Dynasty: 2013 Off-season Grocery List (3 Viewers)

[jonboltz]

ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside.

This is where I'd disagree. He put up 4700 passing yards and 33 total TDs. Both of those numbers could absolutely go down. Keep in mind that 1) he is likely losing his HOF TE; and 2) they will likely have a stronger running game next year.

 

[Inspiration]

I'd tend to side with this view point (and a little beyond). On one of my better teams, I traded RGIII and a late 2014 1st for my personally ranked QB3, Matt Ryan, and a random 2014 2nd. I can definitely understand the RGIII optimism based on what he has shown, but for me, thinking he can adapt to produce elite passing numbers and knowing he can are two very different things. Also, even if he scales back on the running, I'm still worried that I won't be able to rely on him to stay on the field.

The QB position is such that it's elite production or nothing, in terms of helping your fantasy team win. Upside is the most important factor when I value a QB. Matt Ryan is very likely an average starting QB on a yearly basis (5-7) out of 12. He gives his owners very little advantage over Tony Romo, who is essentially below replacement level, when it comes to dynasty value. Give me RG3.

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo. ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside. On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs. I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

I would be skeptical of using this season as a baseline for Ryan's future production. In fact, 2012 seems like a best case scenario for Ryan. He had arguably the best receiver group on the NFL in Roddy White, Julio Jones and Tony Gonzalez (and they played in a combined 48 of 48 possible games). Additionally, 4 out of 5 starters on the offensive line (including both tackles) played in all 16 games. Even with all of this, Ryan still "only" managed a 5th place finish among QBs (6th in PPG). With Gonzalez's assumed retirement (and White likely declining at some point in the next few years), if seems rather unlikely that Ryan will ever have the quality of talent around him that he had this year. Additionally, the Falcons' offense is unlikely to experience the same luck with health in future seasons that it did this year. Ryan seems far more likely to settle into a mid-to-late QB1 level than elevate to a consistent difference making performer.

 

[Concept Coop]

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo. ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside. On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs. I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

You're making quite an investement; you're taking a players career year and calling it just the begining, knowing he is losing a great TE. Why are Romo and Manning's numbers fluid, but Ryans will only go up? Romo's numbers are pretty close to Ryan's and he had one of the worst offensive lines in the NFL. I would gladly take Romo over Ryan in a re-draft, assuming Dallas can field even a baseline O-line. Statistically, year 5 is the year a QB is what he is. Most QBs don't drastically improve over that baseline. Simply my opinion, and we'll see. But calling 2012 a baseline is calling Ryan a Brady/Manning level player. I don't see that.

 

[meyerj31]

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo. ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside. On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs. I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

You're making quite an investement; you're taking a players career year and calling it just the begining, knowing he is losing a great TE. Why are Romo and Manning's numbers fluid, but Ryans will only go up? Romo's numbers are pretty close to Ryan's and he had one of the worst offensive lines in the NFL. I would gladly take Romo over Ryan in a re-draft, assuming Dallas can field even a baseline O-line. Statistically, year 5 is the year a QB is what he is. Most QBs don't drastically improve over that baseline. Simply my opinion, and we'll see. But calling 2012 a baseline is calling Ryan a Brady/Manning level player. I don't see that.

Yea, this is pretty good. I think anyone taking Ryan in the 5th or earlier is leaving a lot of value on the table given the expected performance of the 10-12 QBs next year (and subsequent years).In the dynasty start-up that I have drafting in a few weeks I don't plan on taking any QB in the first 5 rounds, unless some crazy value presents itself (Rodgers in the 4th, etc.).I was blown away that someone took Luck at 2.04 in one of those mock threads. If a league was guaranteed to run for 15 years -maybe- that's a good pick, but in a 3-year window that is nuts. Brady/Brees/Manning should all be considered top players for the next three years.

 

[Ernol]

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo. ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside. On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs. I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

You're making quite an investement; you're taking a players career year and calling it just the begining, knowing he is losing a great TE. Why are Romo and Manning's numbers fluid, but Ryans will only go up? Romo's numbers are pretty close to Ryan's and he had one of the worst offensive lines in the NFL. I would gladly take Romo over Ryan in a re-draft, assuming Dallas can field even a baseline O-line. Statistically, year 5 is the year a QB is what he is. Most QBs don't drastically improve over that baseline. Simply my opinion, and we'll see. But calling 2012 a baseline is calling Ryan a Brady/Manning level player. I don't see that.

Lets take a look at Ryan’s progression over his still young career (in terms of fantasy production):Year 1: 243Year 2: 230 (missed 2 weeks)Year 3: 304Year 4: 333Year 5: 369His gradual rise has coincided with Atlanta’s gradual shift to a pass-heavy offense which is driven in large part by a shift in the NFL to the pass but which was also enabled by management’s growing trust in Ryan (an assumption). The question is, do you think Atlanta is done with their shift and reached their max and will start to run a little more? Or, do you think their shift to a more explosive pass-heavy attack is still ongoing (Tony G or no Tony G) and that the upward trend for Ryan will continue? I believe the latter. For that reason, I do view Ryan as a Brady-like player in terms of fantasy production (not from a QB skill comparison). In any case, if Ryan were to maintain the 369 point level, I'd hardly view that as close to replacement level. That level of production is very valuable imo. As for your reference to Manning, sure, I think he can repeat in 2013 and even improve (not expecting it, but it would not surprise me), but he’s 37 so the likelihood that 372 for Manning is just a “baseline” is not as great. It is more likely that he begins his decline from here imo, so I view 372 as his upside.For Romo, keep in mind that 353 was his career best (imo, his career year) as well. If Dallas improves their OL, I’m not sure that they don't end up running more vs. increasing their reliance on the pass. I don’t lump Romo in with Peyton Manning and Brady (where I would expect increased production at the age of 33 and up). I certainly would not take Romo over Ryan in a redraft. However, if I were to believe that I could rely on 350 from Romo next year and years to come (like I feel like I could with Ryan at 369), then Romo to me would not be “below replacement level” and may even value Romo close to Russell Wilson and RGIII. The fact that Romo would be drastically undervalued in that case (to the point where you call him below replacement value) should not discount Ryan’s value imo any more than it would discount everyone else’s (including RGIII). For me, in 2013 and beyond, I feel comfortable matching up week to week against Rodgers, Brees, Cam and Brady with Ryan where I believe there won’t be a distinct disadvantage (if he doesn’t outright outscore them). I don’t feel comfortable matching up against those QBs with the Romo/Eli types.

 

[jonboltz]

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo.

ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside.

On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs.

I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

You're making quite an investement; you're taking a players career year and calling it just the begining, knowing he is losing a great TE. Why are Romo and Manning's numbers fluid, but Ryans will only go up? Romo's numbers are pretty close to Ryan's and he had one of the worst offensive lines in the NFL. I would gladly take Romo over Ryan in a re-draft, assuming Dallas can field even a baseline O-line.

Statistically, year 5 is the year a QB is what he is. Most QBs don't drastically improve over that baseline.

Simply my opinion, and we'll see. But calling 2012 a baseline is calling Ryan a Brady/Manning level player. I don't see that.

Lets take a look at Ryan’s progression over his still young career (in terms of fantasy production):Year 1: 243

Year 2: 230 (missed 2 weeks)

Year 3: 304

Year 4: 333

Year 5: 369

His gradual rise has coincided with Atlanta’s gradual shift to a pass-heavy offense which is driven in large part by a shift in the NFL to the pass but which was also enabled by management’s growing trust in Ryan (an assumption).

The question is, do you think Atlanta is done with their shift and reached their max and will start to run a little more? Or, do you think their shift to a more explosive pass-heavy attack is still ongoing (Tony G or no Tony G) and that the upward trend for Ryan will continue? I believe the latter. For that reason, I do view Ryan as a Brady-like player in terms of fantasy production (not from a QB skill comparison). In any case, if Ryan were to maintain the 369 point level, I'd hardly view that as close to replacement level. That level of production is very valuable imo.

As for your reference to Manning, sure, I think he can repeat in 2013 and even improve (not expecting it, but it would not surprise me), but he’s 37 so the likelihood that 372 for Manning is just a “baseline” is not as great. It is more likely that he begins his decline from here imo, so I view 372 as his upside.

For Romo, keep in mind that 353 was his career best (imo, his career year) as well. If Dallas improves their OL, I’m not sure that they don't end up running more vs. increasing their reliance on the pass. I don’t lump Romo in with Peyton Manning and Brady (where I would expect increased production at the age of 33 and up). I certainly would not take Romo over Ryan in a redraft.

However, if I were to believe that I could rely on 350 from Romo next year and years to come (like I feel like I could with Ryan at 369), then Romo to me would not be “below replacement level” and may even value Romo close to Russell Wilson and RGIII. The fact that Romo would be drastically undervalued in that case (to the point where you call him below replacement value) should not discount Ryan’s value imo any more than it would discount everyone else’s (including RGIII).

For me, in 2013 and beyond, I feel comfortable matching up week to week against Rodgers, Brees, Cam and Brady with Ryan where I believe there won’t be a distinct disadvantage (if he doesn’t outright outscore them). I don’t feel comfortable matching up against those QBs with the Romo/Eli types.

Romo put up 380 points in 2007, helped greatly by a very high TD% despite throwing for a relatively average number of attempts. He had a very similar year in 2009 with all of his peripherals -- the only thing different is that he just happened to throw 10 less TDs. Sometimes things like that happen. I wouldn't be shocked at all if Ryan has a similar "NFL performance" next year, but just happens to only throw for 25-26 TDs just because TD numbers can fluxuate.

 

[Ernol]

[

In the dynasty start-up that I have drafting in a few weeks I don't plan on taking any QB in the first 5 rounds, unless some crazy value presents itself (Rodgers in the 4th, etc.).

I was blown away that someone took Luck at 2.04 in one of those mock threads. If a league was guaranteed to run for 15 years -maybe- that's a good pick, but in a 3-year window that is nuts. Brady/Brees/Manning should all be considered top players for the next three years.

I'd be content with Luck at 2.04. His value will only grow relative to your QB10-12 (immensely in my estimation) where even those with 3-year view will start to take notice in the next few years.[Edit to add: My bad, I was thinking a later pick than pick 16. 2.04 doesn't exactly scream "value" to me, but then again, it doesn't strike me as an extreme overpay either. About right, although I personally would not take him there.]

 

[Ernol]

Romo put up 380 points in 2007, helped greatly by a very high TD% despite throwing for a relatively average number of attempts. He had a very similar year in 2009 with all of his peripherals -- the only thing different is that he just happened to throw 10 less TDs. Sometimes things like that happen. I wouldn't be shocked at all if Ryan has a similar "NFL performance" next year, but just happens to only throw for 25-26 TDs just because TD numbers can fluxuate.

Didn't go as far as 2007, missed that. Doesn't affect my assessment, but that was quite a performance.

 

[Ernol]

I would be skeptical of using this season as a baseline for Ryan's future production. In fact, 2012 seems like a best case scenario for Ryan. He had arguably the best receiver group on the NFL in Roddy White, Julio Jones and Tony Gonzalez (and they played in a combined 48 of 48 possible games). Additionally, 4 out of 5 starters on the offensive line (including both tackles) played in all 16 games. Even with all of this, Ryan still "only" managed a 5th place finish among QBs (6th in PPG). With Gonzalez's assumed retirement (and White likely declining at some point in the next few years), if seems rather unlikely that Ryan will ever have the quality of talent around him that he had this year. Additionally, the Falcons' offense is unlikely to experience the same luck with health in future seasons that it did this year. Ryan seems far more likely to settle into a mid-to-late QB1 level than elevate to a consistent difference making performer.

Can't blame you (or anyone else) for taking that position. I realize that I am in the small minority when it comes to Matt Ryan.

 

[One More Rep]

I would be skeptical of using this season as a baseline for Ryan's future production. In fact, 2012 seems like a best case scenario for Ryan. He had arguably the best receiver group on the NFL in Roddy White, Julio Jones and Tony Gonzalez (and they played in a combined 48 of 48 possible games). Additionally, 4 out of 5 starters on the offensive line (including both tackles) played in all 16 games. Even with all of this, Ryan still "only" managed a 5th place finish among QBs (6th in PPG). With Gonzalez's assumed retirement (and White likely declining at some point in the next few years), if seems rather unlikely that Ryan will ever have the quality of talent around him that he had this year. Additionally, the Falcons' offense is unlikely to experience the same luck with health in future seasons that it did this year. Ryan seems far more likely to settle into a mid-to-late QB1 level than elevate to a consistent difference making performer.

Can't blame you (or anyone else) for taking that position. I realize that I am in the small minority when it comes to Matt Ryan.

I feel very comfortable with Ryan as well

 

[mental]

Shorts and Blackmon -- I agree, I liked the talent and 2H production from both.

I keep asking myself, though, what's my goal in locking up 2 JAC WRs? Say I have Calvin Johnson as my WR1, am I really winning rolling out Shorts and Blackmon as my WR2 and WR3 every week? And if I'm not, are they really worth much when I could get guys like Bess and Hartline, Rice and Baldwin, DHB and Moore, Baldwin and Breaston, etc. for less to significantly less?

I'm waiting a year on these guys, there's enough Tebow and MJD comeback risk that I'd rather invest elsewhere and buy even lower if the opportunity presents.

Wow, all those guys you mention in bold are pretty much guys I wouldn't touch right now unless they were real cheap. Can't see any of them being wr2s at all.

That was sort of my point -- I like Shorts' and Blackmon's talent way better than the bolded guys, but their situation in 2013 is not going to be meaningfully better than MIA, SEA, OAK, or KC, so what's the rush to get these guys if I don't already have them? I think of my grocery list as the guys I'm buying now because they have lots of opportunity to improve and little opportunity to regress. Not having Tebow to worry about helps, but there are lots of ways the JAC guys can get cheaper as 2013 plays out, and I'd rather let someone else own them while that's happening. I may have my scouting wrong -- their talent may be so great that they'll just dominate their way through a crummy-looking situation -- but absent that I'm not feeling the urgency.For an example of my "need-to-own" group, take the SF RB situation. This is a place I want to invest in in 2013 because I think there's a good chance a guy there puts up Alfred Morris numbers next year, and absent that, the Gore heir should at least become clearer. I don't know exactly how to play that, though... Gore could be cheap because of his age, but then what? I'm lukewarm on Hunter, James, and Dixon for various reasons, but the only way that threesome as a group gets cheaper is if they all somehow prove not to be NFL worthy.

 

[Concept Coop]

That was sort of my point -- I like Shorts' and Blackmon's talent way better than the bolded guys, but their situation in 2013 is not going to be meaningfully better than MIA, SEA, OAK, or KC, so what's the rush to get these guys if I don't already have them?

Shorts and Blackmon were WR1/2s over the 2nd half of the season; you don't need big change for them to out produce the guys you listed. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Can you give me an example of a WR that is a buy, if Shorts and Blackmon are not because of their situations?

 

[EBF]

The reason to get Shorts right now is because he put up monster ppg numbers, but isn't being treated as a nucleus player by all of his owners. The way I see it, it's an opportunity to get a potential top 15-20 dynasty WR at WR30-35 prices in a lot of leagues. Blackmon was a ppg monster in the second half of the season, but I don't think he's as strong a buy simply because you won't get him cheap.

 

[lbouchard]

I like Shorts but I am a little nervous about his concussions. 2 in about half the season.

 

[EBF]

One thing I'd add about trade discussions is to take into account what the other owner spent to get a given player. When you talk about buying someone like Blackmon or RGIII, you need to realize that whoever owns them probably spent a very high pick on them. If someone passed on guys like Doug Martin and Andrew Luck to take one of the other top rookies, he's probably extremely high on the player in question. So even if he's mistaken, he's not likely to part with him for anything less than a king's ransom. And that's certainly been my experience poking around players like Blackmon. His owners all love him. That means you aren't getting him unless you overpay. On the flipside, whoever owns guys like Cecil Shorts and Russell Wilson in your league probably didn't give up much to get them. Just a waiver pick or a late rookie pick. In this case, an owner is a lot less likely to have a significant emotional attachment to his player. If you shoot him a decent offer, he might be inclined to cash out, knowing that he turned a nice profit on his modest investment even if he's not quite getting top value back. Additionally, someone who stumbled upon a Kaepernick, Wilson, or Morris this season probably wasn't counting on those guys to be key contributors, and is thus more likely to have other solid players at their positions. For example, if the Kaep owner already had a guy like Cam Newton, there's a pretty good chance that he'll be looking to shift one of the two. And that gives you a better chance to get a deal done.

 

[5Rings]

Hell, if Larry Fitzgerald is irrelevant in that offense I doubt Housler has much of a chance. Here is hoping they fix their QB situation. If they don't, I'm not buying any Arizona WR or TE.

His situation is the reason he is still affordable. Thanfully for him, it will improve before he ever plays another snap. And when that happens, I think his value rises dramatically.

As a Fitz owner, I think the ship has already sailed on buying him low. I don't think you are getting him for less than WR12-15 level prices. (Though you may, of course, assume that price is still low for him).The new coach is already in place, and everyone is already under the assumption that he brings in a new QB. Now, if Zona decides to have a 1-year stopgap QB in Matt Moore or Alex Smith, their perceived weaknesses could drive his price back lower again.

If people think this way of Alex Smith, he's a buy. Really? You are going to talk about Alex Smith and Matt ####### Moore in the same sentence? I'm not a Smith fan-boy, but IMO he's easily a top 20 QB in the NFL. He goes to AZ, and Fitz will love the guy. Housler would be the real buy, though.....

 

[jonboltz]

Hell, if Larry Fitzgerald is irrelevant in that offense I doubt Housler has much of a chance. Here is hoping they fix their QB situation. If they don't, I'm not buying any Arizona WR or TE.

His situation is the reason he is still affordable. Thanfully for him, it will improve before he ever plays another snap. And when that happens, I think his value rises dramatically.

As a Fitz owner, I think the ship has already sailed on buying him low. I don't think you are getting him for less than WR12-15 level prices. (Though you may, of course, assume that price is still low for him).The new coach is already in place, and everyone is already under the assumption that he brings in a new QB. Now, if Zona decides to have a 1-year stopgap QB in Matt Moore or Alex Smith, their perceived weaknesses could drive his price back lower again.

If people think this way of Alex Smith, he's a buy. Really? You are going to talk about Alex Smith and Matt ####### Moore in the same sentence? I'm not a Smith fan-boy, but IMO he's easily a top 20 QB in the NFL. He goes to AZ, and Fitz will love the guy. Housler would be the real buy, though.....

I was talking in terms of trade value and perception. Despite Alex Smith (and to a lesser extent, Moore) playing relatively well in recent starting gigs, I don't believe most fantasy owners are going to equate bringing either of these in as a strong improvement at the QB position.As a Fitz owner, I would be happy with Alex Smith.

 

[Steed]

If you think Alex smith is a top 20 qb, you're a fan boy. He's the definition of a game manager that was hidden by a simplistic game plan.

 

[MAC_32]

does anyone worry that Shorts and Blackmon seemed to make their hay with Hene and not Gabbert? I'm thinking they move back to Gabbert or move on to a new guy.

It won't be gabbert.

 

[Concept Coop]

If you think Alex smith is a top 20 qb, you're a fan boy. He's the definition of a game manager that was hidden by a simplistic game plan.

Top 20 really only places in the top 66% of the league. I think I can get on board with that. WIth so many Ponders, Gabberts, Lockers, Sanchi, etc, top 20 doesn't seem like much of a statement.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Cecil Shorts: After going back and watching some Jacksonville games, I'm sold. He's still very much under the radar, and the hobby is going to require that he "do it again" before they value what his talent/youth warrants. I hope to buy him before he does it again. Concussions are scary but he hasn't had Collie/Jackson/Best concussion yet. I'll take that risk into account, but his price is so low that it won't hinder my pursuit.

Looking at a bunch of dynasty draft lists for 2013, it looks like the experts are still undervaluing Shorts. He's rarely ranked very high.

 

[lbouchard]

Re: Shorts, where would you rank him vs a guy like Torrey?

 

[Concept Coop]

Re: Shorts, where would you rank him vs a guy like Torrey?

I rank them closely. I think Shorts has more upside, but Smith is safer. I like that Shorts is quicker in space and more likely to one day be a 80-90 catch/year guy. For that, I'd likely roll the dice on him over Torrey.

 

[5Rings]

If you think Alex smith is a top 20 qb, you're a fan boy. He's the definition of a game manager that was hidden by a simplistic game plan.

I'll just say as a Niner fan who has seen every Alex Smith snap, I could not disagree with you more.I'd be interested in a list of 20 QBs in the NFL you'd take over Alex. If not, its cool, Smith is really not worth debating as he's a QB2.

 

[lbouchard]

Re: Shorts, where would you rank him vs a guy like Torrey?

I rank them closely. I think Shorts has more upside, but Smith is safer. I like that Shorts is quicker in space and more likely to one day be a 80-90 catch/year guy. For that, I'd likely roll the dice on him over Torrey.

I'm updating my WR ranks and I'm debating between Shorts, Torrey, and Garcon. WR is pretty hard to rank IMO.

 

[Concept Coop]

Re: Shorts, where would you rank him vs a guy like Torrey?

I rank them closely. I think Shorts has more upside, but Smith is safer. I like that Shorts is quicker in space and more likely to one day be a 80-90 catch/year guy. For that, I'd likely roll the dice on him over Torrey.

I'm updating my WR ranks and I'm debating between Shorts, Torrey, and Garcon. WR is pretty hard to rank IMO.

Torrey really let me down this year, after being high on him in the off-season. I was really hoping his game would take another step and I don't know that it did. ShortsGarconTorreyIn my opinion. I really like Garcon and he fits nicely with what Washington does/needs in a WR1. Garcon does have more name/trade value right now, so it is very close for me. But I just have a good gut feeling about Shorts and I feel good hitching my wagon to him.

 

[Ernol]

Re: Shorts, where would you rank him vs a guy like Torrey?

I rank them closely. I think Shorts has more upside, but Smith is safer. I like that Shorts is quicker in space and more likely to one day be a 80-90 catch/year guy. For that, I'd likely roll the dice on him over Torrey.

I'm updating my WR ranks and I'm debating between Shorts, Torrey, and Garcon. WR is pretty hard to rank IMO.

Torrey really let me down this year, after being high on him in the off-season. I was really hoping his game would take another step and I don't know that it did. ShortsGarconTorreyIn my opinion. I really like Garcon and he fits nicely with what Washington does/needs in a WR1. Garcon does have more name/trade value right now, so it is very close for me. But I just have a good gut feeling about Shorts and I feel good hitching my wagon to him.

Not unlike how Dez hopefuls may have felt after a disappointing second year. Not saying he is Dez-like, but he is being grossly undervalued by most. You did see how he destroyed Champ Bailey, right?Don't bail now, Torrey is the best of that group and firmly in the second tier of WRs imo.

 

[finito]

does anyone worry that Shorts and Blackmon seemed to make their hay with Hene and not Gabbert? I'm thinking they move back to Gabbert or move on to a new guy.

It won't be gabbert.

Shorts was doing okay with Gabbert too, had games of 4 for 74 and 1 TD, 1 for 80 & 1 TD, 4 for 79 & 1 TD, 8 for 116. He was on fire with Henne, but the fact that he started to produce with Gabbert is encouraging to me that he is the real deal. I really love watching this guy play.

 

[EBF]

Torrey is a one trick pony. All deep stuff and nothing else. Shorts is a better overall receiver and less feast-or-famine from an FF standpoint. I would rather have him.

 

[One More Rep]

I would rank themGarconShortsSmith

 

[thriftyrocker]

Not unlike how Dez hopefuls may have felt after a disappointing second year. Not saying he is Dez-like, but he is being grossly undervalued by most. You did see how he destroyed Champ Bailey, right?Don't bail now, Torrey is the best of that group and firmly in the second tier of WRs imo.

I agree with this. (Well not the 2nd tier part unless the tiers are long.) I like Torrey more. Not that I necessarily would rank him higher or expect a higher ADP on him than Garcon or Shorts. I understand Garcon's short term upside is higher and more guaranteed, and that Shorts may have some benefits. But I think Torrey's a more special or unique player. I think he's likely to be relevant longer. In the league I have Torrey (as a WR4 (starting flex)) I wouldn't move him for Garcon or Shorts.

 

[Concept Coop]

Not unlike how Dez hopefuls may have felt after a disappointing second year. Not saying he is Dez-like, but he is being grossly undervalued by most. You did see how he destroyed Champ Bailey, right?Don't bail now, Torrey is the best of that group and firmly in the second tier of WRs imo.

I never doubted Dez's ability. I questioned whether he'd put it all together earlier this year when he was running the wrong routes left and right. But he was always a very elite talent. Torrey has an elite skill, but but even if he pans out, he's not Dez. (Not that you claimed he was)He got every opportunity this year and didn't get 1,000 yards. That is troubling to me. He makes really great plays on deep balls, but not much else. Not saying that I've given up; but he's behind Shorts for me and not where I thought he'd be this year.

 

[EBF]

Torrey is no Dez. Doesn't have the same tools in the short and intermediate passing game. He's an explosive athlete, but not a precise route runner or a strong possession WR. We know he can catch a streak or a post, but can he catch a comeback? From what I've seen, he isn't an efficient route runner and he can't separate out of his breaks in the way that a guy like Dez or Crabtree can. Everything with him is vertical. Going into this season I thought he had a chance to take the next step and become a top 10 WR. Now I'm more convinced that he is what he is: an FF WR2-WR3 who will frustrate you with his inconsistency. My buddy and I had him in our redraft league and he was liability more often than not. I wouldn't say he's a bust or a bad player. He'll stick around for a long time and he has enough talent to fluke his way to 1100+ yard seasons if a couple bombs drop in his hands. But I don't think he's a realistic candidate to join the upper echelon of NFL or FF WRs.With Shorts you sacrifice some explosiveness, but he's a more impressive route runner and better at working the short and intermediate zones.

 

[SSOG]

I'd tend to side with this view point (and a little beyond). On one of my better teams, I traded RGIII and a late 2014 1st for my personally ranked QB3, Matt Ryan, and a random 2014 2nd. I can definitely understand the RGIII optimism based on what he has shown, but for me, thinking he can adapt to produce elite passing numbers and knowing he can are two very different things. Also, even if he scales back on the running, I'm still worried that I won't be able to rely on him to stay on the field.

The QB position is such that it's elite production or nothing, in terms of helping your fantasy team win. Upside is the most important factor when I value a QB. Matt Ryan is very likely an average starting QB on a yearly basis (5-7) out of 12. He gives his owners very little advantage over Tony Romo, who is essentially below replacement level, when it comes to dynasty value. Give me RG3.

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo. ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside. On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs. I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

Since 2007 (his first full season as a starter), Tony Romo has averaged 22.3 points per game. That's 356 per 16 games. And that's an average, over a 6 year span. You want to talk about consistency, his per-season averages are 23.6, 21.5, 22.1, 21.0, 22.2, and 22.4. You can set your watch to him. Over the same span, Manning put up 22.4 ppg, an average difference of 1.6 points per 16 games. Like I keep saying, Tony Romo is Peyton Manning without the starts streak or the name-brand price tag. Anyway, that 350+ points that Tony Romo has averaged for six straight years now, the same 350+ that you say cannot be relied upon, is a mere 13 points behind the best season Matt Ryan has ever had in his entire career. Ho-hum, business-as-usual Tony Romo is within spitting distance of stars-aligning, running-game-falling-off-a-cliff, HoF-TE Matt Ryan.

 

[Ernol]

I'd tend to side with this view point (and a little beyond). On one of my better teams, I traded RGIII and a late 2014 1st for my personally ranked QB3, Matt Ryan, and a random 2014 2nd. I can definitely understand the RGIII optimism based on what he has shown, but for me, thinking he can adapt to produce elite passing numbers and knowing he can are two very different things. Also, even if he scales back on the running, I'm still worried that I won't be able to rely on him to stay on the field.

The QB position is such that it's elite production or nothing, in terms of helping your fantasy team win. Upside is the most important factor when I value a QB. Matt Ryan is very likely an average starting QB on a yearly basis (5-7) out of 12. He gives his owners very little advantage over Tony Romo, who is essentially below replacement level, when it comes to dynasty value. Give me RG3.

Thats where we disagree. I believe Matt Ryan to be elite and this year was just the beginning. As is, I'll take the 369 especially considering that ATL walked through the motions in Week 17 (would have bested Peyton Manning otherwise). Take away that Week 17, and Ryan finished with 24, 25, 32, 23, 31. That kind of consistently very good to great fantasy production to finish the year should not be discounted imo. ATL's reliance on the pass will only grow in my estimation. For me, 369 is next year's baseline, not the upside. On the other hand, Romo's 350+ cannot be relied upon in 2013 imo (just like Eli Manning's 350+ in 2011 could not). That is the difference between Ryan and your so-called below replacement level QBs. I'd only take Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton over Ryan today.

Since 2007 (his first full season as a starter), Tony Romo has averaged 22.3 points per game. That's 356 per 16 games. And that's an average, over a 6 year span. You want to talk about consistency, his per-season averages are 23.6, 21.5, 22.1, 21.0, 22.2, and 22.4. You can set your watch to him. Over the same span, Manning put up 22.4 ppg, an average difference of 1.6 points per 16 games. Like I keep saying, Tony Romo is Peyton Manning without the starts streak or the name-brand price tag. Anyway, that 350+ points that Tony Romo has averaged for six straight years now, the same 350+ that you say cannot be relied upon, is a mere 13 points behind the best season Matt Ryan has ever had in his entire career. Ho-hum, business-as-usual Tony Romo is within spitting distance of stars-aligning, running-game-falling-off-a-cliff, HoF-TE Matt Ryan.

Except that Tony Romo, now 33, has in actuality only broken 350 twice in his career. This year - barely, and then way back in 2007. Odds are against him breaking it again in 2013. Could he do it, sure. Is he underrated, I think so. Am I or anyone else really comfortable with him as a QB1 for their dynasty team, not if they are contending for titles. Does Tony Romo's past numbers really have anything to do with Matt Ryan going forward, no. In any case, to each his own. If you want to roll with your Peyton Manning clone Tony Romo as your QB1 (which I highly doubt you actually are, particularly if you are actually winning leagues), thats your call. I'll play Ryan.

 

[SSOG]

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/RomoTo00-2.phpFBGs scoring shows Romo topping 350 four times in the last 6 years, but I don't feel like arguing arbitrary benchmarks in random scoring systems. I've posted Romo's per-season averages, and you can see for yourself that they're as consistent as they come. You're characterizing him as if he's some mediocre guy coming off a career year, when last year was just another day at the office for him. The guy's been steady as a metronome since winning the job, and I'd see no reason whatsoever to project him to regress next year. Look, this isn't about whether I'd rather have Romo than Ryan (I wouldn't- I expect they'll score comparably, but Ryan is 5 years younger). This isn't about whether I own Romo (Brees, actually), or whether I could be successful if I was starting Romo (the Romo owner in my league has a title and the third most wins over the last 5 years). This is about you implying that Romo had a career year last year, but that it was only his second good season, and he's primed to slide back into mediocrity next year. That's nonsense. Romo has been a top 8 QB pretty much every time he's taken the field. Sure, if I was starting him, I'd rather have a Rodgers or a Newton or a Brady or a Brees, but if I couldn't get one of them, I'd be perfectly content to ride Romo. Just like I'd be perfectly content to ride Ryan, another consistent QB who has never been a major fantasy difference maker.

 

[Ernol]

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/RomoTo00-2.phpFBGs scoring shows Romo topping 350 four times in the last 6 years, but I don't feel like arguing arbitrary benchmarks in random scoring systems. I've posted Romo's per-season averages, and you can see for yourself that they're as consistent as they come. You're characterizing him as if he's some mediocre guy coming off a career year, when last year was just another day at the office for him. The guy's been steady as a metronome since winning the job, and I'd see no reason whatsoever to project him to regress next year. Look, this isn't about whether I'd rather have Romo than Ryan (I wouldn't- I expect they'll score comparably, but Ryan is 5 years younger). This isn't about whether I own Romo (Brees, actually), or whether I could be successful if I was starting Romo (the Romo owner in my league has a title and the third most wins over the last 5 years). This is about you implying that Romo had a career year last year, but that it was only his second good season, and he's primed to slide back into mediocrity next year. That's nonsense. Romo has been a top 8 QB pretty much every time he's taken the field. Sure, if I was starting him, I'd rather have a Rodgers or a Newton or a Brady or a Brees, but if I couldn't get one of them, I'd be perfectly content to ride Romo. Just like I'd be perfectly content to ride Ryan, another consistent QB who has never been a major fantasy difference maker.

Odd, cant figure out how FBG scores, but if thats what you want to use, Ryan apparently scored 388 to Romo's 358 this year. I thought I was using what most use. Again though, what does Tony Romo’s reliability or non-reliability or his superior or non-superior numbers have to do with Matt Ryan (one of my earlier points). If Tony Romo is Peyton Manning as you say, then he is hardly “replacement value” and should not be viewed as a negative when viewing Ryan. If he really isn’t reliable at 350 (which is my opinion), then the comparison to Ryan is also irrelevant.[Edit to add: Ah ok, I reread your post. Basically, you're acting as the Romo police in a discussion focusing on Matt Ryan ]

 

[Ernol]

Torrey is a one trick pony. All deep stuff and nothing else. Shorts is a better overall receiver and less feast-or-famine from an FF standpoint. I would rather have him.

Very common misperception imo. Just because Smith is incredibly gifted at getting deep, doesn’t mean that is all he can do. I only have to go so far as looking at his TDs this year to see its probably not the case. Touchdowns this year of 25, 5, 18, 19, 19, 47, 20, 6, 59, 32 are not indicative (to me) of a one-trick pony. Taking a look at his lines, I find additional evidence that its probably not the case. Lines like 6/97/1 with 10 targets and 5/88/1 with 11 targets are not indicative (to me) of a one-trick pony. Digging a little deeper and in going through the Raven’s games and plays involving Torrey and my conclusion is that he is not a one-trick pony. Would I have liked to have seen him do more in 2012 given the expectations, of course. Was I comfortable starting him week to week in 2012, not so much. But he only just finished his second year in the league. Patience is warranted here imo (which is the only reason I brought up Dez as people were jumping the gun on him as well for not yet having broken out after only his second year and part of the third).

 

[SSOG]

[Edit to add: Ah ok, I reread your post. Basically, you're acting as the Romo police in a discussion focusing on Matt Ryan ]

It's not a Matt Ryan thread, it's a dynasty buy thread, so a discussion of just how criminally overlooked Romo is happens to be pertinent. In fact, based on the info provided, I'd say Romo is a much better buy than Ryan. He'll give you comparable numbers over the next few years for a fraction of the cost. Or he'll give you comparable production to Manning at three years younger, again for a fraction of the cost.

Torrey is a one trick pony. All deep stuff and nothing else. Shorts is a better overall receiver and less feast-or-famine from an FF standpoint. I would rather have him.

Very common misperception imo. Just because Smith is incredibly gifted at getting deep, doesn’t mean that is all he can do. I only have to go so far as looking at his TDs this year to see its probably not the case. Touchdowns this year of 25, 5, 18, 19, 19, 47, 20, 6, 59, 32 are not indicative (to me) of a one-trick pony. Taking a look at his lines, I find additional evidence that its probably not the case. Lines like 6/97/1 with 10 targets and 5/88/1 with 11 targets are not indicative (to me) of a one-trick pony. Digging a little deeper and in going through the Raven’s games and plays involving Torrey and my conclusion is that he is not a one-trick pony. Would I have liked to have seen him do more in 2012 given the expectations, of course. Was I comfortable starting him week to week in 2012, not so much. But he only just finished his second year in the league. Patience is warranted here imo (which is the only reason I brought up Dez as people were jumping the gun on him as well for not yet having broken out after only his second year and part of the third).

I don't know if the numbers you're posting are making the case you think you're making. Typically, any pass over 15 yards is labeled "deep" in the play-by-play (iirc). By that definition, 80% of his scores are on deep passes. Also, in the two games you brought up, Smith averaged 16.1 and 17.6 ypc- again, not exactly making a compelling case that he's not just (or, at least, primarily) a deep guy when those are the best you can find.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Torrey led the NFL in aDOT the last two years. I don't think you can argue with the fact he has been used mostly as a deep target. Whether that is all he is or a product of his QB (great at deep passes) and other offensive weapons (Rice, Boldin, Pitta all primarily short targets) is debatable.

 

[EBF]

Would I have liked to have seen him do more in 2012 given the expectations, of course. Was I comfortable starting him week to week in 2012, not so much. But he only just finished his second year in the league. Patience is warranted here imo (which is the only reason I brought up Dez as people were jumping the gun on him as well for not yet having broken out after only his second year and part of the third).

Just because one player breaks out in his third year doesn't mean that every player will. I don't buy the Dez/Torrey comparison because they aren't similar as players. Dez has always shown good ability as possession WR. Here are his target conversion rates by season:2010 - 62.5%2011 - 61.2%2012 - 66.7%And here's his yards per target by season:2010 - 7.792011 - 9.012012 - 10.01Dez improved from 2011 to 2012, but his huge bump in FF production has as much to do with a bump in targets as it does improvement in his play. He did get better, but getting 35 extra targets is the main reason why he went from tease to top 10 FF WR. Meanwhile Torrey Smith's conversion rates:2011 - 52.6%2012 - 44.5%And his yards per target: 2011 - 8.852012 - 7.77Torrey actually got worse from his first year to his second. He got 15 more targets, but only 14 more yards. His conversion rate and his yards per target both dropped. Up to this point in his career, he hasn't shown the ability to convert a high percentage of his targets. Some of that probably has to do with usage. If you're mainly targeted downfield, your conversion rate is going to suffer. So if you want to believe that Smith is a complete WR, there's your excuse. However, when watching him play, I haven't seen much evidence that he has the traits needed to do the dirty work. And the stats certainly don't reflect that ability. At least not on the surface.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Torrey actually got worse from his first year to his second.

Flacco's tendency to overthrow in 2012 is legendary. If you don't think that's the whole story of any drop in efficiency for Smith, I don't know what to tell you. Torrey only had 3 drops last year. He was a better football player than 2011. If you disagree with that, please say so. He caught the ball better and ran better routes, and still had the same elite athleticism."Dirty work" is vague at best. Really you just mean route running which is unmetricable. If you're including things like catching balls in traffic, taking hits, fighting for YAC, I'd disagree a whole lot.

 

[Ernol]

I don't know if the numbers you're posting are making the case you think you're making. Typically, any pass over 15 yards is labeled "deep" in the play-by-play (iirc). By that definition, 80% of his scores are on deep passes. Also, in the two games you brought up, Smith averaged 16.1 and 17.6 ypc- again, not exactly making a compelling case that he's not just (or, at least, primarily) a deep guy when those are the best you can find.

Wow, ok, I guess my interpretation of “one-trick” was much more narrow. I suppose under your very broad definition of what is included in that one trick, Torrey Smith does qualify. For me though, I associate one-trick ponies with players relying on long bombs to generate fantasy points, an all-or-nothing proposition. It didn’t occur to me to that to you, a one-trick play might include 15 yard strikes.Players popularly referred to as one-trick ponies here have been Desean Jackson and Mike Wallace (and more recently, Josh Gordon) - Not that I agree with the designation (in case the Josh Gordon police are watching).Desean’s TDs in 2009 (when the designation really flourished) were 85, 71, 64, 67, 57, 54, 48, 35, 72, 60, 19, 2. Now that is indicative (but not necessarily conclusive) of a one-trick pony. Mike Wallace’s TDs in 2010 and 2009 (when his designation came about) were 47, 40 24, 60, 19, 54, 46, 41, 29, 53, 39, 15, 33, 52, 43, 56. Not as severe as Desean, but still much deeper TDs as a whole than Torrey’s in 2012. Josh Gordon’ TDs, 62, 20, 71, 33, 44. Again, much more indicative of a one-trick pony than Torrey. Take some other players being discussed here:Cecil Shorts 39, 80, 42, 4, 67, 59, 5Pierre Garcon (last 2 years) 87, 59, 6, 67, 33, 12, 88, 59, 8, 11All of these TD lines look, to me, a lot more one-trick than Torrey’s 25, 5, 18, 19, 19, 47, 20, 6, 59, 32 (which to me, doesn’t look anything like a one-trick at all). Again, I am not saying any of these players are “one-trick ponies”. By your very broad definition, even Vincent Jackson’s 29, 7, 19, 17, 17, 20, 24, 13 (fairly pedestrian TDs as a whole to me) looks awfully “one-trick”. Clearly, people can look at the same numbers and conclude two very different things.

 

[Ernol]

Would I have liked to have seen him do more in 2012 given the expectations, of course. Was I comfortable starting him week to week in 2012, not so much. But he only just finished his second year in the league. Patience is warranted here imo (which is the only reason I brought up Dez as people were jumping the gun on him as well for not yet having broken out after only his second year and part of the third).

Just because one player breaks out in his third year doesn't mean that every player will. I don't buy the Dez/Torrey comparison because they aren't similar as players. Dez has always shown good ability as possession WR. Here are his target conversion rates by season:2010 - 62.5%2011 - 61.2%2012 - 66.7%And here's his yards per target by season:2010 - 7.792011 - 9.012012 - 10.01Dez improved from 2011 to 2012, but his huge bump in FF production has as much to do with a bump in targets as it does improvement in his play. He did get better, but getting 35 extra targets is the main reason why he went from tease to top 10 FF WR.

Clearly, not every player breaks out in their third year. By my reference to Dez, I was merely cautioning that many players that do break out don’t do so in their first or second years. So, if you liked a player that much, patience early in their careers is warranted. I thought I already said this, but I was in no way comparing Torrey’s skills to Dez nor did I say they were the same type of receiver. If you want to keep arguing against me as if I made those statements, carry on.

 

[EBF]

"Dirty work" is vague at best. Really you just mean route running which is unmetricable. If you're including things like catching balls in traffic, taking hits, fighting for YAC, I'd disagree a whole lot.

When I say dirty work I'm talking about working the short and intermediate zones of the field. FF players tend to put a lot of emphasis on speed and big plays, but a big part of earning your keep as a pro WR is providing a consistent target on shorter routes. Separating out of breaks. Catching tough passes in traffic. Making yards after the catch. These are things that players like Marshall, Crabtree, Bryant, Fitzgerald, V Jackson, and Wayne do really well. When I watch Torrey Smith, I don't see that same kind of nimble athlete. He's an explosive player. Just not quite as precise and efficient in his movements. I think he's capable of 1000+ yard seasons. I just don't see him as a threat to ever become a dominant #1 WR. Even if you don't buy all that subjective analysis, Torrey's low reception totals and low conversion rate provide some support for the idea that he's not much of a possession WR. Is that just a matter of usage or does it reflect some actual deficiencies in his game? I lean towards the latter. I view him as a low end FF WR2 with upside to have weak WR1 seasons if the bombs fall his way, but whose inconsistency might be maddening if you're expecting steady production (much like DeSean Jackson).

 

[squistion]

Torrey actually got worse from his first year to his second.

Flacco's tendency to overthrow in 2012 is legendary. If you don't think that's the whole story of any drop in efficiency for Smith, I don't know what to tell you. Torrey only had 3 drops last year. He was a better football player than 2011. If you disagree with that, please say so. He caught the ball better and ran better routes, and still had the same elite athleticism."Dirty work" is vague at best. Really you just mean route running which is unmetricable. If you're including things like catching balls in traffic, taking hits, fighting for YAC, I'd disagree a whole lot.

unmetricable (?). Could you please define what you mean by that word and perhaps the difference between route running that is metricable versus unmetricable?

 

[thriftyrocker]

unmetricable (?).

Impossible to measure/quantify. Sorry for making up a word.

 

[thriftyrocker]

V Jackson...nimble......Even if you don't buy all that subjective analysis, Torrey's low reception totals and low conversion rate provide some support for the idea that he's not much of a possession WR. Is that just a matter of usage or does it reflect some actual deficiencies in his game?

Vincent Jackson (with all due respect to SSOG) isn't a nimble athlete. VJax for example didn't break 50 recept until Y4 and his high watermark is still 72.Like VJax, Torrey came into the league raw. He's only a 2nd year player. Can Torrey consistently get 70-80 receptions? Why not.

whose inconsistency might be maddening if you're expecting steady production (much like DeSean Jackson).

That's the floor certainly. The ceiling is VJax or Greg Jennings who both hit top 5 or 6 dynasty value at one point in their careers.

 

[SSOG]

V Jackson...nimble......Even if you don't buy all that subjective analysis, Torrey's low reception totals and low conversion rate provide some support for the idea that he's not much of a possession WR. Is that just a matter of usage or does it reflect some actual deficiencies in his game?

Vincent Jackson (with all due respect to SSOG) isn't a nimble athlete. VJax for example didn't break 50 recept until Y4 and his high watermark is still 72.

No due respect necessary. VJax isn't nimble. He's also not nifty, shifty, or spry. He is, however, huge with incredible measurables, and he's able to use that raw physical advantage to get himself open and do the "dirty work", as EBF calls it. Can Torrey one day do that, too? Well, he's giving up 3 inches and 35 pounds, so I think he might be better off trying to go the nimble route. Jennings is a good comp- I think that's Smith's upside, and Desean is his downside. Quality dynasty WR2-3, but I wouldn't want to be in a position where I had to count on him as a wr1.

 

[Bandite]

Also, I disagree that RG3 is a buy low. His NFL and FF success were tied to his running. After seeing him get battered this season, I think there are legitimate questions about whether or not that aspect of his game is sustainable long term. By NFL QB standards he's a really slight guy. Given his injury issues, teams are going to be gunning for him big time going forward, knowing that they can break him. So I think he'll have to evolve and become more of a pocket passer. He can still be successful without the dynamic rushing stats, but that was a big part of why his FF value was so high. Take that away and I don't think he has a clear advantage over someone like Wilson. He is still a top 5 dynasty QB in my view, but I wouldn't give Wilson or Luck for him straight up. And his awesome rookie year and massive name brand factor will make him an expensive trade target even despite his injuries.

Sorry I know this is the wrong thread, just like the discussion. Debating an offer currently on RG3: 14 teamer, full PPR. Current QB is Peyton ManningGive: Victor CruzGet: RG3/Santoio Holmes. Gut feeling is Cruz is too much to pay for RG3