of teams, rosters, etc. Perhaps the guy's in a 10 team start 2 WR league with a short bench. Or maybe he's in a 32 team leaague full of complete ##### idiots and LT is on the ww as well. His point is that posts like yours and "can I join your league" and the rest of those arrogant posts serve no purpose other than to get him fired up.Having said that, in a "typical" league, Battle should not be on the wwBroadwayG said:You get fired up because I mentioned that Battle is one of the top 180 fantasy players?Wildcat said:BroadwayG said:
Thanks.To be honest, my original post was "He shouldn't be on a waiver wire." Since that can easily be construed as 'If Arnaz Battle is on the waiver wire in your league, you suck, your friends suck and your league sucks,' I enhanced it to the 180 player comment. Apparently, it wasn't enough.I don't know why I feel the need today, but I'm going to stick up for Broadway again. Most 10 team leagues with short benches don't have 180 players drafted. I don't really understand what your point is. Broadway never said that the OP's league sucked. He merely stated that Battle shouldn't be on the WW in leagues that have 180 people rostered. I personally would put the number at 200 or so, but his post was not unreasonable. I hate all the "your league sucks" "Do you play amongst 3rd graders" etc. comments too. I reread the posts and can't come up with anywhere that Broadway said that.Peter_Griffin said:He's fired up because you blindly say that Player X (Battle in this case) shouldn't be on the waiver wire without knowing anything about the league's scorind system, # of teams, rosters, etc. Perhaps the guy's in a 10 team start 2 WR league with a short bench. Or maybe he's in a 32 team leaague full of complete ##### idiots and LT is on the ww as well. His point is that posts like yours and "can I join your league" and the rest of those arrogant posts serve no purpose other than to get him fired up.Having said that, in a "typical" league, Battle should not be on the wwBroadwayG said:You get fired up because I mentioned that Battle is one of the top 180 fantasy players?Wildcat said:BroadwayG said:
Maybe maybe not. As the #2 WR on a mediocre passing team that puts him in the 40-50's for WR's. If you also consider the fact that coming into the season he's the 4th receiving option behind DJax, Davis and Gore at best plus they also brought in Lelie and drafted Hill so there are plenty of targets in San Fran. I like Battle better than those 2 but I can see the logic why he's available in many leagues.Peter_Griffin said:Peter_Griffin said:Having said that, in a "typical" league, Battle should not be on the ww
When I say "typical" league, I mean 12 teams, start 3 WR, no PPR and you're going to have at least 5 guys on your bench. That would mean that each team is going to have at a minimum 4 WRs on their team and most likely 5. That would mean he'd have to be ranked worse than 60 to not get drafted. I'm not saying he's top 20 material but given all of the preseason love for the 49ers he had to at least be on most people's draft boards as a late round flier. (I do not own him by the way but he was drafted late in our 12 team start 3 WR PPR league)playin4beer said:
Good post. Besides DJax's injury history there is something else about him I don't like it. I assume the Seahawks FO knows more about Jackson than I'll even know and I think it speaks volumes that they would give up a #1 pick for Branch, sign both Branch and Burleson to nice contracts, and than give away DJax for a 4th round pick. This simply tells me they were not very high on him. Maybe it was his drops or his injuries but something is there and it's why I think Battle could be in for a decent year.
Well let's see, D-Jax has been productive when healthy and with Hasselbeck throwing to him in an offense that wasn't scared to pass mid to deep field. Right now he's healthy, but Alex Smith certainly isn't going to give him numbers Hasselbeck would and we have yet to see what the offense will do in regards to the deep ball.
