Assessing risk of the top 3. (1 Viewer)

[lebowski]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

 

[jurb26]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

 

[Brakiss]

great another thread for this topic

 

[Mr. Peterson]

I'd go with LT, he's proven his worth, he's one of the best if not the best recieving RB's and and he's got a good back up to take a little of the work load off of him. LJ hasnt played a whole season so he hasn't proved that he can take the pounding of a whole season esp with no one to back him up. I think the system he was in was the reason for alot of his sucess and who knows what H.Edwards will do to there system. And I think SA was a part of a system and he lost a big part of that left side of the line. I also dont think he has too many years of top 5 production.

 

[lebowski]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

 

[lebowski]

great another thread for this topic

Relax...if you don't like it don't read it. Just trying to get some discussion from a different point of view.

 

[jurb26]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

 

[lebowski]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

 

[jurb26]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

It's gonna be a Saunders offence. Yes he will get the op for TDs and in bunches. I"m not sure why this would be a worry. I think LT and Portis present the least amount of risk.

 

[lebowski]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

It's gonna be a Saunders offence. Yes he will get the op for TDs and in bunches. I"m not sure why this would be a worry. I think LT and Portis present the least amount of risk.

I'm not familiar with a "Saunder's offense" could you elaborate a bit on that. Also, do you see that fast of a turn around and do they have the line to block for Portis?

 

[fruity pebbles]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

He was averaging a TD a game after week 5 last year. Really seemed to break out after a slow start.

 

[lebowski]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

He was averaging a TD a game after week 5 last year. Really seemed to break out after a slow start.

LJ averaged over 2 TD's per game after he took over. I'm not saying that that will happen again but that is pretty impressive

 

[joffer]

in the last 9 games that LJ started, he had:

261 for 1351 and 16 TDs rushing

27 for 304 and 1 TD receiving

I don't like extrapolating, but that's a pace over 16 games for

464/2402/28.4 rushing

46/540/1.8 receiving

which, in ppr scoring, is 523.5 points.

The average for RB1 over the last 5 years is 408 points, over the last 2 years it's 365 points.

- LJ could see a 22% drop in production and would still beat that 5 year mark

- he could see a 28% drop in production and still beat last year's RB1 number

- no history of injury risk other than the standard "everyone is vulnerable"

- despite the endless talk about a new offensive coordinator, he's the former OL coach who was instrumental in putting in the current system....no reason to change.

no brainer.

 

[fruity pebbles]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

He was averaging a TD a game after week 5 last year. Really seemed to break out after a slow start.

LJ averaged over 2 TD's per game after he took over. I'm not saying that that will happen again but that is pretty impressive

I'd take LJ and Alexander in a heartbeat over Portis in a redraft. But I've got Portis and LT pretty close.

 

[fruity pebbles]

in the last 9 games that LJ started, he had:

261 for 1351 and 16 TDs rushing

27 for 304 and 1 TD receiving

I don't like extrapolating, but that's a pace over 16 games for

464/2402/28.4 rushing

46/540/1.8 receiving

which, in ppr scoring, is 523.5 points.

The average for RB1 over the last 5 years is 408 points, over the last 2 years it's 365 points.

- LJ could see a 22% drop in production and would still beat that 5 year mark

- he could see a 28% drop in production and still beat last year's RB1 number

- no history of injury risk other than the standard "everyone is vulnerable"

- despite the endless talk about a new offensive coordinator, he's the former OL coach who was instrumental in putting in the current system....no reason to change.

no brainer.

Point taken but it's a pretty safe bet that LJ won't see 464 carries. Holmes never had more than 327 in KC over a season.

 

[joffer]

Point taken but it's a pretty safe bet that LJ won't see 464 carries. Holmes never had more than 327 in KC over a season.

no doubt, but we're talking about risk. I like the risk that his production won't drop more than 25% barring injury

 

[cowboyz]

LT2 was neck and neck with alexander until he got injured...

while portis owners were worried if he would ever score. al saunders won't instantly turn the redskins into the chiefs in one year. and they play in a much tougher division then the west coasts. he will not have the upside of the others, because he's not going to score 2-3 tds against the eagles, cowboys, or giants.

1)SA no durability concern, intact offense, history of tds. Only reason to not go for him is superstition with the madden cover and loss in the super bowl

2)LJ no durability concern, highest upside. risk is an injury to willie roaf. performance might also change if herm decides to air it out when the chiefs fall behind, since LJ can't block. not likely to happen though.

3)LT2 durability concerns, especially in the ff playoffs. proven success with no TE, WR, or QB. so performance is not an issue.

FF RB success is predominantly not about the player, but rather having an injury free year. that's why countless guys are able to step in and have success and why good players like deuce are consistently overrated.

 

[lebowski]

1)SA no durability concern, intact offense, history of tds. Only reason to not go for him is superstition with the madden cover and loss in the super bowl

No concern about the loss of Hutchingson?

 

[jurb26]

While portis owners were worried if he would ever score. al saunders won't instantly turn the redskins into the chiefs in one year. and they play in a much tougher division then the west coasts. he will not have the upside of the others, because he's not going to score 2-3 tds against the eagles, cowboys, or giants.

Since being in Wash, Portis has 9 TDs vs the division in 12 games. Not to bad. On top of it, he has multiple TD games in each season vs Philly. I would thin that Saunders only helps to add to that total and the overall total to Portis' TDs.

 

[Family Matters]

in the last 9 games that LJ started, he had:

261 for 1351 and 16 TDs rushing

27 for 304 and 1 TD receiving

I don't like extrapolating, but that's a pace over 16 games for

464/2402/28.4 rushing

46/540/1.8 receiving

which, in ppr scoring, is 523.5 points.

The average for RB1 over the last 5 years is 408 points, over the last 2 years it's 365 points.

- LJ could see a 22% drop in production and would still beat that 5 year mark

- he could see a 28% drop in production and still beat last year's RB1 number

- no history of injury risk other than the standard "everyone is vulnerable"

- despite the endless talk about a new offensive coordinator, he's the former OL coach who was instrumental in putting in the current system....no reason to change.

no brainer.

I agree. I don't know how anyone would think he isn't the clear number 1. Those number speak loud and clear about how they feel in KC. And trust me when I say that the feeling is all the way at the top. Peterson wouldn't hire someone that didn't agree with him on LJ. Partly, it seemed, he wanted to get away from Vermeil because of their differences on LJ. Peterson is a big fan and Edwards will be too.As for getting 464 carries, I agree that won't happen. 350+ is very realistic and that would give him a shot at 2000 yards and 20+ TD's. And that's why he's the #1 RB this year. Nothing against LT but S.D. doesn't do what KC does.

 

[thecardiackid]

It's a top 4..... so moot point.

In some people's opinion but I think most believe top three.

and most believed that LT was well ahead of SA last year too....

Valid point...do you believe Portis has less risk than either of the other 3. My biggest worry about Portis would be that I don't think he will get the TD's. LJ, SA, and LT are all given every opportunity to score. I wouldn't be suprised if Portis put up very good #'s this year...I just don't see the TD's

It's gonna be a Saunders offence. Yes he will get the op for TDs and in bunches. I"m not sure why this would be a worry. I think LT and Portis present the least amount of risk.

I'm not familiar with a "Saunder's offense" could you elaborate a bit on that. Also, do you see that fast of a turn around and do they have the line to block for Portis?

Cowboyz sort of covers it below, but JIC, a "Saunder's Offense" would refer to the opinion that Washington's new OC guru Al Saunders, most recenlty of KC rushing offense fame, will significantly improve the WAS rush game with his system - and therefore Portis' #'s should increase.Sort of like Houston's new Kubiak Offense w/ him bringing DEN's *system* to the Texans. A lot of guys are excited about Portis' upside this year considering the success Saunders had in KC over the years. WRT the "fast turn around", I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Granted, WAS needs to grasp (and of course execute) Al's gameplan - and it seems like they've got a decent enough O line to succeed at some level. Whether that ends up being close to KC's past #'s is the debate - especially considering the learning curve, personnel, and the Skins "tough" division & schedule.

Considering CP's skills, and the "new and improved" offensive scheme (yet to be seen) I'd tend to agree w/ the upside potential @ the ADP of #4, but I'd personally still take the other 3 first - mainly due to slightly lower risk (LT/SA/LJ PROVED it last season), TE Cooley in the RZ, and overall TD opps IMO.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

 

[jurb26]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

It's also easy to forget that LJ came into the 2nd half of last year with some fresh legs that KC took serious advantage of.

 

[Bri]

see Hucks' thread too

 

[lebowski]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

I disagree on this with you. I would say the loss of an all pro tackle would be more detrimental than the coaching change. Now if Mike Martz was the new head coach I would be more worried about LJ's production.

 

[joffer]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

If Edwards wanted to change offensive philosophies, why wouldn't he bring in his own guy? He hired the former OL coach because the guy helped put that system in place. Edwards is there to improve the defense, plain and simple.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

If Edwards wanted to change offensive philosophies, why wouldn't he bring in his own guy? He hired the former OL coach because the guy helped put that system in place. Edwards is there to improve the defense, plain and simple.

Sure, but you still don't know how Solari will work out as an OC and whether he and Edwards will mesh.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

I disagree on this with you. I would say the loss of an all pro tackle would be more detrimental than the coaching change. Now if Mike Martz was the new head coach I would be more worried about LJ's production.

Hutch was a guard, I believe. A little bit less important than a tackle, in my opinion.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Guess from the responses that most disagree with me. Can anyone give some more opinions on why Johnson is such a safe bet?

 

[joffer]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

If Edwards wanted to change offensive philosophies, why wouldn't he bring in his own guy? He hired the former OL coach because the guy helped put that system in place. Edwards is there to improve the defense, plain and simple.

Sure, but you still don't know how Solari will work out as an OC and whether he and Edwards will mesh.

fair point, they both may end up being lousy play-callers

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

So knowing that we are all about assessing risk at these boards...who do you think has the least amount of risk, LT, LJ or SA?

I don't really agree with this one. New head coach, new offensive coordinator. Not only has the coordinator not had that job at the NFL level before, but he hasn't coached with Edawrds before. He's a hold over from the Vermeil days. Who knows how they will mesh together? I'm more worried about Herm Edwards and Mike Solari than I am with adding Phil Rivers and subtracting Steve Hutchinson. I can't argue the younger, less wear tear issue, but I don't think it's a slam dunk that LJ is the least risky.

If Edwards wanted to change offensive philosophies, why wouldn't he bring in his own guy? He hired the former OL coach because the guy helped put that system in place. Edwards is there to improve the defense, plain and simple.

Sure, but you still don't know how Solari will work out as an OC and whether he and Edwards will mesh.

fair point, they both may end up being lousy play-callers

Right, plus I imagine there are some dynamics between OC and HC when it comes to play calls on 3rd and short, going for it/play call on 4th down, etc.

Just something I think people are missing.

 

[lebowski]

Guess from the responses that most disagree with me. Can anyone give some more opinions on why Johnson is such a safe bet?

Sorry, construx...Hutch was a guard. But the loss of an all pro-lineman anywhere is not a good thing in my opinion. As far as LJ goes here is the way I see it...Positives:

Young

Hungry

Good runner

Good line

Running philosophy on offense

Negatives:

New coach

Never carried the rock for a full nfl season

The last one to me is the biggest concern! The problem is projecting injury risk is not easy to do. He was obviously a workhorse for the second half of last season and did not show any signs of slowing down. He had 336 carries last season Alexander had 370 last year. Essentially LJ had the carries of a full season and seemed to do fine. I see one strike against LJ : coaching, and I see one strike against SA: line. The question is which one do you see as more important. I see the line as being the most important myself.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I was reading over a thread I posted earlier this year here and it got me thinking a little bit. I know many of you out there believe fantasy football is about managing risk. The question then becomes, "which of the top 3 has the least amount of risk this year?" All 3 of the players have question marks but which one has the least risk. In my opinion the answer is Larry Johnson. He is coming back to basically the same team with basically the same offensive philosophy. I really don't see alot changing. He is also younger the LT or Alexander and thus has less wear and tear on his body.

Wow...I was a HUGE LJ supporter going into last season but even I will readily admit that I feel he has far and away the most risk of any of the big three. He is not going back to the same team with the same offensive philosophy. There really is no "same offensive philosophy" as #### Vermeil and Al Saunders who must own the KC RBs in their fantasy football leagues because they absolutely feed them the ball in the redzone like no other.Herm can say all he wants about how he's going to run the football now, but when push comes to shove and it's 3rd and goal from the 6 is he going to suddenly develope the gall to hand it off? I doubt it. It would be one thing if these guys were being replaced by another FF RB maker like Norv Turner, but Herm is merely average. And of course we can't forget that everyone around LJ is even older, Priest says he'll be coming back and Herm says he'll be used, Tony Richardson is gone, and LJ has never played a full season as the feature back. LJ certainly has the most upside, but he's the biggest bust risk as well.

LT has to be the pick for safest here. Ok....so he's got a new QB, so what? LT's numbers actually declined a bit when Brees turned his career around. When he had a poor QB situation he put up some of the best numbers of his career.

I really really really think people are vastly underrating the effect of Vermeil and Saunders being gone in KC.

EDIT: Heh, it censored out Vermeil's first name..

 

[joffer]

and LJ has never played a full season as the feature back.

since when isn't 336 carries considered a "full season"? The fact that he had the majority of those carries in a smaller window of time is more impressive, not less.

 

[joffer]

Wow...I was a HUGE LJ supporter going into last season but even I will readily admit that I feel he has far and away the most risk of any of the big three. He is not going back to the same team with the same offensive philosophy. There really is no "same offensive philosophy" as #### Vermeil and Al Saunders who must own the KC RBs in their fantasy football leagues because they absolutely feed them the ball in the redzone like no other.

again, if Herm wanted to change offensive philosophies, running systems, etc., why wouldn't he bring in his own guy for the OC job?

 

[Keepers]

Hutch was a guard, I believe. A little bit less important than a tackle, in my opinion.

In the passing game (and especially protecting a QB's blind side) I agree with you but in the run game, no. I would say they are pretty even in the run game and for teams that pound it up the middle, a guard may be more important.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Hutch was a guard, I believe. A little bit less important than a tackle, in my opinion.

In the passing game (and especially protecting a QB's blind side) I agree with you but in the run game, no. I would say they are pretty even in the run game and for teams that pound it up the middle, a guard may be more important.

Good point, and we are talking RB. Still think Alexander is safer than LJ.