I think Michael Bush is the pick here. Its quite possible he is the starting back in Oakland. I like his upside alot more than the others you have listed, and at this point of the draft, its all about upside.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Dynasty Rankings (9 Viewers)
- Thread starter Fear & Loathing
- Start date
massraider
Footballguy
I'd take Knox. Possible WR1 for a Martz offense has more upside to me than half an OAK RBBC.
Knox is who I was thinking also, Bush also dosent get many receptions.
Its a possible #1 WR or a possible #1 RB. Bush has a better chance at being the #1 RB in Oakland than Knox has of being the #1 WR in Chicago.
GreatLakesMike
Footballguy
I like Breaston the most out of that bunch. Harrison is a mirage. Bush is more than likely a committee back, and he's no spring chicken. Caddy is old and oft-injured, and another committee back. Braylon can't catch. Aromashodu, Doucet and Knox are ok, but replaceable. I see Breaston having a long, productive career in the NFL. I don't think he'll ever be a #1, but I think he'll be a solid #2 for quite a few years. I also think, save Braylon, that Breaston is the most talented WR of that bunch, and... he can catch the ball!!!!Committee backs are a dime a dozen, and Martz might make WR's for a year or two, but do you honestly see Martz sticking in Chicago?
Last edited by a moderator:
Bush just turned 26 two weeks ago, and only has 217 career carries in which he has averaged 4.6 YPC. Bush should have at least 4 good years left considering his mileage. I understand that he is currently in a RBBC, but he could easily take the starting role there. Its not like Breaston is a proven WR without risk himself. He might not even end up as the #2 WR on a team with Matt Leinart as the starting QB. If the OP does go WR, i agree with the other posters that it should be Knox, he has more upside than the other WR's with the possible exception of Aromashodu.
GreatLakesMike
Footballguy
I haven't t read/heard anything concerning Breaston's #2 spot being in jeopardy. Also, carries have nothing to do with a RB's decline. Age is what matters. I'm not saying I'd blame the OP for choosing Bush... just giving my opinion.
kremenull
Footballguy
I play in a triple-flex dynasty, start 1-4 RB, 2-5 WR, 1-4 TE, and the TEs killed it last year in these formats (1.5 PPR). The marquee TEs have as much value (or more) than many WR1s. If you project Finley to be the next Gates, then he is certainly worth a late 1st to early 2nd Rd pick in a startup with 2- and 3- flex and 1.5 PPR for TE. Depends on your projection, although other high-end TEs should be availabe in Rd 3, something else to consider.....
I know its more age than mileage, but theres a reason RB's break down by 30 and all other postions play well past that. You may be right about Breaston, but i not a big fan. I think he benefited from having Fitz and Boldin drawing all the coverage. I think he could stay as the 3rd WR with Doucet taking over the #2. Either way, with Leinart at QB, im not very optomistic about any Cards WR's. Like you, i was just giving my two cents as well.
massraider
Footballguy
I am a Raiders fan, and I think that's incorrect.
Anthony Borbely
Footballguy
Breaston started 4 games in 2008 when Boldin was hurt and did the following:7/77/08/102/11/6/05/91/1In the game above when he caught 1 pass, the Cardinals got blown out by NE and Arizona QBs only completed 12 in the game. Fitz only caught 3 himself. Even with that game, Breaston caught 21/276/2 in those 4 starts. There has also been times in the last 2 years where Boldin did not play the entire game or was limited and Breaston did just fine. Leinart could be an issue and that would be a reasonable reason to not like Breaston's outlook, but I don't agree that Breaston only puts up numbers because of Fitz and Boldin. I also think he is a much better WR than Doucet.
That's yet to be determined, we've barely seen Doucet for half a season. He looked very strong after the catch and he is a little more physically imposing than Breaston. I really like Breaston's talent too, but Doucet may end up being the better fit to line up opposite Fitz when both are in their prime. Staying healthy is the biggest issue for Doucet.
munchkin
Footballguy
If Knox shows he can be a productive and effective WR under Martz because the reliance on a passing game gives him more opportunity then why should that hurt him in the long run? Granted, he may not see the inflated number of targets he would under Martz but if he proves to be proficient then I would imagine any O Coordinator in the future would still want to take advantage of those skills. At this point in a Dynasty draft I would assume it to be worth a shot to look at a player's upside.GreatLakesMike said:
mikel2014
Footballguy
GreatLakesMike
Footballguy
I'm sure any offensive coordinator would find a spot for Knox if he's productive and effective at his position. That can be said for any player. It's a small sample size, but I haven't seen anything from Knox to suggest that he's irreplaceable, or that he has more upside than Breaston. I just think Breaston is the better talent and will always have a job.
munchkin
Footballguy
Of course that's true. What I was responding to was the concern that a poster had that because Knox was effective in a Martz system that would be used against him. IF Knox proves effective then I think its reasonable to assume he would provide greater value in Chicago without a clear cut #1 in front of him than Breaston in Arizona with Fitzy. If you believe Breaston will produce as well as Boldin then Knox may never be better than that.
You beat me to it, Borbely. Breaston's been just fine without Boldin in the past. Besides, it's not like he's going to be facing tough coverages even with Boldin gone. Fitzgerald still commands the majority of the defense's attention.Anthony Borbely said:
I'd go with Ricky because a single top-20 season is worth more than 2-3 RB30-40 seasons. I doubt Ricky has much left in the tank, but with his strong season last year and with Brown's injury, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Ricky put up one last fantasy-relevant season. As for Caddy... my thoughts on him have been pretty clear. Mediocre-at-best talent, terrible situation, extensive injury history, and he's 28 to boot (so it's not like he's got that long left in the league, either).
HenryMuto
Footballguy
I just picked up the Fantasy Index by far my favorite fantasy football magazine but man I got to tell you their Keeper rankings are way off in some areas and they have been for several years now. If you go back a year or two they really seem to have no clue when ranking keepers for dynasty leagues.
Last year Slaton was #6 RB and Ray Rice #17.
This year was a WOW.
Ryan #3 ranked QB
Rodgers #5 ranked QB
Maybe this will come true in a few years but for value sake I don't see how they can be ranked like that.
Last year Slaton was #6 RB and Ray Rice #17.
This year was a WOW.
Ryan #3 ranked QB
Rodgers #5 ranked QB
Maybe this will come true in a few years but for value sake I don't see how they can be ranked like that.
I love it when people say stuff like this. You know its 2010, not 1960. Living in the city doesnt really give you an advantage in knowing about the team. Unless you know the coaches, anyone with an internet connection knows what you know.I would bet anything Bush ends up with more carries than any other RB in Oakland. As a Mcfadden owner, i hope i am wrong, but i doubt it.
Who are you not agreeing with here?
The local fan or "homer" no longer has any advantage in terms of the information he has access to... but that doesn't mean that the "home-town fan" doesn't still have advantages. For instance, fans have a tremendous advantage in terms of the SATURATION LEVELS of team information. Thanks to the internet, I could easily go online and seek out every single article about the Raiders on ESPN, I could read all of the Bay Area rags and the local blogs, I could perk my ears up every single time the rumor mill spit out the faintest whisper of a rumor regarding the Raiders... but I don't, because it's the Raiders, and I don't like them. If I spent two hours following the latest Raiders news, I would consider it a waste of two hours of my life. I process any Raiders-related news in the most selective and shallow manner possible, paying attention to some tidbits that catch my eye but never even realizing how much else I was missing, simply because I don't care. I might hear a rumor that Bush is looking good in camps... but I'd miss the 5 other rumors that the coaching staff was disappointed with his work ethic, or that Al Davis was pushing for McFadden to start, or any other such rumors. Any Raiders Homer will have a crushing advantage against me when it comes to the sheer volume of team-related info that they've processed... so when a Raiders Homer speaks, I tend to listen to what they have to say. Of course, when they're done talking I'm going to make a joke about the state of their franchise, but that's merely my duty as a Broncos homer.
You said that you "think he benefited from having Fitz and Boldin drawing all the coverage" (direct quote). Borbely showed that Breaston did just fine in the games where Boldin wasn't drawing coverage- in fact, he did better than fine, he put up some of his best numbers. Breaston is better off without Boldin than he is with Boldin.Now, I'm sure he's greatly benefited from Fitzgerald eating every coverage thrown his way for breakfast, but as that's not likely to change in the forseeable future, it's not really an important point to make.Who are you not agreeing with here?
Either way, I think Breaston is an underrated WR and I will need to see a lot more from Doucet than a couple of nice runs after the catch before I'm willing to buy that Early is going to leap him on the depth chart.
massraider
Footballguy
Actually, I don't even live in the city, and never have.I should probably clarify my statement:I think Knox has a better chance of helping a fantasy owner as a Chicago #1 (or even 1A) than Bush has a RB1 in Oakland. Mainly because I think it's almost a certainty that Bush is 1A or 1B in almost a 50/50 RBBC, going by touches. And a 50/50 RBBC in Oakland shouldn't be very exciting to anyone. I know the Raiders had a nice offseason and all, but they still won't be scoring 28 points a game. I think Chicago can, on the other hand, have two very nice WRs that can start week in and week out for fantasy owners. Bush is one of those guys that I think the perception is greater than the reality. Good size, decent speed, can catch, etc. But there are too many times that Bush didn't use that size to his advantage. There were too many times when he needed a blow after only a few carries. One big game here or there gets people's attention, but what about the other games? And it's nice he can catch, but it was rare that he was first option on a passing play. Miller is the intermediate guy, and DMC is the screen/swing pass guy.The one caveat, is if/when DMC gets injured. When that happens, Bush becomes a solid start. Question is, will be DMC be nice enough to be injured when you need Bush?Bush might be the #1 guy, but if he is only getting 10-15 touches, is that a true #1? Johnny Knox can outscore him with 3 catches.The local fan or "homer" no longer has any advantage in terms of the information he has access to... but that doesn't mean that the "home-town fan" doesn't still have advantages. For instance, fans have a tremendous advantage in terms of the SATURATION LEVELS of team information. Thanks to the internet, I could easily go online and seek out every single article about the Raiders on ESPN, I could read all of the Bay Area rags and the local blogs, I could perk my ears up every single time the rumor mill spit out the faintest whisper of a rumor regarding the Raiders... but I don't, because it's the Raiders, and I don't like them. If I spent two hours following the latest Raiders news, I would consider it a waste of two hours of my life. I process any Raiders-related news in the most selective and shallow manner possible, paying attention to some tidbits that catch my eye but never even realizing how much else I was missing, simply because I don't care. I might hear a rumor that Bush is looking good in camps... but I'd miss the 5 other rumors that the coaching staff was disappointed with his work ethic, or that Al Davis was pushing for McFadden to start, or any other such rumors. Any Raiders Homer will have a crushing advantage against me when it comes to the sheer volume of team-related info that they've processed... so when a Raiders Homer speaks, I tend to listen to what they have to say. Of course, when they're done talking I'm going to make a joke about the state of their franchise, but that's merely my duty as a Broncos homer.
And I haven't lived in Colorado for 11 years. I'd still be willing to bet that I've been exposed to a greater breadth and depth of information regarding the Denver Broncos than 90+% of the people on the board... just because I like the Denver Broncos and therefore pay more attention to everything concerning them. Most of my advantage regarding "my team" simply comes from the fact that, at the end of the day, I care more about them than Joe Schmoe. I'm not smarter than Joe Schmoe, and I don't have access to a better, smarter, faster, or more accurate information network... but I pay better attention so I catch more details. I'm invested in the team so I have better retention of those details. The result is that I have a much larger pool of data in my memory banks to draw upon when reaching conclusions, which usually results in a more accurate big-picture view- not through any merit of my own, of course, but rather owing entirely to my irrational love of a certain logo on laundry.
Haven't checked in for a few days so if this discussion has already taken place forgive me, but what are everybody's thoughts on Louis Murphy? I really liked what I saw from him in limited viewings last year and I love his work ethic. The only thing is that he's 3rd on the Raider depth chart which wouldn't equate to much fantasy success.
Everyone talks about DHB's speed, but Murphy is a burner, too. He's another sub-4.4 guy like Al Davis loves. He was the most impressive WR on Oakland's roster last year, and the Gators offense clearly missed him in a big way (it's entirely possible that Murphy's loss was felt even more keenly than Harvin's). He's a very nice prospect with good upside, a great player to stash-and-see. DHB and Schilens are currently obstacles to his playing time... but in terms of obstacles, it's not like he's stuck behind Fitzgerald and Boldin. DHB was the worst rookie WR I can remember seeing last season, finishing the year with almost as many drops (7) as receptions (9) and a catch% (23%) that would have made Chris Chambers blush. Schilens is a former 7th rounder with just 70 more receiving yards in his career to date than Murphy himself. Would anybody really be surprised if he passed either on the depth chart at some point?With all of that said... I really believe that there are few commodities more overrated than WRs with upside. There are dozens of them all over the league. If you can get Murphy, then great. If you can't... don't lose a wink of sleep over it. Just add one of the 30 other young WRs with a profile just like his.
You are exactly right about what you quoted me saying. Now read what Borbely quoted me saying(the part i bolded). There is a BIG difference between "only puts up numbers because of Fitz/Boldin" and "i think he benefited from having Fitz and Boldin". Not to pick on Borbely, but i hate when people argue a point, and misquote you to make their argument sound better.SSOG said:The local fan or "homer" no longer has any advantage in terms of the information he has access to... but that doesn't mean that the "home-town fan" doesn't still have advantages. For instance, fans have a tremendous advantage in terms of the SATURATION LEVELS of team information. Thanks to the internet, I could easily go online and seek out every single article about the Raiders on ESPN, I could read all of the Bay Area rags and the local blogs, I could perk my ears up every single time the rumor mill spit out the faintest whisper of a rumor regarding the Raiders... but I don't, because it's the Raiders, and I don't like them. If I spent two hours following the latest Raiders news, I would consider it a waste of two hours of my life. I process any Raiders-related news in the most selective and shallow manner possible, paying attention to some tidbits that catch my eye but never even realizing how much else I was missing, simply because I don't care. I might hear a rumor that Bush is looking good in camps... but I'd miss the 5 other rumors that the coaching staff was disappointed with his work ethic, or that Al Davis was pushing for McFadden to start, or any other such rumors. Any Raiders Homer will have a crushing advantage against me when it comes to the sheer volume of team-related info that they've processed... so when a Raiders Homer speaks, I tend to listen to what they have to say. Of course, when they're done talking I'm going to make a joke about the state of their franchise, but that's merely my duty as a Broncos homer.Go deep said:You said that you "think he benefited from having Fitz and Boldin drawing all the coverage" (direct quote). Borbely showed that Breaston did just fine in the games where Boldin wasn't drawing coverage- in fact, he did better than fine, he put up some of his best numbers. Breaston is better off without Boldin than he is with Boldin.Now, I'm sure he's greatly benefited from Fitzgerald eating every coverage thrown his way for breakfast, but as that's not likely to change in the forseeable future, it's not really an important point to make.Go deep said:Who are you not agreeing with here?
Either way, I think Breaston is an underrated WR and I will need to see a lot more from Doucet than a couple of nice runs after the catch before I'm willing to buy that Early is going to leap him on the depth chart.
Im not down on Breaston, but at that point of a draft, a person should be looking for high ceiling guys(imo). Breaston may end up putting up decent numbers if he does keep the #2 job in Arizona, but Michael Bush could also end up with 70% of the Oakland RB touches. Unless you are in a league that greatly de-values RB's, Bush's upside is considerably higher than Breaston's.
I got where you're coming from, there. Sorry for the misunderstanding.Anyway, regarding your last point... I don't agree. I think upside is very important and should be valued, but probability-of-achieving-fantasy-relevance is equally important. Otherwise, a guy like Jerricho Cotchery would have essentially 0 value. I actually think that Cotch is a decent comp for Breaston. He's not going to ever be a top-12 WR, but he could hit the top 20 if things broke right for him, and even if they don't there's a phenomenal chance that he's got several more years as a fantasy asset (WR3 or better) left in him.
I guess it depends in what your team looks like at that point of the draft. If you neglected WR's and needed a #3 WR, Breaston might be a good option there. Personally though, i am a swing for the fences guy in the mid rounds of a dynasty start-up. I dont want a "safe pick", i want a guy who has a chance to be a top 15 player at his position. I know there are different ways to run a dynasty team, but like i have mentioned in other threads, i want to build a dominate team, not just try to peice together a competitive team each year. For example, i have the same dynasty score for Lee Evans and Donnie Avery, but i would take Donnie Avery over Evans everytime. Evans is a safer bet for 800 yards and 5 TD's than Avery, but Evans has almost zero chance of ever being a top 15 WR. Avery may never finish as a top 50 WR, but although unlikely, he has a much better chance at making it into the top 15 at some point of his career.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Then you shouldn't give them the same score.
Anthony Borbely
Footballguy
The point I attempted to make is that Breaston was just as good or better when Boldin did not play. The numbers show that. I apologize for the lack of clarity in my post, but it was clearly unintentional. I would never intentionally misquote anyone to make my argument sound better. I made a point and supported it with facts and then leave it to others to agree or disagree. I actually think the points I made spoke for themselves and reflected my opinion and that is the important thing.As far as your last paragraph, the difference in my opinion and yours is I think Breaston is locked into the starting WR spot and you don't. That is why you think his ceiling is lower than what I think it.
Last edited by a moderator:
I've watched dominant teams fall every year after just one or two players get hurt. There's something to be said for making the playoffs every year with "boring" teams. Both approaches will win championships at similar rates...but 2-4th place finishes are worth money in most leagues too, and the "safe" approach garners more of those.
TitansFan10
Footballguy
The only thing keeping Evans from having a chance at top 15 is him needing a trade. Since I don't think he can NEVER get a trade, I do not agree that he has 0% chance of ever hitting a top 15 spot.I was just reading this and thinking its funny hoe completely different people opinions on players can be. I like Avery, but to me he is the one I can't imagine having a top 15 season.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
It's not the same as his No. 2 job being in jeopardy, but I've seen a couple of articles like this one positing that Doucet is better suited to the No. 2 role with Breaston sticking in the No. 3.Edit to add: I'm going on record as saying Knox is considerably more talented than Breaston.
Last edited by a moderator:
Evans is signed through 2012, and i think it is highly unlikely the Bills trade their only decent WR. Evans will also be 30 by the time the 2010 season ends. So sure, he can sign with a different team in 2013 at the age of 33 and maybe he ends up in a good situation, maybe he doesnt, either way, Evans chances at a top 15 season are way behind him. Avery may never be a top 15 WR, but he hasnt proven that he is not capable yet, unlike Evans.The only thing keeping Evans from having a chance at top 15 is him needing a trade. Since I don't think he can NEVER get a trade, I do not agree that he has 0% chance of ever hitting a top 15 spot.I was just reading this and thinking its funny hoe completely different people opinions on players can be. I like Avery, but to me he is the one I can't imagine having a top 15 season.
A truly dominant team will miss the playoffs maybe one time in ten years. A team playing safe, trying to put together a contender each year will make the playoffs maybe five times out of ten.By the way, a dominant team has the depth to overcome injuries, thats the advantage to trying to piece together a contender.
I dont think dynasty rankings are that simple.
gorf
Footballguy
dynasty score/ranking/preference -- it all means the same thing. there are a bunch of different factors, and everyone weights them differently. but if there's one guy who you clearly prefer over another guy, for whatever reason, then you ought to rank him higher, no?
Inspiration
Footballguy
I have seen this same statement from a few writers now and I don't understand the basis for it (I don't have Insider, so I can't read Williamson's article). If anything, I would think that their individual skillsets would indicate just the opposite.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
It actually makes very little sense to say that Doucett is better suited for the No. 2 role versus the No. 3 role, unless you're saying that Doucett is the better player than Breatson - as obviously the No. 2 should see he field more often than the No. 3.
I gather what "they" are trying to say is that Doucett's game is more similar to Boldin's and therefore Doucett should start outside and Breaston should play the slot (or No. 3 in this case). Of course this ignores the fact that most of the time the Cardinals went to 3 WR sets Boldin would move to the slot and Breaston would play putside.
I think it's just a writer trying to be over-clever and support his "sleeper" without really knowing what he is saying.
Is it possible that Doucett ends up being better than Breaston and sees more playing time and targets? Sure, but it's likely not because he or Breaston is better suited to a certain role.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
He's an NFL scout, or at least a former scout now working for Scouts Inc.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I couldn't read the article and I don't necessarily agree or disagree about whether Doucett or Breaston will end up being the second best WR in Arizona - but the line you quoted isn't based on that.So what does he mean by better suited for No. 2 v. No. 3?- that Doucett is the better talent. If so fine - honestly I haven't seen enough of Doucett to argue either way. I was impressed with how he looked against GB but that's a small sample size. If that's his reasoning then I would respectt his poinion.- if he means Breaston is better suited to play the slot than outside (No. 2 v. No. 3) - then I'm not sure what he is trying to say or that he is making a valid point, as Boldin did a lot of slot work in 3 WR sets with Breaston playong outside.
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
We already knew Finley and Sidney Rice would be attending, but here are some new names:Golden Tate
Malcolm Jenkins (2nd year)
Tarvaris Jackson, Jaymar Johnson
I just read about the Rotoworld mock and I gotta criticize F&L a bit.
Nice start outa the #2 hole with AllDay and Peyton, but Pierre Thomas over Brandon Marshall, Boldin, Jennings and Sid Rice? We've beaten to death Brandon Marshall and I understand the risks involved with owning him longterm but he's finally healthy and happy for the first offseason in how long?
I'm sorry but PT is not a better player than any of those guys I mentioned.
Nice start outa the #2 hole with AllDay and Peyton, but Pierre Thomas over Brandon Marshall, Boldin, Jennings and Sid Rice? We've beaten to death Brandon Marshall and I understand the risks involved with owning him longterm but he's finally healthy and happy for the first offseason in how long?
I'm sorry but PT is not a better player than any of those guys I mentioned.
You really think that Lee Evans, the guy who was WR7 with JP Losman under center, has a 0% chance of being a top-15 WR? You think Donnie Avery has a better chance of being a top-15 WR? Wow, guess we're going to agree to disagree there.I get that Evans is no spring chicken (although 29 is still young for a WR)... but Avery is just 3 years younger. As terrible as the Rams are, it might be 3 years before they even field so much as a mediocre offense, which sort of negates Avery's age advantage.Edit: I get what you're saying about trying to build a dominant team, but you can't just say "I'm going to swing for the fences with every pick and then if every single one of them is a home run I'll have a dominant team!". It doesn't work that way. You have to BUILD a dominant team, step by step, player by player. Part of that process is getting guys like Lee Evans, quality depth that will keep you afloat while you're acquiring studs. Once your team is already dominant, then yeah, Lee Evans is completely expendable... but you've got to get there, first.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
So we're criticizing mock drafts more than two months before the start of the season? Really?Link to the mock?
Last edited by a moderator:
Fear & Loathing
Footballguy
Yeah, I have Marshall rated about 15th at WR, so I wasn't going to draft him there.
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
greatest thread ever man
We're clearly seeing things differantly. The "safe route" produces a playoff team (for me, anyway) 80% of the time. The "shoot for dominance" route ends up bottom five every bit as often as top 2 for those who choose to attempt that route. THUS THE USE OF THE TERM SAFE ROUTE! Of course the dominant team makes the playoffs....but often on the basis of weeks 1-10. Come playoff time, those teams that dominated the first half are usually no more dominant then the safe route team...but people tend to MISS far more often on the dominant route.No sweat in the end...we all have our preferred path, and they both can work.
Similar threads
