What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Couch Potato 2013 Offseason Dynasty Rankings (1 Viewer)

1st post-draft update: QBs updated Wed 5/1.

1st post-draft update: TEs updated Wed 5/1.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Awesome stuff - Though in hindsight David Wilson stands out a bit... His ranking seems a bit contradictory to the fact that you've placed Lacy and Bell above him.

Purely don't think he's that talented?

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful, the Giants will continue to use a committee approach, and Andre Brown will get the TDs from 5 yards in. Bradshaw's best season was RB13 and he's a better pass catcher. Wilson did not catch a lot of passes in college and I'm not convinced he'll be a big contributor there in the pros either.

He's only had 71 pro carries and only two games that amounted to much, against the bad defenses of the Saints and Eagles, and he's not yet had more than 15 carries in a pro game. He had one year in college where he was the primary back, and while he did pile up stats against weak opposition, he didn't do a whole lot in 3 of his last 4 games against better teams at the end of the year. In the conf. title and bowl games he went for 2.9 YPC losing to Clemson and 3.4 YPC losing to Michigan.

So, with all that I have him at RB18, and that may be a little high. He's getting the benefit of the doubt that he can produce with more carries and is ahead of the three guys directly below him (C Johnson, Bush, S Jackson) due to the big 5+ year age difference.

I have a lot more confidence in Bell PIT and Lacy GB in terms of situation, overall workload, and TD production. I'll certainly bump Wilson up if he shows me more in a starting role against better teams, but I'm just as ready to drop him down if he shows me he's more Felix Jones than Chris Johnson.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alex Smith over EJ Manuel?
For me the cutoff is about Vick/Alex Smith where I feel like a QB can be fantasy useful if pressed into service due to bye/injury, and will keep his job for a couple of years. Vick is more iffy as to losing his job sooner, but his per game production is going to be better so he's higher. Smith is helped by going to Andy Reid's offense where he should have better numbers than in SF where Harbaugh kept a lid on him.

Below those guys I see a group of starting QBs who may be nothing but a liability if you ever have to use them. Some will be out of a job after 2013, some may survive and extra year, but I have little faith in Ponder, Weeden, Flynn, Gabbert to help me.

Now, Manuel is sandwiched between, and the reason is that I view him as more likely than not to end up belonging to the lower group that I just mentioned. I understand that I'm in the minority on this one, but I think he's a huge bust risk.

Here's what I said in the Manuel v. Geno thread a few days ago:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=681186#entry15529483

I'm happy to go against the grain and say Geno Smith.

Pre-draft he was ranked higher by most scouting services and probably most NFL teams as well. He's going to be a much better QB in my humble opinion. The fact that Buddy Nix and Doug Marrone felt differently and took Manuel instead has the whole FF world jumping on the bandwagon, but I think following their lead is a big mistake. The fact that one front office chose to draft Manuel in the first round doesn't mean anyone else has to think it was a good idea. To me he was a 3rd-5th round prospect, well below Smith. Manuel has serious bust potential, and if I had to bet I'd say he'll do just that. Smith I think will turn out to be pretty decent. Time will tell.
and http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=681186#entry15529709

I can't deny that NY is a circus for the time being, and that is a negative. But situations change, and surrounding talents change, coaching staffs change. After the Sanchez fiasco I think Smith has more rope than most incoming QBs not drafted in the first couple of picks because they don't want two disasters in a row on their hands. Plus he's going in pissed off, not scared IMO. Other QBs have succeeded in that city, and so can he.

But I'm not suggesting Smith is going to be a fantasy stud, just serviceable. What I am suggesting though is that Manuel won't cut it. His accuracy is bad, his pocket presence is bad, leadership skills, etc. My vote for Smith isn't so much FOR Smith but AGAINST Manuel. I just don't think he makes it in the NFL as a starter. I think he'll turn out to be another miss like Losman in Buffalo and I'm staying away.
I expect that I'll get a lot of raised eyebrows at my rankings of Geno Smith and EJ Manuel. It's not what most are doing. But I'll stand by it and we'll see how it plays out over the next 2-3 years.

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful, the Giants will continue to use a committee approach, and Andre Brown will get the TDs from 5 yards in. Bradshaw's best season was RB13 and he's a better pass catcher. Wilson did not catch a lot of passes in college and I'm not convinced he'll be a big contributor there in the pros either.

He's only had 71 pro carries and only two games that amounted to much, against the bad defenses of the Saints and Eagles, and he's not yet had more than 15 carries in a pro game. He had one year in college where he was the primary back, and while he did pile up stats against weak opposition, he didn't do a whole lot in 3 of his last 4 games against better teams at the end of the year. In the conf. title and bowl games he went for 2.9 YPC losing to Clemson and 3.4 YPC losing to Michigan.

So, with all that I have him at RB18, and that may be a little high. He's getting the benefit of the doubt that he can produce with more carries and is ahead of the three guys directly below him (C Johnson, Bush, S Jackson) due to the big 5+ year age difference.

I have a lot more confidence in Bell PIT and Lacy GB in terms of situation, overall workload, and TD production. I'll certainly bump Wilson up if he shows me more in a starting role against better teams, but I'm just as ready to drop him down if he shows me he's more Felix Jones than Chris Johnson.
There are certainly reasons to have concerns about Wilson, but I can't imagine why the bolded is one of them. He only had three games where he had 10+ carries last year (one of your concerns and rightfully so), so stating that he's "only had two good games, against bad defenses" is a somewhat misleading since he didn't really get the opportunity to have good games outside of those three games.

Also, while he may not be the receiving threat that Bradshaw was he's also 2x as explosive as Bradshaw and more likely to do major damage with his touches. Outside of his obvious talent, the thing that I like about him is that he's now had a year to learn the ropes and yet is younger than half of the RB's in the current crop of rookies and within 8 months of the youngest out of all of them. Risk certainly exists with Wilson so I don't necessarily disagree with your ranking though I'd prefer his upside to the safe play in La'Veon Bell and the even higher risks that come with Lacy.

By the way, easily my favorite set of rankings on FBG's. Thanks for continuing to post them and respond to inquiries about them. :moneybag:

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful, the Giants will continue to use a committee approach, and Andre Brown will get the TDs from 5 yards in. Bradshaw's best season was RB13 and he's a better pass catcher. Wilson did not catch a lot of passes in college and I'm not convinced he'll be a big contributor there in the pros either.

He's only had 71 pro carries and only two games that amounted to much, against the bad defenses of the Saints and Eagles, and he's not yet had more than 15 carries in a pro game. He had one year in college where he was the primary back, and while he did pile up stats against weak opposition, he didn't do a whole lot in 3 of his last 4 games against better teams at the end of the year. In the conf. title and bowl games he went for 2.9 YPC losing to Clemson and 3.4 YPC losing to Michigan.

So, with all that I have him at RB18, and that may be a little high. He's getting the benefit of the doubt that he can produce with more carries and is ahead of the three guys directly below him (C Johnson, Bush, S Jackson) due to the big 5+ year age difference.

I have a lot more confidence in Bell PIT and Lacy GB in terms of situation, overall workload, and TD production. I'll certainly bump Wilson up if he shows me more in a starting role against better teams, but I'm just as ready to drop him down if he shows me he's more Felix Jones than Chris Johnson.
Well, I think you're discounting him way too much and penalizing him for something he has no control over (the schedule of teams he played against). Sure, you may want to temper your expectations because he played against lower defenses, but other RBs play against those teams and don't put up the numbers he was able to do. More importantly, it's how he looked doing it.

But, with all that aside, the one thing I would argue is one of the biggest points that should move him up much higher for you. The NYG are a very well-run organization that has always had a strong emphasis on the running game. With that emphasis, they took exactly 1 RB in the entire draft and it was with the 2nd to last pick in the NFL draft (Michael Cox). They let Bradshaw go. They didn't bring in a single FA. Aside from Andre Brown, they don't have much else at RB (Da'Rel Scott and Ryan Torain). And we know that Brown isn't the most durable guy at this point.

That tells me the NYG have the utmost confidence in Wilson to take the job and run with it. And, even during their down years, the NYG RB position has been very, very productive both in NFL as well as FF terms. In other words, there are very few situations in the NFL that you can trust what the team and coaching staff is going to do. This is one of those you should trust pretty comfortably. So you've got a 1st round RB with elite measurables on a team that seems incredibly committed to him that has historically done well in both evaluation and ultimate production from the position. And ignoring all that, if you just watch him, he jumps off the screen at you.

Sure, you can wait to see more. But, if you have any hopes of acquiring him, it will be way too late by then. There's not many guys that have elite RB potential. This is one of those very few guys that has the potential to vault there as early as this year (for the rest of you who don't already have him up there).

I think RB18 is entirely too conservative for him given the whole picture.

 
I just took Wilson in a startup draft at pick 2.8 (RB10, right ahead of Lynch). It is true that I took him where I did mainly due to his age, but I honestly think he could live up to that billing as soon as this year. Also helpful is that it is a return-yardage league, so he gets bonus points if he stays on there as well.

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful, the Giants will continue to use a committee approach, and Andre Brown will get the TDs from 5 yards in. Bradshaw's best season was RB13 and he's a better pass catcher. Wilson did not catch a lot of passes in college and I'm not convinced he'll be a big contributor there in the pros either.

He's only had 71 pro carries and only two games that amounted to much, against the bad defenses of the Saints and Eagles, and he's not yet had more than 15 carries in a pro game. He had one year in college where he was the primary back, and while he did pile up stats against weak opposition, he didn't do a whole lot in 3 of his last 4 games against better teams at the end of the year. In the conf. title and bowl games he went for 2.9 YPC losing to Clemson and 3.4 YPC losing to Michigan.
There are certainly reasons to have concerns about Wilson, but I can't imagine why the bolded is one of them. He only had three games where he had 10+ carries last year (one of your concerns and rightfully so), so stating that he's "only had two good games, against bad defenses" is a somewhat misleading since he didn't really get the opportunity to have good games outside of those three games.

Also, while he may not be the receiving threat that Bradshaw was he's also 2x as explosive as Bradshaw and more likely to do major damage with his touches. Outside of his obvious talent, the thing that I like about him is that he's now had a year to learn the ropes and yet is younger than half of the RB's in the current crop of rookies and within 8 months of the youngest out of all of them. Risk certainly exists with Wilson so I don't necessarily disagree with your ranking though I'd prefer his upside to the safe play in La'Veon Bell and the even higher risks that come with Lacy.

By the way, easily my favorite set of rankings on FBG's. Thanks for continuing to post them and respond to inquiries about them. :moneybag:
I think you're selling Bradshaw a bit short tbh. 07-08 Bradshaw was THE explosive guy for the Giants. It's a shame the foot issues have made him a 'truck it out' type RB.

Well, I think you're discounting him way too much and penalizing him for something he has no control over (the schedule of teams he played against). Sure, you may want to temper your expectations because he played against lower defenses, but other RBs play against those teams and don't put up the numbers he was able to do. More importantly, it's how he looked doing it.

But, with all that aside, the one thing I would argue is one of the biggest points that should move him up much higher for you. The NYG are a very well-run organization that has always had a strong emphasis on the running game. With that emphasis, they took exactly 1 RB in the entire draft and it was with the 2nd to last pick in the NFL draft (Michael Cox). They let Bradshaw go. They didn't bring in a single FA. Aside from Andre Brown, they don't have much else at RB (Da'Rel Scott and Ryan Torain). And we know that Brown isn't the most durable guy at this point.

That tells me the NYG have the utmost confidence in Wilson to take the job and run with it. And, even during their down years, the NYG RB position has been very, very productive both in NFL as well as FF terms. In other words, there are very few situations in the NFL that you can trust what the team and coaching staff is going to do. This is one of those you should trust pretty comfortably. So you've got a 1st round RB with elite measurables on a team that seems incredibly committed to him that has historically done well in both evaluation and ultimate production from the position. And ignoring all that, if you just watch him, he jumps off the screen at you.

Sure, you can wait to see more. But, if you have any hopes of acquiring him, it will be way too late by then. There's not many guys that have elite RB potential. This is one of those very few guys that has the potential to vault there as early as this year (for the rest of you who don't already have him up there).

I think RB18 is entirely too conservative for him given the whole picture.
I think if you're going to look at Wilson within the context of the NYG, you've also got to take into account that Coughlin in general doesn't leave much in the hands of rookies, especially when they start off as badly as Wilson did team-wise. I can't really look at the minimal amounts of carries as either positive or negatives really knowing that's how the organisation and coaches organise their team. If it's anything to go by, they're better for it as opposed to chucking rookies into the deep.

Bruce's criticisms of Wilsons lack of production historically are fair enough, though I would consider how Wilson has looked GETTING those yards, as gianmarco said, to override that for the moment. He just looks the part on the field. I'm biased as well though so...

Thanks for elaborating either way Bruce :thumbsu:

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful,
According to STATS X-Info, Virginia Tech RB David Wilson led the nation in yards after contact in 2011.
Wilson's 990 yards after contact were 267 more than Trent Richardson's, and the sample size isn't skewed. Wilson had 290 carries to Richardson's 283. According to the National Football Post's Dan Pompei, the STATS X-Info is being used by "several teams" preparing for the draft in two weeks.
 
I expect that I'll get a lot of raised eyebrows at my rankings of Geno Smith and EJ Manuel. It's not what most are doing. But I'll stand by it and we'll see how it plays out over the next 2-3 years.
I can appreciate ranking Geno over EJ. I think that's completely valid. But perhaps you're valuing short term backup QBs higher. Palmer and Smith will really only have trade value to 1 out of 50 teams, and even then no one's overpaying. EJ will be taken in the late 1st to mid 2nd in rookie drafts, whereas it is hard to get a 4th for Smith in most leagues. If you wanted to ignore market value and just look at expected value, I think Smith's expected remaining career VBD is pretty close to 0, and I say that as someone who thinks he's a little bit of a sleeper this year.

I can understand just being convinced EJ will bust and putting a DND on him. But compare EJ to Locker. Both are guys who had warts coming in as passers but got taken in the 1st anyway. Both have legs and could get added rushing stats. One has a 54% completion percentage in college, and the other 68%. One can't keep his left arm in its socket and has already floundered in the league for 2 years, the other has no failure bias built up yet except for the fact some think he was overdrafted. I think EJ is worth more than Locker just because of the psychology of not being shown he's terrible yet.

The biggest negative I've seen on EJ is that he only sees half the field, and like Gabbert that's not going to cut it in the NFL. Obviously Gabbert is a low floor, but given the effect of the rushing threat both to defenses and in fantasy scoring, I think the floor is much higher than that. Locker is much better at seeing the field, but has much more trouble delivering the ball where he wants it. Pick your poison I guess, which trait is harder to develop; which organization is better suited to develop passers; how much time does each guy have left before the team just has to move on. Poor man's Kaepernick vs. poor man's McNabb.

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful,
>

According to STATS X-Info, Virginia Tech RB David Wilson led the nation in yards after contact in 2011.
Wilson's 990 yards after contact were 267 more than Trent Richardson's, and the sample size isn't skewed. Wilson had 290 carries to Richardson's 283. According to the National Football Post's Dan Pompei, the STATS X-Info is being used by "several teams" preparing for the draft in two weeks.
I agree that Wilson is a bit low, but I think this stat is flawed. Any stat that suggests Wilson breaks more tackles than Trent - if that's how we're using it - needs major context. Doug Martin got credit for something like 170 yards of YAC based on 3 broken plays where he was mearly touched. I have a feeling a lot of that went in to Wilson's YAC production, while Trent is a beast to bring down, even at the pro level with broken ribs. I have no problem with the statement that Wilson isn't powerful for a RB at the pro level.

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful,
>

According to STATS X-Info, Virginia Tech RB David Wilson led the nation in yards after contact in 2011.
Wilson's 990 yards after contact were 267 more than Trent Richardson's, and the sample size isn't skewed. Wilson had 290 carries to Richardson's 283. According to the National Football Post's Dan Pompei, the STATS X-Info is being used by "several teams" preparing for the draft in two weeks.
I agree that Wilson is a bit low, but I think this stat is flawed. Any stat that suggests Wilson breaks more tackles than Trent - if that's how we're using it - needs major context. Doug Martin got credit for something like 170 yards of YAC based on 3 broken plays where he was mearly touched. I have a feeling a lot of that went in to Wilson's YAC production, while Trent is a beast to bring down, even at the pro level with broken ribs. I have no problem with the statement that Wilson isn't powerful for a RB at the pro level.

Wilson has more than enough power for a RB at the pro level

He's not AP, but plenty of stiff arms and pushing defensive players backward on a limited number of carries there. Not much in the way of him getting knocked backward and failing to get yards due to lack of power.

 
gianmarco, on 03 May 2013 - 12:14, said:

Wilson has more than enough power for a RB at the pro level

He's not AP, but plenty of stiff arms and pushing defensive players backward on a limited number of carries there. Not much in the way of him getting knocked backward and failing to get yards due to lack of power.
There were such runs during the season, however, that are not going to show up on highlights. Looking at his game logs, he was very reliant on the big play. As a Wilson owner, early on, I recall him getting 1 to 3 carries a game, the large majority of which went for -2 to 2 yards, and he didn't look very strong. He's electric, so if he can break runs as often as, say, Spiller, it won't matter. But, I personally don't think he strong, compared to the average NFL RB.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So is Bell's big jump strictly due to situation or do you really like his talent as well?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I want to disagree on your Andre Johnson ranking, mostly for superstitious reasons. I disagreed last year and he ended up as a top 5 WR in my PPR leagues. ... and #9 in non-PPR with only 4 TDs.

Seriously I think (as in hope) that AJ has three stellar seasons left in him. Regardless I'll be riding him until the wheels fall off.

 
Previously listed under WR:

130 NR Robinson, Denard Michigan 22.9 8.7 … 5th to 6th round in 2013. (projected)

Where does he fall as a RB?

 
Just wanted to say nice work, appreciate the thread always look forward to it every year.

 
David Wilson.... He's fast, he's elusive, and he'll bust off a nice big run at times. But he's not powerful, the Giants will continue to use a committee approach, and Andre Brown will get the TDs from 5 yards in. Bradshaw's best season was RB13 and he's a better pass catcher. Wilson did not catch a lot of passes in college and I'm not convinced he'll be a big contributor there in the pros either.

He's only had 71 pro carries and only two games that amounted to much, against the bad defenses of the Saints and Eagles, and he's not yet had more than 15 carries in a pro game. He had one year in college where he was the primary back, and while he did pile up stats against weak opposition, he didn't do a whole lot in 3 of his last 4 games against better teams at the end of the year. In the conf. title and bowl games he went for 2.9 YPC losing to Clemson and 3.4 YPC losing to Michigan.

So, with all that I have him at RB18, and that may be a little high. He's getting the benefit of the doubt that he can produce with more carries and is ahead of the three guys directly below him (C Johnson, Bush, S Jackson) due to the big 5+ year age difference.

I have a lot more confidence in Bell PIT and Lacy GB in terms of situation, overall workload, and TD production. I'll certainly bump Wilson up if he shows me more in a starting role against better teams, but I'm just as ready to drop him down if he shows me he's more Felix Jones than Chris Johnson.
I tend to agree with this although I do think Wilson could get a lot of opportunity for a time. I am not comfortable enough with him as a complete RB to consider that a lock though. The Giants could still bring Bradshaw back also.

The RB style I see in Wilson is similar to what I see in Franklin. They are very quick and fast. So if the hole is there for them they can get behind a defense quickly. But Nfl defenses are too good for a team to count on their RB doing that often enough to not change that up with a more powerful or elusive player, or both like Bradshaw at times. So I do not see him as a long term feature RB even if he does get that type of opportunity for awhile, the team may still prefer having a complimentary RB after giving him the chance to be a 20 touch a game guy for awhile, as I think he will have a lot of dead plays. Some of those plays on early downs might be more effective with a RB who gets more yards after contact or a variety of other qualities that I am not sure Wilson has as strengths in his game right now. At the same time it is too early to judge how good Wilson could be. I do not get that warm fuzzy when I watch him play though.

 
Previously listed under WR:

130 NR Robinson, Denard Michigan 22.9 8.7 … 5th to 6th round in 2013. (projected)

Where does he fall as a RB?
I wasn't able to get back to the thread Friday but hope to today later on sometime. Thanks for all the feedback on players everybody. Good stuff and good food for thought where you disagree. I'll reply on them later today I think. One quickie though before I'm off to work this morning I can answer is Denard Robinson, and I meant to post something on him after realizing I didn't have him in the RB update (I still have him listed as WR, but JAC has now said he'll be RB/slash for them).

I'll move Denard to RB in my next update and he'll likely go in the RB4/5 range somewhere around RB45-55 I think for now. I drafted him in a rookie draft this week at rookie #40 and listed this comment: "A real speedster and exceptional athlete, was college QB then RB near the end due to shoulder injury, his last couple games had 100 yards in each. JAC has said he will be RB as a pro, and with MJD a free agent after this season let's take a flier on Robinson with a 4th round rookie pick."

Thanks for asking about him and reminding me I needed to address this fix before the next update.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This just seems silly to me considering what Bennett showed last year when he was on both legs. Once he got hurt, his production dipped. I think he's at least a top-end TE2 if not a TE1.

TIGHT ENDS (updated 5/1)

Tier 6 – TE3: Vets as occasional lineup fillers and youth with uncertain potential
25 +3 Bennett, Martellus CHI 26.5 4.9 … 2nd round in 2008. Signed through 2016. Signed 3/12.
 
I don't believe Dan Herron is on a NFL roster right now.
Bengals, here's two sources

http://www.bengals.com/team/roster.html

http://www.rotoworld.com/teams/rosters/nfl/cin/cincinnati-bengals

And contract info:

12/4/2012: Signed a four-year, $2.1 million contract. 2013: $480,000, 2014: $570,000, 2015: $660,000, 2016: Free Agenthttp://www.rotoworld.com/teams/contracts/nfl/cin/bengals
my bad, I was looking at MFL and they have him listed as a free agent. Guess it's their mistake...he's going to have a hard time making the roster. I'm a huge fan of Burkhead. Although I could be bias as I've watched most of the Husker games. I think he's better than any other NFL Husker RB in the past few years- ala Brandon Jackson or Roy Helu. He has all the tools except for a 40 yd dash.

 
MFL can't be relied on this time of year especially with minor players. They don't keep up with signings of such players in offseason very well. I could show you 20+ players easily right now who are on rosters that they don't list.

 
This just seems silly to me considering what Bennett showed last year when he was on both legs. Once he got hurt, his production dipped. I think he's at least a top-end TE2 if not a TE1.

TIGHT ENDS (updated 5/1)

Tier 6 – TE3: Vets as occasional lineup fillers and youth with uncertain potential

25 +3 Bennett, Martellus CHI 26.5 4.9 … 2nd round in 2008. Signed through 2016. Signed 3/12.
Glad you think it's so silly. Happy to give you something to laugh at. :)

Yeah, in terms of last year's production I do have him low. And he signed a 4-year deal with CHI so there's more security than there was last year. And Trestman is the new OC in CHI and with him a new system which may use the TE more than in the recent past.

There are a few reasons I had him this low, maybe not great ones. I have an admitted bias against "Marty B" and still have in my head the Cowboys being happy to see him go after not meeting expectations, and the fact that he only lasted a year in New York before moving on. It was said the Giants tried to re-sign him, but they didn't try all that hard and the contract he signed with the Bears is one the Giants could have handled if they wanted to. Also, Cutler only once in his 6-year career has had a TE exceed 49 catches in a season (Olsen with 60 in 2010).

I don't recall production dipping due to injury, but that might be true. It looks like his production was constant enough through the year. Don't forget that he had the benefit of being in the NYG system with Eli throwing the ball, which was much better for him than his new situation will likely be in CHI.

No way I'd adjust him up to TE1 status. He's just not someone I'd trust long term. I think he still does a lot of bonehead things (he was famous in DAL for immaturity and not knowing where he should be on the field for plays) and could wear out his welcome in CHI in a couple of years. And I'd want to see Cutler using his TE more, and see how much the TE is utilized in Trestman's offense, before bumping him much. That said, I will revisit my ranking for him and see if I should have him a little higher.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I want to disagree on your Andre Johnson ranking, mostly for superstitious reasons. I disagreed last year and he ended up as a top 5 WR in my PPR leagues. ... and #9 in non-PPR with only 4 TDs.

Seriously I think (as in hope) that AJ has three stellar seasons left in him. Regardless I'll be riding him until the wheels fall off.
Same here. You have to at this point. Buyers are only going to bite if you sell him at a worst case scenario price.

 
This just seems silly to me considering what Bennett showed last year when he was on both legs. Once he got hurt, his production dipped. I think he's at least a top-end TE2 if not a TE1.

TIGHT ENDS (updated 5/1)

Tier 6 – TE3: Vets as occasional lineup fillers and youth with uncertain potential

25 +3 Bennett, Martellus CHI 26.5 4.9 … 2nd round in 2008. Signed through 2016. Signed 3/12.
Glad you think it's so silly. Happy to give you something to laugh at. :)

Yeah, in terms of last year's production I do have him low. And he signed a 4-year deal with CHI so there's more security than there was last year. And Trestman is the new OC in CHI and with him a new system which may use the TE more than in the recent past.

There are a few reasons I had him this low, maybe not great ones. I have an admitted bias against "Marty B" and still have in my head the Cowboys being happy to see him go after not meeting expectations, and the fact that he only lasted a year in New York before moving on. It was said the Giants tried to re-sign him, but they didn't try all that hard and the contract he signed with the Bears is one the Giants could have handled if they wanted to. Also, Cutler only once in his 6-year career has had a TE exceed 49 catches in a season (Olsen with 60 in 2010).

I don't recall production dipping due to injury, but that might be true. It looks like his production was constant enough through the year. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/BennMa00-3.php Don't forget that he had the benefit of being in the NYG system with Eli throwing the ball, which was much better for him than his new situation will likely be in CHI.

No way I'd adjust him up to TE1 status. He's just not someone I'd trust long term. I think he still does a lot of bonehead things (he was famous in DAL for immaturity and not knowing where he should be on the field for plays) and could wear out his welcome in CHI in a couple of years. And I'd want to see Cutler using his TE more, and see how much the TE is utilized in Trestman's offense, before bumping him much. That said, I will revisit my ranking for him and see if I should have him a little higher.
Guess I think he's matured since those Dallas days. While he has an interesting personality, early reports from Chicago are positive:

‘‘He’s a student,” Bears tight end coach Andy Bischoffsaid Thursday after the third day of minicamp. ‘‘He’s writing everything down. He’s asking questions. He wants to be coached. Really, in every possible way, he’s been a joy.’’

‘‘He’s often involved in suggestions and mentorship in the right way,’’ Bischoff said. ‘‘He’s not overstepping the guidelines of a coach, but really just reinforcing the player. He’s been a leader. He wants to be the leader of that group. He’s been doing it quietly. The personality comes out in non-football-related deals. He’s been wonderful.’’
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/19575206-606/new-bears-tight-end-martellus-bennett-quickly-at-head-of-the-class.html

While New York could have paid him, they have some serious financial issues coming up trying to keep both Cruz & Nicks. The 4 year $21 million deal may have been way too much when you consider the 1 year 2.25 million deal they signed Myers too. I wouldn't hold that or the Dallas stuff against him. Have to look at what we/ve seen on the field which is an athletic freak who makes plays when they toss him the rock.

Cutler really hasn't ever had a tight end. In Denver, Scheffler was young & raw, but he liked tossing him the rock. Once he got to Chicago, Olsen was solid, but then Martz shipped him off because they didn't want to use a TE due to the system, not Jay's fault. Last year, Kellen Davis was dropping balls and they just didn't have that target which is why they invested so much in the Black Unicorn...

 
This just seems silly to me considering what Bennett showed last year when he was on both legs. Once he got hurt, his production dipped. I think he's at least a top-end TE2 if not a TE1.

TIGHT ENDS (updated 5/1)

Tier 6 – TE3: Vets as occasional lineup fillers and youth with uncertain potential

25 +3 Bennett, Martellus CHI 26.5 4.9 … 2nd round in 2008. Signed through 2016. Signed 3/12.
Glad you think it's so silly. Happy to give you something to laugh at. :)

Yeah, in terms of last year's production I do have him low. And he signed a 4-year deal with CHI so there's more security than there was last year. And Trestman is the new OC in CHI and with him a new system which may use the TE more than in the recent past.

There are a few reasons I had him this low, maybe not great ones. I have an admitted bias against "Marty B" and still have in my head the Cowboys being happy to see him go after not meeting expectations, and the fact that he only lasted a year in New York before moving on. It was said the Giants tried to re-sign him, but they didn't try all that hard and the contract he signed with the Bears is one the Giants could have handled if they wanted to. Also, Cutler only once in his 6-year career has had a TE exceed 49 catches in a season (Olsen with 60 in 2010).

I don't recall production dipping due to injury, but that might be true. It looks like his production was constant enough through the year. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/BennMa00-3.php Don't forget that he had the benefit of being in the NYG system with Eli throwing the ball, which was much better for him than his new situation will likely be in CHI.

No way I'd adjust him up to TE1 status. He's just not someone I'd trust long term. I think he still does a lot of bonehead things (he was famous in DAL for immaturity and not knowing where he should be on the field for plays) and could wear out his welcome in CHI in a couple of years. And I'd want to see Cutler using his TE more, and see how much the TE is utilized in Trestman's offense, before bumping him much. That said, I will revisit my ranking for him and see if I should have him a little higher.
Guess I think he's matured since those Dallas days. While he has an interesting personality, early reports from Chicago are positive:

>

‘‘He’s a student,” Bears tight end coach Andy Bischoffsaid Thursday after the third day of minicamp. ‘‘He’s writing everything down. He’s asking questions. He wants to be coached. Really, in every possible way, he’s been a joy.’’

‘‘He’s often involved in suggestions and mentorship in the right way,’’ Bischoff said. ‘‘He’s not overstepping the guidelines of a coach, but really just reinforcing the player. He’s been a leader. He wants to be the leader of that group. He’s been doing it quietly. The personality comes out in non-football-related deals. He’s been wonderful.’’
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/19575206-606/new-bears-tight-end-martellus-bennett-quickly-at-head-of-the-class.html

While New York could have paid him, they have some serious financial issues coming up trying to keep both Cruz & Nicks. The 4 year $21 million deal may have been way too much when you consider the 1 year 2.25 million deal they signed Myers too. I wouldn't hold that or the Dallas stuff against him. Have to look at what we/ve seen on the field which is an athletic freak who makes plays when they toss him the rock.

Cutler really hasn't ever had a tight end. In Denver, Scheffler was young & raw, but he liked tossing him the rock. Once he got to Chicago, Olsen was solid, but then Martz shipped him off because they didn't want to use a TE due to the system, not Jay's fault. Last year, Kellen Davis was dropping balls and they just didn't have that target which is why they invested so much in the Black Unicorn...
Good stuff LC, thanks. I like the Bischoff quotes too. I remember Martz being part of the problem in CHI also.

I'm never going to be real high on M Bennett but of course if you are, great, and I hope you are right. I'm not against moving him up when I do TEs again (same for any player at any position if my mind can be changed), but I'd want to also look at who I was moving down for him.

I mentioned my bias against him, and that's a hard nut to crack. One year of good (55 catch) production in a great situation with Eli before leaving NYG wasn't enough to erase an opinion I've had for quite awhile concerning the guy. My gut says be cautious expecting 50+ catches again in 2013, and be really cautious longer term expecting him to be more than a flaky guy with one aberrational season to his credit... but again I probably do have him a little too low due to my bias and will revisit the ranking.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Marty B is a classic example of having million dollar talent but a ten-cent head. Watch his videos on YouTube for further proof. I wouldn't count on him to work hard on anything, he hasn't done that since he's been in the league so why start now?

 
Rankings comments:

1. Manning seems too high. It would seem to be a rare situation that one would value him higher than Kaepernick and Wilson.

2. Freeman seems too low. His season was better than it appeared at face value last year.

3. Why do you have RGIII a tier above Kaepernick and Wilson? Do you believe his situation is clearly better or his talent is clearly superior or both? Is this based on a short or long term window?

4. Harvin seems a tier too high. How many targets are you expecting him to get in the short term?

5. Gordon and Danario Alexander both seem too high.

6. Vincent Brown seems too low.

7, Tony Gonzalez seem too high. We have to assume he is a one year guy at this point. How can he be more valuable than other guys below him, like Vernon Davis.

8. Housler seems low.
Some of these have been addressed, but not all. CP?

 
Just scooped Marvin Jones and Nick Toon in the 5th of a rookie draft. Was surprised to see how high Bruce has them although I agree somewhat and think its funny how people get so attracted to the new toys

 
RBs updated 5/14.

For those who were wondering, Denard Robinson is added and comes in at RB51.

QBs updated 5/14.

TEs updated 5/14.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This just seems silly to me considering what Bennett showed last year when he was on both legs. Once he got hurt, his production dipped. I think he's at least a top-end TE2 if not a TE1.

TIGHT ENDS (updated 5/1)

Tier 6 – TE3: Vets as occasional lineup fillers and youth with uncertain potential

25 +3 Bennett, Martellus CHI 26.5 4.9 … 2nd round in 2008. Signed through 2016. Signed 3/12.
Glad you think it's so silly. Happy to give you something to laugh at. :)

Yeah, in terms of last year's production I do have him low. And he signed a 4-year deal with CHI so there's more security than there was last year. And Trestman is the new OC in CHI and with him a new system which may use the TE more than in the recent past.

There are a few reasons I had him this low, maybe not great ones. I have an admitted bias against "Marty B" and still have in my head the Cowboys being happy to see him go after not meeting expectations, and the fact that he only lasted a year in New York before moving on. It was said the Giants tried to re-sign him, but they didn't try all that hard and the contract he signed with the Bears is one the Giants could have handled if they wanted to. Also, Cutler only once in his 6-year career has had a TE exceed 49 catches in a season (Olsen with 60 in 2010).

I don't recall production dipping due to injury, but that might be true. It looks like his production was constant enough through the year. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/BennMa00-3.php Don't forget that he had the benefit of being in the NYG system with Eli throwing the ball, which was much better for him than his new situation will likely be in CHI.

No way I'd adjust him up to TE1 status. He's just not someone I'd trust long term. I think he still does a lot of bonehead things (he was famous in DAL for immaturity and not knowing where he should be on the field for plays) and could wear out his welcome in CHI in a couple of years. And I'd want to see Cutler using his TE more, and see how much the TE is utilized in Trestman's offense, before bumping him much. That said, I will revisit my ranking for him and see if I should have him a little higher.
Guess I think he's matured since those Dallas days. While he has an interesting personality, early reports from Chicago are positive:

>

‘‘He’s a student,” Bears tight end coach Andy Bischoffsaid Thursday after the third day of minicamp. ‘‘He’s writing everything down. He’s asking questions. He wants to be coached. Really, in every possible way, he’s been a joy.’’

[color=rgb(61,60,60);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;]‘‘He’s often involved in suggestions and mentorship in the right way,’’ Bischoff said. ‘‘He’s not overstepping the guidelines of a coach, but really just reinforcing the player. He’s been a leader. He wants to be the leader of that group. He’s been doing it quietly. The personality comes out in non-football-related deals. He’s been wonderful.’’[/color]
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/bears/19575206-606/new-bears-tight-end-martellus-bennett-quickly-at-head-of-the-class.html

While New York could have paid him, they have some serious financial issues coming up trying to keep both Cruz & Nicks. The 4 year $21 million deal may have been way too much when you consider the 1 year 2.25 million deal they signed Myers too. I wouldn't hold that or the Dallas stuff against him. Have to look at what we/ve seen on the field which is an athletic freak who makes plays when they toss him the rock.

Cutler really hasn't ever had a tight end. In Denver, Scheffler was young & raw, but he liked tossing him the rock. Once he got to Chicago, Olsen was solid, but then Martz shipped him off because they didn't want to use a TE due to the system, not Jay's fault. Last year, Kellen Davis was dropping balls and they just didn't have that target which is why they invested so much in the Black Unicorn...

Good stuff LC, thanks. I like the Bischoff quotes too. I remember Martz being part of the problem in CHI also.

I'm never going to be real high on M Bennett but of course if you are, great, and I hope you are right. I'm not against moving him up when I do TEs again (same for any player at any position if my mind can be changed), but I'd want to also look at who I was moving down for him.

I mentioned my bias against him, and that's a hard nut to crack. One year of good (55 catch) production in a great situation with Eli before leaving NYG wasn't enough to erase an opinion I've had for quite awhile concerning the guy. My gut says be cautious expecting 50+ catches again in 2013, and be really cautious longer term expecting him to be more than a flaky guy with one aberrational season to his credit... but again I probably do have him a little too low due to my bias and will revisit the ranking.

From the 5-7 Bears games I watched I saw Cutler targeting Kellen Davis plenty of times, he just would rarely make the play. I would wonder why Cutler would keep going to him sometimes.

>New Bears coach Marc Trestman has not yet unveiled detailed plans for his offense. But one thing for sure is that the team needs to get more out of the tight end position in the passing game than it did in 2012.

This past season Bears tight ends combined for only 29 receptions, the fewest in the NFL for the second straight year. Starter Kellen Davis caught just 19 passes while being plagued by drops.

"We need a tight end that can threaten the defense," said new tight ends coach Andy Bischoff, who spent the past five seasons working on Trestman's staff with the CFL's Montreal Alouettes.

"We need a tight end that can create stress in the middle of the field, or wherever we place him, because we're going to line him up next to the tackle, outside the numbers and in the backfield, and we're going to expect the defense to figure it out."

A Bears tight end caught at least 20 passes in 17 straight seasons before the streak was snapped in 2011 when Davis was limited to 18 receptions. Desmond Clark caught 45, 44 and 41 passes from 2006-2008, while Greg Olsen had 39, 54, 60 and 41 receptions from 2007-10.

Mike Martz, who served as offensive coordinator in 2010-11, didn't employ tight ends as down-the-field threats in the passing game. His successor, Mike Tice, made a more concerted effort to incorporate tight ends as receivers in 2012. But Davis struggled throughout the season.

Backup Matt Spaeth delivered one of the top plays of the year with a diving 13-yard touchdown catch against the Vikings, but the 6-7, 260-pounder is a more of a natural blocker than receiver.

"Absolutely we need a tight end that can catch the ball," Bischoff said. "The days of the tight end that blocked and ran flat routes in this league are coming to an end. The guys that just run three-yard flat routes, that is not going to do anything for you."

New Bears offensive coordinator Aaron Kromer arrives from New Orleans, where he worked with a Saints offense that featured star tight end Jimmy Graham. An athletic former college basketball player, Graham has 184 receptions for 2,292 yards and 20 touchdowns the past two seasons.

"We've utilized the tight end in this offense quite often," Kromer said. "We'd surely like to be able to throw the football to them. We'd like them to be able to block somewhat in the running game. They're not going to be an offensive lineman blocking, but definitely the more weapons you have the better off you are." http://www.chicagobears.com/news/article-1/Bears-want-their-tight-ends-to-threaten-defenses/f8f04829-37b8-4eed-98c9-83ba835bdb47
So the coaching does suggest that a TE could have a much bigger role in the Bears offense in 2013 if Bennett is that guy I could see something like 80 targets. I am not quite seeing Bennett being the guy who will take targets away from Marshall, Jeffrey and Forte.

The offense will still feature the best Bears personel. I could see Bennett getting more targets than Jeffrey perhaps but I am just not seeing him being so talented that the Bears will give him over 100 targets with the other options available.

Marquess Wilson was added as a rookie. I do not see the other TE getting a lot of targets either. Trestman did seem to have a passing offense that goes to the inside players a bit more than the outside guys, but his main receivers were more big WR like Marshall, Jeffrey, Wilson, Rucker rather than a bigger player like Bennett. So while I see a very good opportunity situation for Bennett I do not necessarily think it is so good that I would expect Bennett to perform as a TE1 in 2013. While I could see that happening I do not have enough reasons to think that it will despite some of the coaching decisions pointing towards that being a strong possibility. I think that Forte will be more involved in the passing game as well.

I think a big part of why the Bears TE performance has been so poor is in part because their offensive line has been so bad at the tackle positions that they often need the TE to help them in pass protection. I think with improved LT play from Bushrod that will allow them to get Bennett or other receivers out in patterns more than they have the last couple years. I still am not that excited about Bennett in 2013 or moving forward. i am open to reasons why I should be.

Forte on the new offense- http://www.chicagobears.com/multimedia/videos/Forte-on-new-offense/aa2c132e-5051-48f0-9d40-4ec6e7472958

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top