Dynasty Rankings (5 Viewers)

[renesauz]

Since this is a dynasty strategy thread I thought this would be the best place to post this question. Sorry if it's already been touched on here, but I'm not going to search through 180+ pages to see.

Note: I'm not looking for any feedback on this trade. I'm just using a point of reference.

Recently, I made a trade in which the core of it was the 1.01 rookie pick & Devin Thomas for the 1.03 rookie pick, Pierre Garcon, & the 2.04 rookie pick.

As far as fillers go, I gave up Derrick Ward, the 3.09 rookie pick, and Andre Caldwell for two guys that I released after the trade.

I liked my end of the core part of the trade better (which side is irrelevant is mine to what I'm getting at), but I'm feeling a bit of trader's remorse because I feel like I may have given up to many fillers to make the core of the trade happen (or at least not trying to offer a trade with fewer fillers first).

So I have two questions,

1.) Is there a limit to how many filler players you are willing to give up in a trade?

2.) How easy/hard do you find it to be to replace these guys with players from the waiver wire during the season (if it makes any difference the dynasty league is 12 teams with 24 man rosters)?

You didn't say which part of the deal you acquired. In this specific case, it looks like it depends on how much you like Garcon. But it also seems like you're looking for general answers to two specific questions as opposed to a trade grade.

1. No. No limit to fillers. I'm always happy to throw in fillers because it frees up roster space for me to pick up players on the waiver wire that I can turn around and use as fillers for more trades down the road.

2. Easier than most people believe. A basic philosophy that all fantasy leaguers (be it baseball, football, whatever) need to master is to pick up free talent, package it with another lesser talent and get an upgrade in your starting lineup.

Dynasty rule #37: *Always trade fillers for superiors talents.

*Corollary: Never worry about overpaying in quantity to get quality.

I tend to agree with this strategy (and especially the corollary at the bottom)...would you extend it to a startup auction or similar proceeding? Is it a good idea to spend nearly the whole budget on a few core guys and try to scrape something together at the end based on the assumption that depth is most easily replaceable?(this relates to one of my own teams but I think the general question is a good one so I'll try to keep it in general terms for now)

recently I participated in my first dyno auction draft and this led me to pursue studs hard and stack my lineup. I have 5 young-to-youngish core studs (IMO at least) out of 7 skill-position starters, 2 slightly-below-average starters, and very little (two decent prospects and a bunch of dollar bid guys) behind them, and am curious whether i've shot myself in the foot or set myself up for long-term success.

Typically I have a lot of faith in my prospecting abilities (especially at WR) but in an auction if you proceed this way you're grabbing guys from the very bottom of the barrel in that respect so the schilens/jacoby/doucet types are gone (along with all but the deepest rookies) and this consists of shotgunning the raw 5th-round longshot naanee's and the first-round bust roy/mike/reggie williamses of the world.

Anyhow, curious what your thoughts are on such a strategy in a startup. It gives up a lot of "value," i know, but then there's the quality over quantity thing (which usually seems to work out best in the long run).

There are pluses and minuses to that strategy. If you use it, you need to make sure that they are YOUNG studs. A single injury or two will derail you until you get some semblance of legit backups.A bigger question is: HOW DEEP IS THE LEAGUE!? Finding depth is easy with 21 to 23 man roster limits (your strat will work fine, maybe even the best strat). Even when quality prospects are missing, decent fill-in options usualy exist.

Finding depth with 25 man rosters, 3 IR slots, and 3 or 4 practice squad slots is MUCH MUCH more challenging. In those deep leagues, it's virtually impossible to find viable fill-ins on the wire, let alone good prospects. You can still aquire a lot of studs, but you need to leave at least SOME money for later. There's a big differance between being able to spend 3 bucks on a fourth tier player and being limited to dollar days dumpster diving. CAVEAT: If you're whole league is super agressive (not saving money), then there's no need to save money yourself...you only need a few bucks more then the majority of your league.

 

[humpback]

A little of my thoughts on auction dynasty startups, as I have done a few now. Most of my leagues have been PPR,4 pts QB passing TD's, 12 teams, a lineup something like QB, RB, WR, TE, DEF, 3 FLEX. $400 cap. 1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. These guys will give you good production for years as well as maintaining elite trade value much longer than their RB counterparts. In my leagues I have targeted some combination of Calvin, Dez, Crabtree, Nicks and S. Rice. You want elite talent's, not a roster full of Mike Wallace's and Jeremy Maclins, who have staying power. Now I know I am including Dez, Crabtree and Nicks in that, who have yet to prove things over a long period of time, but that brings me to the next point.2) Trust your instincts. If you think like I do that Dez is a surefire top 10 dynasty WR, then its not crazy to pay more for him than Steve Smith (NYG) or DeSean Jackson. You have to be willing to stick your neck out for a player, because it is likely at least one other owner will be willing to do so for each player. 3) Don't worry about overpaying. I see people all the time saying, well I really wanted Fitzgerald, but when the bid when up from $87 to $92 that was too rich for me. What? If you want Fitz, get Fitz. Don't worry about losing the cash to pick up Jonathan Dwyer or Anthony Dixon later in the draft. 4) DO NOT try to jack up bids on players you have no interest in. If you don't like LeSean McCoy but feel he is still going for too cheap, well then let him go for cheap. Only bid on players at prices you are comfortable with winning them at. 5) Keep it cheap at QB and TE, you can find productive players at these positions for cheap and focus your money elsewhere. Following this strategy, here is a recent auction roster I ended up with (prices in parenthesis)QBEli Manning (18)Matt Stafford (17)RB Ryan Grant (35)Montario Hardesty (25)Michael Bush (14)WR Calvin Johnson (82)Dez Bryant (66)Hakeem Nicks (58)Chad OchoCinco (26)Mike Williams (8)Chaz Schilens (7)Laurent Robinson (6)Brandon Tate (4)Louis Murphy (3)Chris Chambers (1)TEZack Miller (9)Jared Cook (7)Martellus Bennett (2)Tony Moeaki (1)Garret Graham (1)Ed Dickson (1)

 

[kremenull]

A little of my thoughts on auction dynasty startups, as I have done a few now. Most of my leagues have been PPR,4 pts QB passing TD's, 12 teams, a lineup something like QB, RB, WR, TE, DEF, 3 FLEX. $400 cap.

1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. These guys will give you good production for years as well as maintaining elite trade value much longer than their RB counterparts. In my leagues I have targeted some combination of Calvin, Dez, Crabtree, Nicks and S. Rice. You want elite talent's, not a roster full of Mike Wallace's and Jeremy Maclins, who have staying power. Now I know I am including Dez, Crabtree and Nicks in that, who have yet to prove things over a long period of time, but that brings me to the next point.

2) Trust your instincts. If you think like I do that Dez is a surefire top 10 dynasty WR, then its not crazy to pay more for him than Steve Smith (NYG) or DeSean Jackson. You have to be willing to stick your neck out for a player, because it is likely at least one other owner will be willing to do so for each player.

3) Don't worry about overpaying. I see people all the time saying, well I really wanted Fitzgerald, but when the bid when up from $87 to $92 that was too rich for me. What? If you want Fitz, get Fitz. Don't worry about losing the cash to pick up Jonathan Dwyer or Anthony Dixon later in the draft.

4) DO NOT try to jack up bids on players you have no interest in. If you don't like LeSean McCoy but feel he is still going for too cheap, well then let him go for cheap. Only bid on players at prices you are comfortable with winning them at.

5) Keep it cheap at QB and TE, you can find productive players at these positions for cheap and focus your money elsewhere.

Following this strategy, here is a recent auction roster I ended up with (prices in parenthesis)

QB

Eli Manning (18)

Matt Stafford (17)

RB

Ryan Grant (35)

Montario Hardesty (25)

Michael Bush (14)

WR

Calvin Johnson (82)

Dez Bryant (66)

Hakeem Nicks (58)

Chad OchoCinco (26)

Mike Williams (8)

Chaz Schilens (7)

Laurent Robinson (6)

Brandon Tate (4)

Louis Murphy (3)

Chris Chambers (1)

TE

Zack Miller (9)

Jared Cook (7)

Martellus Bennett (2)

Tony Moeaki (1)

Garret Graham (1)

Ed Dickson (1)

Yeah, I didn't want to be the first to burst your bubble or anything, but I'm not too keen on your roster. That backfield is atrocious, and judging by your guidelines I can see how you ended up with such a roster. Here's where I would differ in your strategy.

1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. OK! No problem per se with this, but don't go totally overboard so as not to get at least 1 marquee (e.g., MJD, Rice) or combo of a young and talented RB (e.g., Charles, Mendy, Beanie) and a nice rook that you like (e.g., Mathews, Spiller, Best, Hardesty, Tate). If I land at least two good, young, cornerstone RBs, then I feel I can compete for years if I've invested heavily in the ELITE young WRs as you say. Otherwise, I go with young stud RBs and take a couple of older, productive WRs (e.g., Chad, Steve Smith - CAR) along with a couple younger sleepers like Aromashadu, Wallace, Schilens, and others...

3) Don't worry about overpaying.

Don't agree here at all. Definitely worry about overpaying in most cases, especially early on as the savvy auctioneers will hold back on their $$$$ the first few days and come in and scoop up all the undervalued talents while the eager-beaver spenders have blown most of their wad on 2 players, studs yeah, but probably could have gotten a better value on the next tier in terms of overall production per $.

Anyway, good luck to you but those strategic points you listed nor anyone else's (mine included) aren't bullet-proof.

 

[gheemony]

Since this is a dynasty strategy thread I thought this would be the best place to post this question. Sorry if it's already been touched on here, but I'm not going to search through 180+ pages to see.

Note: I'm not looking for any feedback on this trade. I'm just using a point of reference.

Recently, I made a trade in which the core of it was the 1.01 rookie pick & Devin Thomas for the 1.03 rookie pick, Pierre Garcon, & the 2.04 rookie pick.

As far as fillers go, I gave up Derrick Ward, the 3.09 rookie pick, and Andre Caldwell for two guys that I released after the trade.

I liked my end of the core part of the trade better (which side is irrelevant is mine to what I'm getting at), but I'm feeling a bit of trader's remorse because I feel like I may have given up to many fillers to make the core of the trade happen (or at least not trying to offer a trade with fewer fillers first).

So I have two questions,

1.) Is there a limit to how many filler players you are willing to give up in a trade?

2.) How easy/hard do you find it to be to replace these guys with players from the waiver wire during the season (if it makes any difference the dynasty league is 12 teams with 24 man rosters)?

You didn't say which part of the deal you acquired. In this specific case, it looks like it depends on how much you like Garcon. But it also seems like you're looking for general answers to two specific questions as opposed to a trade grade.

1. No. No limit to fillers. I'm always happy to throw in fillers because it frees up roster space for me to pick up players on the waiver wire that I can turn around and use as fillers for more trades down the road.

2. Easier than most people believe. A basic philosophy that all fantasy leaguers (be it baseball, football, whatever) need to master is to pick up free talent, package it with another lesser talent and get an upgrade in your starting lineup.

Dynasty rule #37: *Always trade fillers for superiors talents.

*Corollary: Never worry about overpaying in quantity to get quality.

I tend to agree with this strategy (and especially the corollary at the bottom)...would you extend it to a startup auction or similar proceeding? Is it a good idea to spend nearly the whole budget on a few core guys and try to scrape something together at the end based on the assumption that depth is most easily replaceable?(this relates to one of my own teams but I think the general question is a good one so I'll try to keep it in general terms for now)

recently I participated in my first dyno auction draft and this led me to pursue studs hard and stack my lineup. I have 5 young-to-youngish core studs (IMO at least) out of 7 skill-position starters, 2 slightly-below-average starters, and very little (two decent prospects and a bunch of dollar bid guys) behind them, and am curious whether i've shot myself in the foot or set myself up for long-term success.

Typically I have a lot of faith in my prospecting abilities (especially at WR) but in an auction if you proceed this way you're grabbing guys from the very bottom of the barrel in that respect so the schilens/jacoby/doucet types are gone (along with all but the deepest rookies) and this consists of shotgunning the raw 5th-round longshot naanee's and the first-round bust roy/mike/reggie williamses of the world.

Anyhow, curious what your thoughts are on such a strategy in a startup. It gives up a lot of "value," i know, but then there's the quality over quantity thing (which usually seems to work out best in the long run).

Not exactly. In auction leagues, the key is to get value so that your $200 roster is worth more than that. That's a mix of getting high-performing players at below production value and getting $1 bargain bin types that explode. You just have to be careful that you don't end up with a lot of extra cash. Some things I do to help with this strategy:1. Make sure you go into your auction with a max bid for each player. If you don't, you'll find yourself over-spending and not getting value.

2. My system for setting auction values is slightly logarithmic. Let's say the difference between player 1 and player 10 is 10 VBD. And the same difference between player 10 and player 20. Even though the VBD is the same, the $ value for player 1 v. player 10 is still greater than that for player 10 v. player 20. This is because player 1 is more likely to produce in your starting lineup while player 20 is less likely. Many auction methods make the mistake of valuing on a straight-line basis.

3. I aim to get the top tier players at 80% of the max bid value I have. The second tier 75% and lower as you drop tiers. This helps ensure that you're getting good value. And because the lower tier players are more risky, you need to compensate by getting them at a bigger discount. But I do make sure that I don't end up with a bunch of 5th tier players at 90% discount because you can't win that way. If the top tier guys are going for more than expected, I do try to make sure I get at least get a few core players and then try to really take advantage of the overbidding by getting the next tier or two of players at big discounts.

 

[BeTheMatch]

Yeah, I didn't want to be the first to burst your bubble or anything, but I'm not too keen on your roster. That backfield is atrocious, and judging by your guidelines I can see how you ended up with such a roster.

Here's where I would differ in your strategy.

1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. OK! No problem per se with this, but don't go totally overboard so as not to get at least 1 marquee (e.g., MJD, Rice) or combo of a young and talented RB (e.g., Charles, Mendy, Beanie) and a nice rook that you like (e.g., Mathews, Spiller, Best, Hardesty, Tate). If I land at least two good, young, cornerstone RBs, then I feel I can compete for years if I've invested heavily in the ELITE young WRs as you say. Otherwise, I go with young stud RBs and take a couple of older, productive WRs (e.g., Chad, Steve Smith - CAR) along with a couple younger sleepers like Aromashadu, Wallace, Schilens, and others...

3) Don't worry about overpaying.

Don't agree here at all. Definitely worry about overpaying in most cases, especially early on as the savvy auctioneers will hold back on their $$$$ the first few days and come in and scoop up all the undervalued talents while the eager-beaver spenders have blown most of their wad on 2 players, studs yeah, but probably could have gotten a better value on the next tier in terms of overall production per $.

Anyway, good luck to you but those strategic points you listed nor anyone else's (mine included) aren't bullet-proof.

How is it exactly that you're going to get an MJD or Ray Rice while also putting most of your money it's ELITE young WRs? There are other people bidding in the auction too!

 

[kremenull]

Yeah, I didn't want to be the first to burst your bubble or anything, but I'm not too keen on your roster. That backfield is atrocious, and judging by your guidelines I can see how you ended up with such a roster.

Here's where I would differ in your strategy.

1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. OK! No problem per se with this, but don't go totally overboard so as not to get at least 1 marquee (e.g., MJD, Rice) or combo of a young and talented RB (e.g., Charles, Mendy, Beanie) and a nice rook that you like (e.g., Mathews, Spiller, Best, Hardesty, Tate). If I land at least two good, young, cornerstone RBs, then I feel I can compete for years if I've invested heavily in the ELITE young WRs as you say. Otherwise, I go with young stud RBs and take a couple of older, productive WRs (e.g., Chad, Steve Smith - CAR) along with a couple younger sleepers like Aromashadu, Wallace, Schilens, and others...

3) Don't worry about overpaying.

Don't agree here at all. Definitely worry about overpaying in most cases, especially early on as the savvy auctioneers will hold back on their $$$$ the first few days and come in and scoop up all the undervalued talents while the eager-beaver spenders have blown most of their wad on 2 players, studs yeah, but probably could have gotten a better value on the next tier in terms of overall production per $.

Anyway, good luck to you but those strategic points you listed nor anyone else's (mine included) aren't bullet-proof.

How is it exactly that you're going to get an MJD or Ray Rice while also putting most of your money it's ELITE young WRs? There are other people bidding in the auction too!

Well, that's why I stated to not go overboard. When he's saying MOST of his $$ on ELITE WRs, to him that could mean more than 50% of his allotment. If you are going to get an MJD or Rice, then obviously you're not going to use MOST of your $$ on the WRs. MOST will need to be scaled back to a nice proportion, like $160 out of $400, let's say. And if you are going to go after Rice or MJD, then see Rule #3. Anyway, there is more than one way to skin a cat and each auction will run its own course, so develop your strategy however you like but you better have at least 2-3 backup plans.......I know at least a little somethin' about auctions, my friend.....

 

[massraider]

Yeah, I didn't want to be the first to burst your bubble or anything, but I'm not too keen on your roster. That backfield is atrocious, and judging by your guidelines I can see how you ended up with such a roster.

Here's where I would differ in your strategy.

1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. OK! No problem per se with this, but don't go totally overboard so as not to get at least 1 marquee (e.g., MJD, Rice) or combo of a young and talented RB (e.g., Charles, Mendy, Beanie) and a nice rook that you like (e.g., Mathews, Spiller, Best, Hardesty, Tate). If I land at least two good, young, cornerstone RBs, then I feel I can compete for years if I've invested heavily in the ELITE young WRs as you say. Otherwise, I go with young stud RBs and take a couple of older, productive WRs (e.g., Chad, Steve Smith - CAR) along with a couple younger sleepers like Aromashadu, Wallace, Schilens, and others...

3) Don't worry about overpaying.

Don't agree here at all. Definitely worry about overpaying in most cases, especially early on as the savvy auctioneers will hold back on their $$$$ the first few days and come in and scoop up all the undervalued talents while the eager-beaver spenders have blown most of their wad on 2 players, studs yeah, but probably could have gotten a better value on the next tier in terms of overall production per $.

Anyway, good luck to you but those strategic points you listed nor anyone else's (mine included) aren't bullet-proof.

How is it exactly that you're going to get an MJD or Ray Rice while also putting most of your money it's ELITE young WRs? There are other people bidding in the auction too!

You can't. His isn't a very realistic strategy. Any cornerstone RB are going to be nominated early, and are all going to be overpaid for. I also disagree with the notion that you automatically hold your money back early on. You are never the only owner with that strategy, especially in a league with strong owners. You have to get some good players on your team. And I mean really good players. And the nature of auctions, that I have seen, is that the players that are rated highest get nominated early. If a guy wins Tony Romo early, he wants as much money spent on QB as possible, so he makes sure that the other top QBs are out there, and people are bidding on them. There's always one owner out there that doesn't like the top guy (CJ3 let's say) so he throws him out there right away. You might steal a Cadillac Williams later, when everyone is out of money, but you won't be stealing a Gore/Stewart/Wells.

I have had that 'savvy' team before, where I refused to overspend on players, and what winds up happening is that you have better backups than the next guy. So you have 4 RBs all in the same tier (good values), two QBs in the 10-14 range and maybe 6 WR that are all startable. But no top of the line guys, and you play the matchup game every week. There is something to be said for having your starters set in stone. When you have 4 of the same guy, and are playing the matchups every week, it won't take long before you get burned.

The best part of an auction is you can build your team how you want. If you are drafting 11th, it's tough to go RB/RB, because there may not be two guys there. but in an auction, you can get whomever you want, and any sleepers you want as well, even if you have to overpay a bit. You've got to have a price in mind for every player, what you are willing to pay in a worst case scenario (worst case meaning he gets nominated early, and is getting some action). I might not like the risks associated with SJax, but there's a price that he makes sense to me. So I bid to that spot, and if someone beats me, I am okay with that.

One other benefit to getting your guy early, is that lesser players can cost more later, if they are the end of a tier. I can see that happening with QB this year. If Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Romo, and Rivers are gone, you might see a bidding war for Shaub (and Kolb maybe) as owners realize they might get shut out of that tier of QBs.

I think it's nice to have a strategy, but I think it's a lot more important to be flexible, and be willing to adjust your strategy on the fly. I have a list of guys that I think will be values at their prices, but you can't fall in love too much at an auction. My biggest weakness is that guy I think will be a minimum bid player that I think is a nice sleeper, and I get caught up overpaying for that guy.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

I participated in my first auction in a dynasty startup this year. We auctioned off the top 24 rookie draft slots as part of the overall auction. (The auction was held before the NFL draft)

It is a 12 team PPR league.

I went out and got my two big name PPR WRs (Marshall and Calvin), wanted one of 5 or 6 top QBs (I don't value QBs highly, but in a 12 team dynasty they are more scarce) and landed Romo, but I overpaid for my 23 year old TE, Finley.

$400

Romo (41), Calvin (87), Marshall (70), Finley (42)

For RBs I went after high rookie picks and filled in with lower value guys:

Rookie pick 1.02 (45), pick 1.04 (36), pick 1.06 (16)

Reggie Bush (16), M.Barber (12), M.Bush (8), Portis (4), Norwood (2), McGahee (4)

RBs were going for much more than I was willing to pay, since I wanted the WRs. Young WRs seemed overpriced as well, though I would have liked to get a good one to develop as my WR3. As it now stands, my WR3 is going to be whoever emerges from E.Bennet, Gaffney, Walter, Manningham, J.Nelson, and N.Washington.

After the NFL draft, I traded pick 1.06 and 2.06 for pick 1.03.

I drafted the big three RBs, Matthews, Best, and Spiller. I also picked up Starks later.

At this point there was not a team that looked substantively better than the rest. There are a couple of teams that look poised to struggle, but it isn't easy to rank the rest. Nobody had significant quality depth.

The team that had J.Charles ($81) approached me about J.Best and M.Bush. I traded those two plus Martellus Bennet for Charles, T.Jones, and Pettigrew.

So my team looks like:

Romo, Cassel, Cambell

Charles, Matthews, Spiller, R.Bush, Portis, McGahee, Starks, Norwood

Calvin, Marshall, Manningham, Walter, Gaffney, Bennet, Nelson, Washington

Finley, Pettigrew

We only have a 2 round rookie draft, so there are still some decent rookies available, so I should get at least a couple of decent prospects.

I regret spending $42 on Finley from the perspective that it left me scrambling a bit to fill my RB spots, which in turn left me scrambling a bit to fill my WR3 spot. However, I am happy with how things turned out... I like Finley to be a top TE for a long time, which matters in this league that has no contracts. Gates, Witten, and Clark have a much shorter shelf life, and Vernon Davis went for just a few dollars less than Finley.

My core is young and talented, and I think my team is at least as good as any other, but my youth will keep me in contention longer than other teams' vets, hopefully.

There were many bargains to be had in the auction after I had kind of bid myself into a bit of a corner, but the one or two teams that were in a position to take advantage really only got an advantage at the RB3 or WR3 spots, at the expense of blue chip front line WRs/RBs. I originally planned to be that bargain hunter, but I am very glad to have landed the players that I did.

So what I am saying is that saving your money for bargain hunting may not be a big advantage if you are not getting the front line studs. Your results may vary.

 

[renesauz]

I still say league roster size should have a fairly significant impact on any strategy you implement.

 

[Lash]

found this post on another forum and it scares me even more about Best, i didn't know about the other 2 (of five major injuries)

Z-A says:

May 21, 2010 at 1:35 pm

Two concussions in the span of two weeks not even a year ago, already had foot surgery, knee surgery, dislocated elbow, and hip surgery. Yeah, that’s all since 2008!

can anyone verify all of these?

did he actually have all five of these injuries in one and a half seasons?

 

[HenryMuto]

Is it time to cut bait on Steven Jackson ? he had a great year for yards last season but only 4 TD's and I play in a TD heavy league. I have had S-Jackson since he was a rookie when I drafted him but he peeked in 2006 and at that time I could have got the world for him. As it seems with most RB's (not all) when they peek with that huge year they are never the same and S-Jackson has been this way in 2007-2009 with injuries and his team being terrible killing his TD's. So is now the time to cut bait or will he have a few more great season in him ?

I was kinda hoping he was going to become a FA and go to a team where he could be back to his old self stat wise. Similar to what Turner had happen for him when he went to a team like Atlanta and exploded for 17 TD's.

Instead Jackson was resigned by the Rams and now is stuck in that bad situation for a few more years before Bradford becomes a good QB and before the Rams find any good WR's.

By the time the Rams are back Jackson will be age 30 and we all know what that means. RB death to 90% of good RB's.

Thoughts ?

If you traded S-Jackson right now in a dynasty league what would you expect back in terms of draft picks or players ?

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

Jackson's situation can turn on a dime... If Bradford is the real deal, he could be adequate this year and GOOD as soon as next season. Also, the Rams have the makings of a reasonably decent O-line with upside... if their young guys pan out.

The Rams have had a slew of injuries to the Oline, WRs, and QBs the last two years. A healthy team cures a lot of ills.

Jackson's yardage output is ELITE. His 4 TDs last season were flukishly bad... he had 8 TDs in less than 12 games the season before, when the Rams were just as bad as last year. I would think his over/under for TDs is around 7. If he got 7 TDs last season instead of 4, he would have been RB7.

The back is scary. He's a risk for sure. But he did not look like he was slowing down last year until his back issue. If the relatively minor surgery does the job and his back isn't an issue, he will be pretty studly.

If the team gels around him, he could be top 5 again as soon as 2011... when he is 28 years old.

Or the Rams could suck forever.

It is about risk tolerance, really.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Is it time to cut bait on Steven Jackson ? he had a great year for yards last season but only 4 TD's and I play in a TD heavy league. I have had S-Jackson since he was a rookie when I drafted him but he peeked in 2006 and at that time I could have got the world for him. As it seems with most RB's (not all) when they peek with that huge year they are never the same and S-Jackson has been this way in 2007-2009 with injuries and his team being terrible killing his TD's. So is now the time to cut bait or will he have a few more great season in him ?I was kinda hoping he was going to become a FA and go to a team where he could be back to his old self stat wise. Similar to what Turner had happen for him when he went to a team like Atlanta and exploded for 17 TD's.Instead Jackson was resigned by the Rams and now is stuck in that bad situation for a few more years before Bradford becomes a good QB and before the Rams find any good WR's.By the time the Rams are back Jackson will be age 30 and we all know what that means. RB death to 90% of good RB's.Thoughts ?If you traded S-Jackson right now in a dynasty league what would you expect back in terms of draft picks or players ?

There are really two questions here: 1. Is it time to cut bait on S-Jax? 2. Is it time to cut bait on S-Jax in a TD-heavy league?I have S-Jax in a fairly standard scoring league, and I'm not shopping him. Every report out of St. Louis and all signals from the Rams indicate that S-Jax's back surgery will actually help him in the long run. Whether you believe that or not, both he and his head coach are as confident as can be about his training camp return.TD-heavy leagues are a different story, though. S-Jax has never been a great bet for touchdowns, and the Rams are still rebuilding. They should be better this year, but only incrementally so.

 

[MAC_32]

Based on what I've seen the SJax owner won't get appropriate value for him unless his back problems cause him to cliff dive this season. I'd hold unless I were in a position in which I was stacked at RB and could get Jonathan Stewart or Jahvid Best.

 

[Go deep]

Is it time to cut bait on Steven Jackson ? he had a great year for yards last season but only 4 TD's and I play in a TD heavy league. I have had S-Jackson since he was a rookie when I drafted him but he peeked in 2006 and at that time I could have got the world for him. As it seems with most RB's (not all) when they peek with that huge year they are never the same and S-Jackson has been this way in 2007-2009 with injuries and his team being terrible killing his TD's. So is now the time to cut bait or will he have a few more great season in him ?I was kinda hoping he was going to become a FA and go to a team where he could be back to his old self stat wise. Similar to what Turner had happen for him when he went to a team like Atlanta and exploded for 17 TD's.Instead Jackson was resigned by the Rams and now is stuck in that bad situation for a few more years before Bradford becomes a good QB and before the Rams find any good WR's.By the time the Rams are back Jackson will be age 30 and we all know what that means. RB death to 90% of good RB's.Thoughts ?If you traded S-Jackson right now in a dynasty league what would you expect back in terms of draft picks or players ?

Yes, you should be shopping him. He still has pretty good trade value right now, and this might be the last year that is true. Having said that, i wouldnt trade him unless the price is right, as its certainly not a situation where he is a must trade, unless you have no chance at contending this year. Alot of people will tell you dont trade studs, never give the best player in a trade, etc, i am not that person. I shop almost everyone every year in dynasty. If the price is right, i will trade ANYONE. I recently traded Chris Johnson and Steven Jackson in the same league a week apart. Point being is it cant hurt to throw out some offers and see what happens.

 

[Go deep]

Based on what I've seen the SJax owner won't get appropriate value for him unless his back problems cause him to cliff dive this season. I'd hold unless I were in a position in which I was stacked at RB and could get Jonathan Stewart or Jahvid Best.

I dont think alot of people will think Best is enough. I recently traded Jackson and Lee Evans for the 1.4, 1.6 and Greg Jennings.

 

[MAC_32]

Based on what I've seen the SJax owner won't get appropriate value for him unless his back problems cause him to cliff dive this season. I'd hold unless I were in a position in which I was stacked at RB and could get Jonathan Stewart or Jahvid Best.

I dont think alot of people will think Best is enough. I recently traded Jackson and Lee Evans for the 1.4, 1.6 and Greg Jennings.

Best, alone, is not enough. He would need to be the center piece if one of the top 4 or J Stew weren't involved though.

 

[kremenull]

Yeah, I didn't want to be the first to burst your bubble or anything, but I'm not too keen on your roster. That backfield is atrocious, and judging by your guidelines I can see how you ended up with such a roster.

Here's where I would differ in your strategy.

1) Put most of your money in ELITE young WR's. OK! No problem per se with this, but don't go totally overboard so as not to get at least 1 marquee (e.g., MJD, Rice) or combo of a young and talented RB (e.g., Charles, Mendy, Beanie) and a nice rook that you like (e.g., Mathews, Spiller, Best, Hardesty, Tate). If I land at least two good, young, cornerstone RBs, then I feel I can compete for years if I've invested heavily in the ELITE young WRs as you say. Otherwise, I go with young stud RBs and take a couple of older, productive WRs (e.g., Chad, Steve Smith - CAR) along with a couple younger sleepers like Aromashadu, Wallace, Schilens, and others...

3) Don't worry about overpaying.

Don't agree here at all. Definitely worry about overpaying in most cases, especially early on as the savvy auctioneers will hold back on their $$$$ the first few days and come in and scoop up all the undervalued talents while the eager-beaver spenders have blown most of their wad on 2 players, studs yeah, but probably could have gotten a better value on the next tier in terms of overall production per $.

Anyway, good luck to you but those strategic points you listed nor anyone else's (mine included) aren't bullet-proof.

How is it exactly that you're going to get an MJD or Ray Rice while also putting most of your money it's ELITE young WRs? There are other people bidding in the auction too!

You can't. His isn't a very realistic strategy. Any cornerstone RB are going to be nominated early, and are all going to be overpaid for. I also disagree with the notion that you automatically hold your money back early on. You are never the only owner with that strategy, especially in a league with strong owners. You have to get some good players on your team. And I mean really good players. And the nature of auctions, that I have seen, is that the players that are rated highest get nominated early. If a guy wins Tony Romo early, he wants as much money spent on QB as possible, so he makes sure that the other top QBs are out there, and people are bidding on them. There's always one owner out there that doesn't like the top guy (CJ3 let's say) so he throws him out there right away. You might steal a Cadillac Williams later, when everyone is out of money, but you won't be stealing a Gore/Stewart/Wells.

I have had that 'savvy' team before, where I refused to overspend on players, and what winds up happening is that you have better backups than the next guy. So you have 4 RBs all in the same tier (good values), two QBs in the 10-14 range and maybe 6 WR that are all startable. But no top of the line guys, and you play the matchup game every week. There is something to be said for having your starters set in stone. When you have 4 of the same guy, and are playing the matchups every week, it won't take long before you get burned.

The best part of an auction is you can build your team how you want. If you are drafting 11th, it's tough to go RB/RB, because there may not be two guys there. but in an auction, you can get whomever you want, and any sleepers you want as well, even if you have to overpay a bit. You've got to have a price in mind for every player, what you are willing to pay in a worst case scenario (worst case meaning he gets nominated early, and is getting some action). I might not like the risks associated with SJax, but there's a price that he makes sense to me. So I bid to that spot, and if someone beats me, I am okay with that.

One other benefit to getting your guy early, is that lesser players can cost more later, if they are the end of a tier. I can see that happening with QB this year. If Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Romo, and Rivers are gone, you might see a bidding war for Shaub (and Kolb maybe) as owners realize they might get shut out of that tier of QBs.

I think it's nice to have a strategy, but I think it's a lot more important to be flexible, and be willing to adjust your strategy on the fly. I have a list of guys that I think will be values at their prices, but you can't fall in love too much at an auction. My biggest weakness is that guy I think will be a minimum bid player that I think is a nice sleeper, and I get caught up overpaying for that guy.

I don't believe I ever mentioned anythng about stealing Gore/Stewart/Wells.......The price you will pay for guys around their level (or even slightly below) will be a good buy based on the production you can expect to receive in comparison to the price you may have to pay for "The Big 4 RBs" and their production......that's what was meant, if it wasn't too clear initially.What you may believe the term 'cornerstone' player is and what I believe it is could also be different, so my strategy is certainly realistic in acquiring what I need for my type of dynasty team(s). I wouldn't get stuck on Rice, CJ4.24 and them, and I'd still get my type of cornerstone RBs to build around, competing right out of the gate and into the future........

Bottom line is to be very flexible and prepared to most likely having to alter your initial plan

 

[massraider]

What you may believe the term 'cornerstone' player is and what I believe it is could also be different, so my strategy is certainly realistic in acquiring what I need for my type of dynasty team(s). I wouldn't get stuck on Rice, CJ4.24 and them, and I'd still get my type of cornerstone RBs to build around, competing right out of the gate and into the future........

OK, give me a name. Who are these young, stud RBs you are gonna target, that you won't be overpaying for?

 

[Go deep]

What you may believe the term 'cornerstone' player is and what I believe it is could also be different, so my strategy is certainly realistic in acquiring what I need for my type of dynasty team(s). I wouldn't get stuck on Rice, CJ4.24 and them, and I'd still get my type of cornerstone RBs to build around, competing right out of the gate and into the future........

OK, give me a name. Who are these young, stud RBs you are gonna target, that you won't be overpaying for?

Felix Jones, sure fire top 8 back that can be had for a reasonable price.

 

[D'OHtis]

What you may believe the term 'cornerstone' player is and what I believe it is could also be different, so my strategy is certainly realistic in acquiring what I need for my type of dynasty team(s). I wouldn't get stuck on Rice, CJ4.24 and them, and I'd still get my type of cornerstone RBs to build around, competing right out of the gate and into the future........

OK, give me a name. Who are these young, stud RBs you are gonna target, that you won't be overpaying for?

Steve Slaton

 

[Go deep]

What you may believe the term 'cornerstone' player is and what I believe it is could also be different, so my strategy is certainly realistic in acquiring what I need for my type of dynasty team(s). I wouldn't get stuck on Rice, CJ4.24 and them, and I'd still get my type of cornerstone RBs to build around, competing right out of the gate and into the future........

OK, give me a name. Who are these young, stud RBs you are gonna target, that you won't be overpaying for?

Steve Slaton

Also throw in Matt Forte, Donald Brown, Jahvid Best, Amhad Bradshaw, CJ Spiller, Darren Mcfadden, Marshawn Lynch, Lesean Mccoy, Ben Tate, Montario Hardesty and Michael Bush.Oh yeah, cant forget Jimmy Starks.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Felix Jones, sure fire top 8 back that can be had for a reasonable price.

Sure fire? How can you be confident that he can carry a full load? How can you be confident that he can make it through a full 16-game schedule without getting injured?

 

[Go deep]

Felix Jones, sure fire top 8 back that can be had for a reasonable price.

Sure fire? How can you be confident that he can carry a full load? How can you be confident that he can make it through a full 16-game schedule without getting injured?

I dont think he will need to carry the full load to be a top 8 RB in PPR leagues. Also, i cant be sure he will stay healthy for 16 games, but if that were part of the criteria to be a top 8 RB, i wouldnt have anyone in my top 8.

 

[Penguin]

Felix Jones, sure fire top 8 back that can be had for a reasonable price.

Sure fire? How can you be confident that he can carry a full load? How can you be confident that he can make it through a full 16-game schedule without getting injured?

I dont think he will need to carry the full load to be a top 8 RB in PPR leagues. Also, i cant be sure he will stay healthy for 16 games, but if that were part of the criteria to be a top 8 RB, i wouldnt have anyone in my top 8.

Top 8 in a PPR last year was just shy of 250 pts.Felix carried 116 times for 685 yards (5.9 ypc) and 3 TD's. He added 19 receptions for 119 yards (6.25 ypc) and 0 TD's. At 5.9 yards per carry, he'd still need around 200 to get to 1200 yards rushing. Add in 40 receptions @ 7.5 per reception for another 300 yards and 10 total touchdowns. That would put him right around RB 8 in a PPR.It's achievable but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.

 

[Ernol]

Felix Jones, sure fire top 8 back that can be had for a reasonable price.

Sure fire? How can you be confident that he can carry a full load? How can you be confident that he can make it through a full 16-game schedule without getting injured?

I dont think he will need to carry the full load to be a top 8 RB in PPR leagues. Also, i cant be sure he will stay healthy for 16 games, but if that were part of the criteria to be a top 8 RB, i wouldnt have anyone in my top 8.

Top 8 in a PPR last year was just shy of 250 pts.Felix carried 116 times for 685 yards (5.9 ypc) and 3 TD's. He added 19 receptions for 119 yards (6.25 ypc) and 0 TD's. At 5.9 yards per carry, he'd still need around 200 to get to 1200 yards rushing. Add in 40 receptions @ 7.5 per reception for another 300 yards and 10 total touchdowns. That would put him right around RB 8 in a PPR.It's achievable but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.

I thought by top 8, he meant a back ranked in the top 8, not a back that sure-fire will finish in the top 8 in 2010. J Stew is widely considered the RB5 and he is not likely to finish in the top 8 in 2010 either. The top 10 last year included Addai, Ricky, T Jones and Ryan Grant, none of which are normally drafted ahead of Felix today. The top 10 also included Gore and Sjax whom I believe will not be considered ahead of Felix this time next year. So I think the top 8-10 in rankings (not necessarily by actual finish) are totally up for grabs this year. There are obvious risks with Felix, but after the top 4 RBs, and maybe J Stew, there are no other backs that I would easily take over Felix right now.

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

Hey F and L -

Getting ready for my rookie draft next week and was looking over your rankings. Just curious if these have been tweaked at all since the time you posted them right after the draft.

In a 10 teamer/start 2 QB I have the 1.10 and 2.01. Since my QBs are all relatively weak and one of them is Orton I was thinking about targeting Tebow over Claussen - seems like a no brainer to me for a lot of reasons. None of the RBs at that part of the draft interest me at all so I'm getting excited over the possible upside of Mike Williams, but I'm curious about Damian Williams being ranked higher. I realize you have them 1 and 2 in the same tier, so you think it's very close, but what edged him out?

Also, you have Dexter McCluster listed as a RB (which is fine), but if I asked you to compare him to the WRs, where would he rank?

Thanks in advance...

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Hey F and L -

Getting ready for my rookie draft next week and was looking over your rankings. Just curious if these have been tweaked at all since the time you posted them right after the draft.

In a 10 teamer/start 2 QB I have the 1.10 and 2.01. Since my QBs are all relatively weak and one of them is Orton I was thinking about targeting Tebow over Claussen - seems like a no brainer to me for a lot of reasons. None of the RBs at that part of the draft interest me at all so I'm getting excited over the possible upside of Mike Williams, but I'm curious about Damian Williams being ranked higher. I realize you have them 1 and 2 in the same tier, so you think it's very close, but what edged him out?

Also, you have Dexter McCluster listed as a RB (which is fine), but if I asked you to compare him to the WRs, where would he rank?

Thanks in advance...

Yeah, at this point I'd probably have Mike Williams over Damian Williams. Mike was originally edged out because of his character concerns, but I think he's worth the gamble since he's likely to start right away.I think I'd slot McCluster in there with the Williams boys at the top of tier three.

 

[HenryMuto]

I have to really study the value's of these players as I am being offered 2 types of trades.

The 1st trade offer is get Fitz, give Boldin, V-Jackson (2nd round 2011 proj 5-10 pick)

The 2nd is a possible trade offer of get 1.02, (Matt Ryan or 2.01) and give Boldin, Steve Slaton

In the 1st deal I don't like giving up V-Jax.

In the 2nd deal not sure I want to deal Slaton and Boldin just for prospects.

Slaton my be done but he looked so good in 2008. Back in 08 I passed on 2 future 1st round picks in a deal for him.

I thought Slaton was going to be the next great back then look what happened last year.

At 1.02 I could get either Bryant or Mathews.

So which holds more value ?

1)Stay pat and keep Bodin, V-Jax and Slaton

2)Take the trade for Fitz (Give up Boldin, V-Jax)

3)Take the trade for 1.02 & Ryan or 2.01 (Give up Boldin, Slaton)

I have Rivers already at QB but no real back up (Garrard) thus why I liked Ryan but he won't start for me unless something bad happens to Rivers

Also salary cap is involved Boldin is $3.10, Fitz is $4.00, Ryan is $0.10, Slaton $0.10, V-Jax $1.10 ($35 cap raise a player $1 every 2 years)

I also have S-Jax ($2.90), P-Thomas ($1.10) that he would work with me in a deal for as well instead of Slaton.

I assume S-Jax then P-Thomas then Slaton is the order of the values but how much different between them ?

Lots of things here if you have any comments on this situation let me know and thanks.

 

[Penguin]

I like 1.02 & M.Ryan for Boldin & Slaton over the other offers.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

3)Take the trade for 1.02 & Ryan or 2.01 (Give up Boldin, Slaton)

Hurry up and click "accept" before this guy comes to his senses.And take Matt Ryan, not the 2.01.

 

[SSOG]

I thought by top 8, he meant a back ranked in the top 8, not a back that sure-fire will finish in the top 8 in 2010. J Stew is widely considered the RB5 and he is not likely to finish in the top 8 in 2010 either. The top 10 last year included Addai, Ricky, T Jones and Ryan Grant, none of which are normally drafted ahead of Felix today. The top 10 also included Gore and Sjax whom I believe will not be considered ahead of Felix this time next year. So I think the top 8-10 in rankings (not necessarily by actual finish) are totally up for grabs this year. There are obvious risks with Felix, but after the top 4 RBs, and maybe J Stew, there are no other backs that I would easily take over Felix right now.

I don't think the disagreement is stemming from the words "top 8", I think it's stemming from the words "sure fire". Ask Darren Sproles owners sometime just how "sure fire" a player who has never averaged 10 carries per game really is. Seriously, Felix Jones' career high carries per game is 11... IN COLLEGE.Felix's situation isn't remotely comparable to Jonathan Stewart's. For one, Stewart was a top-3 rookie draft pick, while Felix was a late first rounder. For another, Stewart has a 24th and 11th place finish on his resume, while Felix has finished 73rd and 39th. For another, we already know that Stewart can handle a full load (because he handled it marvelously to end the season). Stewart has never missed a game, while Felix is constantly missing time. Finally, Stewart's getting a larger share of the pie despite sharing the ball with DeAngelo Williams. Felix is only competing with the RB formerly known as Marion Barber III.Felix is the riskiest back in the top 20. I get why someone would rank him really high based on his upside, but the words "sure fire" and "Felix Jones" should never be uttered in the same sentence. He's ten kinds of risk.

 

[HenryMuto]

Am I over-valuing Boldin and Slaton if I ask for the 1.02, 2.01, 2011 (2nd round), 2012 (3rd round) plus Matt Ryan ?

It may seem like a lot to ask for but with 75% of all draft picks either busting or underacheving I don't want to give up a top 10 WR in his prime plus a RB that was considered a 1st round redraft league player last year for only Ryan and the 1.02 and hope that the 1.02 is the next coming of Randy Moss (dez Bryant) or LT (Ryan Mathews)

Boldin is a great player when he is on the field he actually had better stats per game in 2008 then the great Fitzgerald.

Slaton was awesome in 2008.

If I had traded those 2 players to start the 2009 season I could have expected more in return. I know it is 2010 not 2009 but I think this is still a risky deal.

I put that offer out there to the other guy and will see what he thinks. I am torn right now on what to do.

Last year mid season I gave up Jamaal Charles to get Boldin right before Larry Johnson got released then Charles blew up and now is worth a ton. I think that might be part of the reason I am trying to deal Boldin and recoup some of the value I lost in the Charles deal.

 

[broncofan13000]

Am I over-valuing Boldin and Slaton if I ask for the 1.02, 2.01, 2011 (2nd round), 2012 (3rd round) plus Matt Ryan ?It may seem like a lot to ask for but with 75% of all draft picks either busting or underacheving I don't want to give up a top 10 WR in his prime plus a RB that was considered a 1st round redraft league player last year for only Ryan and the 1.02 and hope that the 1.02 is the next coming of Randy Moss (dez Bryant) or LT (Ryan Mathews)Boldin is a great player when he is on the field he actually had better stats per game in 2008 then the great Fitzgerald.Slaton was awesome in 2008.If I had traded those 2 players to start the 2009 season I could have expected more in return. I know it is 2010 not 2009 but I think this is still a risky deal.I put that offer out there to the other guy and will see what he thinks. I am torn right now on what to do.Last year mid season I gave up Jamaal Charles to get Boldin right before Larry Johnson got released then Charles blew up and now is worth a ton. I think that might be part of the reason I am trying to deal Boldin and recoup some of the value I lost in the Charles deal.

Yes you would be asking for too much1.02 for Boldin is fair (and i would take the 1.02 everytime)...Slaton for 2.01/2011 2nd/and matt ryan? I'd trade slaton for a 2nd rounder, let alone all 3 pieces....way too lopsided.

 

[Go deep]

I thought by top 8, he meant a back ranked in the top 8, not a back that sure-fire will finish in the top 8 in 2010. J Stew is widely considered the RB5 and he is not likely to finish in the top 8 in 2010 either. The top 10 last year included Addai, Ricky, T Jones and Ryan Grant, none of which are normally drafted ahead of Felix today. The top 10 also included Gore and Sjax whom I believe will not be considered ahead of Felix this time next year. So I think the top 8-10 in rankings (not necessarily by actual finish) are totally up for grabs this year. There are obvious risks with Felix, but after the top 4 RBs, and maybe J Stew, there are no other backs that I would easily take over Felix right now.

I don't think the disagreement is stemming from the words "top 8", I think it's stemming from the words "sure fire". Ask Darren Sproles owners sometime just how "sure fire" a player who has never averaged 10 carries per game really is. Seriously, Felix Jones' career high carries per game is 11... IN COLLEGE.Felix's situation isn't remotely comparable to Jonathan Stewart's. For one, Stewart was a top-3 rookie draft pick, while Felix was a late first rounder. For another, Stewart has a 24th and 11th place finish on his resume, while Felix has finished 73rd and 39th. For another, we already know that Stewart can handle a full load (because he handled it marvelously to end the season). Stewart has never missed a game, while Felix is constantly missing time. Finally, Stewart's getting a larger share of the pie despite sharing the ball with DeAngelo Williams. Felix is only competing with the RB formerly known as Marion Barber III.

Felix is the riskiest back in the top 20. I get why someone would rank him really high based on his upside, but the words "sure fire" and "Felix Jones" should never be uttered in the same sentence. He's ten kinds of risk.

Darren Mcfadden was also a top 3 rookie pick, and Felix Jones was drafted before Ray Rice and Chris Johnson in most rookie drafts. Also your 2nd and 3rd points are basically the same thing. Jones ranked so low because he got injured. Actually, all your points after the first one are the same. Felix wasnt getting a bigger piece of the pie because of his injuries. So basically what it all boils down to is can Felix stay healthy. I certainly dont think it is a sure thing he will will, but i dont think his chances of getting hurt are any better than any other RB in the league.Im not sure what the problem with the term "sure fire" is. There is no such thing a "sure thing" in fantasy football, but Jones is the closest thing there is for me, at least for any RB outside the top 10. Talent + situation + opportunity + youth = top 5-8 dynasty RB. Can you name 5-8 RB's in the league who fit that equation any better than Felix?

 

[Penguin]

Am I over-valuing Boldin and Slaton if I ask for the 1.02, 2.01, 2011 (2nd round), 2012 (3rd round) plus Matt Ryan ?It may seem like a lot to ask for but with 75% of all draft picks either busting or underacheving I don't want to give up a top 10 WR in his prime plus a RB that was considered a 1st round redraft league player last year for only Ryan and the 1.02 and hope that the 1.02 is the next coming of Randy Moss (dez Bryant) or LT (Ryan Mathews)Boldin is a great player when he is on the field he actually had better stats per game in 2008 then the great Fitzgerald.Slaton was awesome in 2008.If I had traded those 2 players to start the 2009 season I could have expected more in return. I know it is 2010 not 2009 but I think this is still a risky deal.I put that offer out there to the other guy and will see what he thinks. I am torn right now on what to do.Last year mid season I gave up Jamaal Charles to get Boldin right before Larry Johnson got released then Charles blew up and now is worth a ton. I think that might be part of the reason I am trying to deal Boldin and recoup some of the value I lost in the Charles deal.

Yes you would be asking for too much1.02 for Boldin is fair (and i would take the 1.02 everytime)...Slaton for 2.01/2011 2nd/and matt ryan? I'd trade slaton for a 2nd rounder, let alone all 3 pieces....way too lopsided.

You'll never get all that, in any league.

 

[Ernol]

I thought by top 8, he meant a back ranked in the top 8, not a back that sure-fire will finish in the top 8 in 2010. J Stew is widely considered the RB5 and he is not likely to finish in the top 8 in 2010 either. The top 10 last year included Addai, Ricky, T Jones and Ryan Grant, none of which are normally drafted ahead of Felix today. The top 10 also included Gore and Sjax whom I believe will not be considered ahead of Felix this time next year. So I think the top 8-10 in rankings (not necessarily by actual finish) are totally up for grabs this year. There are obvious risks with Felix, but after the top 4 RBs, and maybe J Stew, there are no other backs that I would easily take over Felix right now.

I don't think the disagreement is stemming from the words "top 8", I think it's stemming from the words "sure fire". Ask Darren Sproles owners sometime just how "sure fire" a player who has never averaged 10 carries per game really is. Seriously, Felix Jones' career high carries per game is 11... IN COLLEGE. Felix's situation isn't remotely comparable to Jonathan Stewart's.

Im sure that is what you meant, but my response was to a post that analyzed the likelihood of Felix producing 250 pts in order to finish in the actual top 8, and I replied that finishing in the top 8 in 2010 and being a top 8 dynasty back are two different things. I used Stew only as an example of a top 8 back that likely will not finish in the actual top 8 in 2010. I also did say that Stew was the only back outside of the obvious top 4 that I might easily take ahead of Felix.

For one, Stewart was a top-3 rookie draft pick, while Felix was a late first rounder. For another, Stewart has a 24th and 11th place finish on his resume, while Felix has finished 73rd and 39th.

Not sure what you mean by that, Stew was the 13th overall pick and Felix was the 22nd. Pedigree about the same, or do you mean a top 3 fantasy draft pick and if so, what does that matter?

For another, we already know that Stewart can handle a full load (because he handled it marvelously to end the season). Stewart has never missed a game, while Felix is constantly missing time. Finally, Stewart's getting a larger share of the pie despite sharing the ball with DeAngelo Williams. Felix is only competing with the RB formerly known as Marion Barber III.

Stew did have a monster end of year, but not sure that means we now know that he can take on a full load based on 4 games. By the way, Felix ended the season on a nice note as well averaging 14 carries a game over the last 5 games (including playoffs) and doing a ton with those carries. While not the monster load Stew took on in the 4 games, that last stretch does bode well going forward imo. Also, the fact that Felix is now only competing with the RB formerly known as Marion Barber III (and already appeared to take over late last year) is a good thing as compared to competing against Deangelo, isn't it?

Felix is the riskiest back in the top 20. I get why someone would rank him really high based on his upside, but the words "sure fire" and "Felix Jones" should never be uttered in the same sentence. He's ten kinds of risk.

Now that may be a bit of an overstatement the other way. Based on F&L’s rankings, I could name quite a few in the top 20 that are as or more risky than Felix. CJ Spiller (for obvious reasons although I do like him a lot), Michael Turner (taking him due to age is a risk in itself plus the possible reduction in work load), Jahvid Best (c’mon, this guy is the definition of risky), Shonn Greene (there is quite the risk that this guy is ordinary, something which is not the case for Felix), Knowshon Moreno (ditto on Greene, except double the risk), Ryan Grant (may not have the starting role past 2010)

 

[SSOG]

Am I over-valuing Boldin and Slaton if I ask for the 1.02, 2.01, 2011 (2nd round), 2012 (3rd round) plus Matt Ryan ?

It may seem like a lot to ask for but with 75% of all draft picks either busting or underacheving I don't want to give up a top 10 WR in his prime plus a RB that was considered a 1st round redraft league player last year for only Ryan and the 1.02 and hope that the 1.02 is the next coming of Randy Moss (dez Bryant) or LT (Ryan Mathews)

Boldin is a great player when he is on the field he actually had better stats per game in 2008 then the great Fitzgerald.

Slaton was awesome in 2008.

If I had traded those 2 players to start the 2009 season I could have expected more in return. I know it is 2010 not 2009 but I think this is still a risky deal.

I put that offer out there to the other guy and will see what he thinks. I am torn right now on what to do.

Last year mid season I gave up Jamaal Charles to get Boldin right before Larry Johnson got released then Charles blew up and now is worth a ton. I think that might be part of the reason I am trying to deal Boldin and recoup some of the value I lost in the Charles deal.

Yes, you're overvaluing Boldin and Slaton. I'd trade both players together for the 1.02 straight up without blinking. Both of them might have been awesome in 2008, but none of my leagues give bonus points for being awesome two years ago. Boldin has benefited from the fact that Larry Fitzgerald was drawing the toughest coverages. He's been fighting a LOT of injuries in his career, and he wasn't that effective even when healthy last season (although a lot of that is on the decline of Warner). While he's still a rock-solid dynasty WR2, he is not a dynasty WR1. As for Slaton... his value last offseason was a mirage. Just because you could have gotten a lot for him last year doesn't mean he's worth a lot. It sucks that you were on the losing end of the Boldin/Charles swap (believe me, I empathize- I traded Miles Austin for Donald Driver a couple of weeks before he went for 200 yards)... but you've got to make every move today with an eye towards the future, not the past.If you can get 1.02, 2.01, Matt Ryan, and a 2011 2nd, then more power to you... but I don't think that's a realistic request, and if it gets shot down, then I'd be ready to lower my asking price.

Darren Mcfadden was also a top 3 rookie pick, and Felix Jones was drafted before Ray Rice and Chris Johnson in most rookie drafts. Also your 2nd and 3rd points are basically the same thing. Jones ranked so low because he got injured. Actually, all your points after the first one are the same. Felix wasnt getting a bigger piece of the pie because of his injuries. So basically what it all boils down to is can Felix stay healthy. I certainly dont think it is a sure thing he will will, but i dont think his chances of getting hurt are any better than any other RB in the league.

Im not sure what the problem with the term "sure fire" is. There is no such thing a "sure thing" in fantasy football, but Jones is the closest thing there is for me, at least for any RB outside the top 10. Talent + situation + opportunity + youth = top 5-8 dynasty RB. Can you name 5-8 RB's in the league who fit that equation any better than Felix?

I certainly *DO* think that Felix's chances of getting hurt are better than any other RB's in the league. This thought process is largely driven by the fact that none of his head coaches have given him more than 11 carries a game since high school. Coaches are smart. When they don't give a guy a huge workload, there's generally a reason. Also, when a guy gets injured every time they give him a bigger workload, that's generally a red flag.Like I said, Felix is ten kinds of risk. He's never carried even a partial workload before- that's a risk. Every time his coaches have upped his workload, he's gotten hurt- that's a risk. His mind-boggling rate stats to date have come over a Jerious Norwood-esque sample size (Felix's first two seasons = 150 carries, 6.5 ypc. Norwood's first two seasons = 200 carries, 6.2 ypc). That's a risk. His perceived value right now is much lower than Beanie Wells, Rashard Mendenhall, et al, which means if he struggles he doesn't get a pass- his value just plummets. That's a risk. I can see how someone could fall in love with his talent and his upside... I just don't see how anyone could consider him a low-risk prospect.

As for your "Talent + Situation + (another word for situation) + Youth" equation... Charles is the same age as Felix and out-Felixed Felix last year in a much worse situation, so there's one. Mendenhall and Wells both have comparable pedigree and better production to date, so there's two more. Ryan Mathews has better pedigree and plays for St. Norv, the patron saint of fantasy RBs. We've already discussed JStew, and ADP/CJ3/MJD/Rice are all givens. There's your 8 RBs with the same equation, plus one more thrown in for good measure.

As for my problem with the term "sure thing"... I agree that there's no "sure thing" in fantasy football. I'm not the guy who used the phrase, I'm the guy who cried foul when you used the phrase. Still, even if we want to talk "degrees of surety", it's not like Felix is a "sure thing" even by relatively lax fantasy football standards. He's a risk. People who think he'll be a top 8 back are doing a lot of projecting how Felix will do in situations Felix has never been in in over 5 years. That is, by nature, a riskier prospect than, say, projecting Jamaal Charles to continue doing what he was already doing (i.e. rocking as the lead back).

 

[SSOG]

Im sure that is what you meant, but my response was to a post that analyzed the likelihood of Felix producing 250 pts in order to finish in the actual top 8, and I replied that finishing in the top 8 in 2010 and being a top 8 dynasty back are two different things. I used Stew only as an example of a top 8 back that likely will not finish in the actual top 8 in 2010. I also did say that Stew was the only back outside of the obvious top 4 that I might easily take ahead of Felix.

I agree that it's possible for a player's dynasty ranking to be higher than his redraft ranking will likely be (witness Roddy White, who I have in my top 5 despite the fact that I doubt he'll ever post a top-5 fantasy finish). While the theory is sound, that still doesn't make Felix Jones a "sure fire" anything.

Not sure what you mean by that, Stew was the 13th overall pick and Felix was the 22nd. Pedigree about the same, or do you mean a top 3 fantasy draft pick and if so, what does that matter?

Yes, I meant in rookie drafts... and it matters because history has shown us time and time again that, until we get compelling information to the contrary, we should trust our first opinions. Witness: Rice, Sidney and Mendenhall, Rashard.

Stew did have a monster end of year, but not sure that means we now know that he can take on a full load based on 4 games. By the way, Felix ended the season on a nice note as well averaging 14 carries a game over the last 5 games (including playoffs) and doing a ton with those carries. While not the monster load Stew took on in the 4 games, that last stretch does bode well going forward imo. Also, the fact that Felix is now only competing with the RB formerly known as Marion Barber III (and already appeared to take over late last year) is a good thing as compared to competing against Deangelo, isn't it?

Felix's career high in carries is 16. He hasn't done ANYTHING to give us reason to believe he can handle a full workload. That 14 carries a game that Felix averaged as he "took over down the stretch" would come out to 226 carries a year. No RB is ever going to consistently finish in the top 12 with just 225 carries a year.The fact that Felix is competing with Barber is a good thing in the short run. In the long run, the fact that Stewart managed to steal so many carries despite competing with DeAngelo is a better thing.

Now that may be a bit of an overstatement the other way. Based on F&L’s rankings, I could name quite a few in the top 20 that are as or more risky than Felix. CJ Spiller (for obvious reasons although I do like him a lot), Michael Turner (taking him due to age is a risk in itself plus the possible reduction in work load), Jahvid Best (c’mon, this guy is the definition of risky), Shonn Greene (there is quite the risk that this guy is ordinary, something which is not the case for Felix), Knowshon Moreno (ditto on Greene, except double the risk), Ryan Grant (may not have the starting role past 2010)

Personally, I don't think those guys are as risky because what you see is what you get. Turner's a stud playing out his last few seasons. Turner owners know what he is. Spiller and Best aren't as risky as Felix because they aren't as costly as Felix. Shonn Greene's risk of being ordinary is no greater than Felix's risk of being Jerious Norwood. Knowshon Moreno is at least going to get a huge workload. Ryan Grant does nothing but produce... and he's cheaper than Felix, to boot (cost is definitely part of risk).At the end of the day, I think that anybody who has averaged 12 carries per game within the last 5 years is a safer bet than a guy who hasn't. I know a lot of people don't share that belief, but it's not like this is an MJD scenario where Felix has demonstrated he's capable of doing everything a featured back is asked to do without any problems but he's just stuck behind one of the best runners of his generation. I guess I'm just a lot more leery than most of looking at a guy who has been in the league 2 years and whose career high rushing yardage was 685 and calling him a sure-fire stone cold LOCK for the top 8. Not when there are so many other appealing alternatives out there.

 

[munchkin]

SSOG says....Both of them might have been awesome in 2008, but none of my leagues give bonus points for being awesome two years ago.

Thanks Bro, that line really struck me this morning; made me burst out laughing in an empty house, well if you don't count the cats.

 

[Go deep]

Am I over-valuing Boldin and Slaton if I ask for the 1.02, 2.01, 2011 (2nd round), 2012 (3rd round) plus Matt Ryan ?

It may seem like a lot to ask for but with 75% of all draft picks either busting or underacheving I don't want to give up a top 10 WR in his prime plus a RB that was considered a 1st round redraft league player last year for only Ryan and the 1.02 and hope that the 1.02 is the next coming of Randy Moss (dez Bryant) or LT (Ryan Mathews)

Boldin is a great player when he is on the field he actually had better stats per game in 2008 then the great Fitzgerald.

Slaton was awesome in 2008.

If I had traded those 2 players to start the 2009 season I could have expected more in return. I know it is 2010 not 2009 but I think this is still a risky deal.

I put that offer out there to the other guy and will see what he thinks. I am torn right now on what to do.

Last year mid season I gave up Jamaal Charles to get Boldin right before Larry Johnson got released then Charles blew up and now is worth a ton. I think that might be part of the reason I am trying to deal Boldin and recoup some of the value I lost in the Charles deal.

Yes, you're overvaluing Boldin and Slaton. I'd trade both players together for the 1.02 straight up without blinking. Both of them might have been awesome in 2008, but none of my leagues give bonus points for being awesome two years ago. Boldin has benefited from the fact that Larry Fitzgerald was drawing the toughest coverages. He's been fighting a LOT of injuries in his career, and he wasn't that effective even when healthy last season (although a lot of that is on the decline of Warner). While he's still a rock-solid dynasty WR2, he is not a dynasty WR1. As for Slaton... his value last offseason was a mirage. Just because you could have gotten a lot for him last year doesn't mean he's worth a lot. It sucks that you were on the losing end of the Boldin/Charles swap (believe me, I empathize- I traded Miles Austin for Donald Driver a couple of weeks before he went for 200 yards)... but you've got to make every move today with an eye towards the future, not the past.If you can get 1.02, 2.01, Matt Ryan, and a 2011 2nd, then more power to you... but I don't think that's a realistic request, and if it gets shot down, then I'd be ready to lower my asking price.

Darren Mcfadden was also a top 3 rookie pick, and Felix Jones was drafted before Ray Rice and Chris Johnson in most rookie drafts. Also your 2nd and 3rd points are basically the same thing. Jones ranked so low because he got injured. Actually, all your points after the first one are the same. Felix wasnt getting a bigger piece of the pie because of his injuries. So basically what it all boils down to is can Felix stay healthy. I certainly dont think it is a sure thing he will will, but i dont think his chances of getting hurt are any better than any other RB in the league.

Im not sure what the problem with the term "sure fire" is. There is no such thing a "sure thing" in fantasy football, but Jones is the closest thing there is for me, at least for any RB outside the top 10. Talent + situation + opportunity + youth = top 5-8 dynasty RB. Can you name 5-8 RB's in the league who fit that equation any better than Felix?

I certainly *DO* think that Felix's chances of getting hurt are better than any other RB's in the league. This thought process is largely driven by the fact that none of his head coaches have given him more than 11 carries a game since high school. Coaches are smart. When they don't give a guy a huge workload, there's generally a reason. Also, when a guy gets injured every time they give him a bigger workload, that's generally a red flag.Like I said, Felix is ten kinds of risk. He's never carried even a partial workload before- that's a risk. Every time his coaches have upped his workload, he's gotten hurt- that's a risk. His mind-boggling rate stats to date have come over a Jerious Norwood-esque sample size (Felix's first two seasons = 150 carries, 6.5 ypc. Norwood's first two seasons = 200 carries, 6.2 ypc). That's a risk. His perceived value right now is much lower than Beanie Wells, Rashard Mendenhall, et al, which means if he struggles he doesn't get a pass- his value just plummets. That's a risk. I can see how someone could fall in love with his talent and his upside... I just don't see how anyone could consider him a low-risk prospect.

As for your "Talent + Situation + (another word for situation) + Youth" equation... Charles is the same age as Felix and out-Felixed Felix last year in a much worse situation, so there's one. Mendenhall and Wells both have comparable pedigree and better production to date, so there's two more. Ryan Mathews has better pedigree and plays for St. Norv, the patron saint of fantasy RBs. We've already discussed JStew, and ADP/CJ3/MJD/Rice are all givens. There's your 8 RBs with the same equation, plus one more thrown in for good measure.

As for my problem with the term "sure thing"... I agree that there's no "sure thing" in fantasy football. I'm not the guy who used the phrase, I'm the guy who cried foul when you used the phrase. Still, even if we want to talk "degrees of surety", it's not like Felix is a "sure thing" even by relatively lax fantasy football standards. He's a risk. People who think he'll be a top 8 back are doing a lot of projecting how Felix will do in situations Felix has never been in in over 5 years. That is, by nature, a riskier prospect than, say, projecting Jamaal Charles to continue doing what he was already doing (i.e. rocking as the lead back).

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Not sure what you're confused about here. "Opportunity" is just a part of "situation".For example, Ryan Matthews is considered to be in a better "situation" than Jonathan Stewart. That's not because SD is a better running team than Carolina (they're not), but because they're a decent running team and at the same time Matthews has far less competition (more opportunity) than Stewart.

 

[az_prof]

Not sure what you're confused about here. "Opportunity" is just a part of "situation".For example, Ryan Matthews is considered to be in a better "situation" than Jonathan Stewart. That's not because SD is a better running team than Carolina (they're not), but because they're a decent running team and at the same time Matthews has far less competition (more opportunity) than Stewart.

I would never consider trading Stewart for Matthews. Situation is fluid. Talent is not. It's Deangelo's last year of his contract. Stewart has proven that he can easily be a top 3 back if he starts. Matthew's is a first round pick who hasn't proven anything yet.

 

[Redmen62]

Not sure what you're confused about here. "Opportunity" is just a part of "situation".For example, Ryan Matthews is considered to be in a better "situation" than Jonathan Stewart. That's not because SD is a better running team than Carolina (they're not), but because they're a decent running team and at the same time Matthews has far less competition (more opportunity) than Stewart.

I would never consider trading Stewart for Matthews. Situation is fluid. Talent is not. It's Deangelo's last year of his contract. Stewart has proven that he can easily be a top 3 back if he starts. Matthew's is a first round pick who hasn't proven anything yet.

I agree, but who said anything about trading Stewart for Matthews? The point was that Matthews has a better situation, which doesn't outweigh the big difference in talent that, imo, makes Stewart the more valuable dynasty back.

 

[SSOG]

SSOG says....Both of them might have been awesome in 2008, but none of my leagues give bonus points for being awesome two years ago.

Thanks Bro, that line really struck me this morning; made me burst out laughing in an empty house, well if you don't count the cats.

I actually drafted a fantasy team last year that entirely by chance wound up being stocked with veterans who were awesome in 2007 but who had underperformed in 2008 (Ochocinco, Brady, Tomlinson, etc). I named them the "2007 All Stars". Sadly, I didn't win the league.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Not sure what you're confused about here. "Opportunity" is just a part of "situation".For example, Ryan Matthews is considered to be in a better "situation" than Jonathan Stewart. That's not because SD is a better running team than Carolina (they're not), but because they're a decent running team and at the same time Matthews has far less competition (more opportunity) than Stewart.

I would never consider trading Stewart for Matthews. Situation is fluid. Talent is not. It's Deangelo's last year of his contract. Stewart has proven that he can easily be a top 3 back if he starts. Matthew's is a first round pick who hasn't proven anything yet.

And I would never trade scrambled eggs for a bagel. What does either one have to do with what I posted?

 

[Ernol]

Yes, I meant in rookie drafts... and it matters because history has shown us time and time again that, until we get compelling information to the contrary, we should trust our first opinions. Witness: Rice, Sidney and Mendenhall, Rashard.

I believe Felix was drafted ahead of Rice in many leagues (mine at least) and was regularly drafted at an earlier draft slot than Sidney as well (i.e., I am still not seeing the distinction you are making here).

Felix's career high in carries is 16. He hasn't done ANYTHING to give us reason to believe he can handle a full workload. That 14 carries a game that Felix averaged as he "took over down the stretch" would come out to 226 carries a year. No RB is ever going to consistently finish in the top 12 with just 225 carries a year.

The fact that Felix is competing with Barber is a good thing in the short run. In the long run, the fact that Stewart managed to steal so many carries despite competing with DeAngelo is a better thing.

You are comparing the two players but seem to be applying different standards. IIRC, in 2009, Stewart didn't exactly steal carries from Deangelo. When Deangelo was playing, Stewart's max carries was 17 carries, but normally more like 10-12 carries per game. He did his damage only when Deangelo went out with an injury. With Deangelo in town, Stewart is not likely to clear 226 carries himself, at least not in 2010 and possibly beyond if Deangelo ends up staying. I love Stewart and think he should be drafted well ahead of Felix, but he does have risks of his own which don't seem to be recognizing.

Personally, I don't think those guys are as risky because what you see is what you get. Turner's a stud playing out his last few seasons. Turner owners know what he is. Spiller and Best aren't as risky as Felix because they aren't as costly as Felix. Shonn Greene's risk of being ordinary is no greater than Felix's risk of being Jerious Norwood. Knowshon Moreno is at least going to get a huge workload. Ryan Grant does nothing but produce... and he's cheaper than Felix, to boot (cost is definitely part of risk).

In recent startups I have seen (in particular two high stakes startups), Best has been drafted well ahead of Felix and Spiller usually ahead as well. In fact, all the backs I mentioned other than Grant have been drafted ahead of or around Felix. Knowing what you are getting (in the case of Turner or Grant) does not make a back less risky imo. Drafting a back in the top 20 that is not likely to be ranked there come next year is a risk in itself imo. There is a reason why Grant is being drafted low (and justifiably so) and that is most are not confident he will be holding onto the lead role for very long (i.e., he is a risky pick if taken in the top 20 now). The fact that you know going in that Turner is playing out his last seasons does not, imo, make him less risky. Sure, if you draft him out of the top 20, then he is less risky. But if you are taking him in a startup ahead of Felix Jones or some other young back (which we are still seeing happen today), then I believe it is very risky to do that (as it would be in a slightly more extreme case of drafting Hines Ward in the top 20 WR despite that fact that what you see is what you get).

 

[HenryMuto]

When I say the player was awesome in 2008 what I mean is if I sell low on the guy now and he rebounds to form I will lose a lot on my investment of the player. So is cutting bait at this time wise while value is low or is it better to just cut bait now before value goes to zero.

 

[Instinctive]

When I say the player was awesome in 2008 what I mean is if I sell low on the guy now and he rebounds to form I will lose a lot on my investment of the player. So is cutting bait at this time wise while value is low or is it better to just cut bait now before value goes to zero.

Chances are Boldin's value doesn't come back up much. He's getting on in years and has an extensive injury history, now playing for a run first team.And Slaton is a guy who produced because of massive opportunity...there's a chance he rebounds, but with Ben Tate there now also, the best he can do is part time.

 

[Go deep]

Not sure what you're confused about here. "Opportunity" is just a part of "situation".For example, Ryan Matthews is considered to be in a better "situation" than Jonathan Stewart. That's not because SD is a better running team than Carolina (they're not), but because they're a decent running team and at the same time Matthews has far less competition (more opportunity) than Stewart.

Im confused about alot of things in his post, but especially that part. I am confused why he took the time to write "another word for situation" instead of "opportunity". Isnt writing the word "opportunity" quicker to type? Plus, look up the words "situation" and "opportunity" in the dictionary, they have different meanings. Jones had a great situation last year, but didnt get the opportunity to play. Im not sure what part of that SSOG doesnt get, but im not going to argue with a guy whose goal it is to try to belittle people who dont agree with him. Im confident Jones is going to be a top 8 dynasty back, he doesnt.