Dynasty Rankings (3 Viewers)

[Sabertooth]

Is Brandon Tate the real deal? He seems to be impressing in camp and by all accounts looks to be in line for that WR3 job in New England. With the contract status of Moss up in the air next season, might Tate be the next big thing at wideout. He can be had cheaply now.

I asked the Audible guys to rank Tate, Price, and Edelman in terms of fantasy value and they both said Tate (if he can stay healthy....well that applies to everyone in my opinion so it applies to no one as well).

I'm on the clock in a league where I am loaded for bear right now and I really want to swing for the fences on a pick. I wouldn't need much production this season, but I just have a feeling he could arrive this year. Anyone else getting this vibe or is it maybe just gas?

 

[EBF]

Is Brandon Tate the real deal? He seems to be impressing in camp and by all accounts looks to be in line for that WR3 job in New England. With the contract status of Moss up in the air next season, might Tate be the next big thing at wideout. He can be had cheaply now.I asked the Audible guys to rank Tate, Price, and Edelman in terms of fantasy value and they both said Tate (if he can stay healthy....well that applies to everyone in my opinion so it applies to no one as well). I'm on the clock in a league where I am loaded for bear right now and I really want to swing for the fences on a pick. I wouldn't need much production this season, but I just have a feeling he could arrive this year. Anyone else getting this vibe or is it maybe just gas?

The guy has hardly played at all in the past two seasons. I like his potential, but it's impossible to say that he's the real deal with any confidence. I do like him more than Price and Edelman though. Consider his relative draft position compared to those two. Price was drafted in the same range, but without the same character/injury issues suppressing his draft stock. The fact that New England took Tate that high despite all the red flags suggests that they like his skills. In a best case scenario I could see him becoming a Donald Driver/Derrick Mason type for them.

 

[EBF]

Brandon Lafell appears to be doing what very few rookies have ever done in Carolina....ascending the depth chart. I like the kid's size but have read he was inconsistent in college. This seems to be the type of problem that a guy can overcome. What is the prevailing opinion on Lafell? He appears to have all the tools and he doesn't have much in front of him in terms of competition. But can he actually make much of an impact this season and beyond?

I would compare him to Mohamed Massaquoi. Both players suffer from serious lapses in consistency that prevented them from becoming superstars in college, but because both are such good athletes, most of the things that they were able to do in the NCAA will also work in the NFL. Basically, they should be the same guys in the NFL that they were in college. That might sound like a non-statement, so let me try to explain.Sometimes you see really dominant college players like Freddie Barnes and Jordan Shipley who have all the football skills that you look for in a WR prospect, but are unlikely to translate their college success to the NFL because they lack the raw physical talent to beat NFL defenders. These guys are great football players, but they're lacking athletically. Guys like LaFell and Massaquoi are a different breed. They're not great football players, but they have athletic talent in droves. So while they're still going to be inconsistent and unreliable when it comes to making plays and catching the football, they have physical abilities that will allow them to generate the same kind of separation in the NFL that they got in college. What I'm getting at is that there are two key aspects of playing the WR position in the NFL: physical talent and football skills. The great players have both on an elite level, but those guys are few and far between. Most players are deficient in some way. It's rare that players with middling physical talent and elite football skills last in the NFL. They simply can't separate from pro corners. However, it's fairly common to see players with elite physical talent and middling football skills hang around the league for years. Braylon Edwards and Roy Williams are still cashing checks every season. Quincy Morgan played for several years despite being absolutely awful in the "skill" aspect of the game. Why? Because he was athletic and he could get open.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I would compare him to Mohamed Massaquoi. Both players suffer from serious lapses in consistency that prevented them from becoming superstars in college, but because both are such good athletes, most of the things that they were able to do in the NCAA will also work in the NFL. Basically, they should be the same guys in the NFL that they were in college. That might sound like a non-statement, so let me try to explain.Sometimes you see really dominant college players like Freddie Barnes and Jordan Shipley who have all the football skills that you look for in a WR prospect, but are unlikely to translate their college success to the NFL because they lack the raw physical talent to beat NFL defenders. These guys are great football players, but they're lacking athletically. Guys like LaFell and Massaquoi are a different breed. They're not great football players, but they have athletic talent in droves. So while they're still going to be inconsistent and unreliable when it comes to making plays and catching the football, they have physical abilities that will allow them to generate the same kind of separation in the NFL that they got in college. What I'm getting at is that there are two key aspects of playing the WR position in the NFL: physical talent and football skills. The great players have both on an elite level, but those guys are few and far between. Most players are deficient in some way. It's rare that players with middling physical talent and elite football skills last in the NFL. They simply can't separate from pro corners. However, it's fairly common to see players with elite physical talent and middling football skills hang around the league for years. Braylon Edwards and Roy Williams are still cashing checks every season. Quincy Morgan played for several years despite being absolutely awful in the "skill" aspect of the game. Why? Because he was athletic and he could get open.

That's an interesting perspective EBF; it makes sense conceptually. Curious how you see that translating to upside though -- sure, Braylon and Roy each had 1 great season, but typically do you think players with elite physical talent but poor-to-average football skills are able to produce as top-15 fantasy players at their position?

 

[Sabertooth]

Logic would seem to indicate that a player can learn to concentrate and overcome inferior mental aspects of the game much easier than overcoming physical deficiencies.

 

[EBF]

I would compare him to Mohamed Massaquoi. Both players suffer from serious lapses in consistency that prevented them from becoming superstars in college, but because both are such good athletes, most of the things that they were able to do in the NCAA will also work in the NFL. Basically, they should be the same guys in the NFL that they were in college. That might sound like a non-statement, so let me try to explain.Sometimes you see really dominant college players like Freddie Barnes and Jordan Shipley who have all the football skills that you look for in a WR prospect, but are unlikely to translate their college success to the NFL because they lack the raw physical talent to beat NFL defenders. These guys are great football players, but they're lacking athletically. Guys like LaFell and Massaquoi are a different breed. They're not great football players, but they have athletic talent in droves. So while they're still going to be inconsistent and unreliable when it comes to making plays and catching the football, they have physical abilities that will allow them to generate the same kind of separation in the NFL that they got in college. What I'm getting at is that there are two key aspects of playing the WR position in the NFL: physical talent and football skills. The great players have both on an elite level, but those guys are few and far between. Most players are deficient in some way. It's rare that players with middling physical talent and elite football skills last in the NFL. They simply can't separate from pro corners. However, it's fairly common to see players with elite physical talent and middling football skills hang around the league for years. Braylon Edwards and Roy Williams are still cashing checks every season. Quincy Morgan played for several years despite being absolutely awful in the "skill" aspect of the game. Why? Because he was athletic and he could get open.

That's an interesting perspective EBF; it makes sense conceptually. Curious how you see that translating to upside though -- sure, Braylon and Roy each had 1 great season, but typically do you think players with elite physical talent but poor-to-average football skills are able to produce as top-15 fantasy players at their position?

Roy Williams in the NFL is the exact same player he was in college. Sometimes dominant. Usually frustrating. Larry Fitzgerald in the NFL is the exact same player he was in college. Reliably dominant. Players who lack consistent receiving skills and instincts usually don't suddenly develop them. On the other hand, players who have all the innate football skills will be successful if they have the necessary physical talent. Think about Darrius Heyward-Bey vs. Michael Crabtree. Heyward-Bey in college was an inconsistent enigma who looked brilliant on one play and horrible on the next. Michael Crabtree was a prodigy who had an innate ability to make plays.After one year in the NFL, don't those descriptions sound like accurate forecasts for their pro careers?

 

[SSOG]

Logic would seem to indicate that a player can learn to concentrate and overcome inferior mental aspects of the game much easier than overcoming physical deficiencies.

I don't think that's true at all. Some people are simply smarter than others. Sure, the less intelligent guys can study their butts off, just like the less athletic guys can turn into gym rats, but eventually there's always a hard cap, a maximum limit they can achieve. I think things like focus and concentration are pretty similar. You can work to improve them, just like you work to improve your speed or strength, but you're always limited to some extent by what nature gave you to work with.I think accuracy is something similar. Prevailing wisdom seems to be that you can "coach up" accuracy, but I don't think there's a whole lot of evidence supporting it. I think, at the end of the day, some people are always going to be less disciplined, or less focused, or be less able to deal with adversity, or have whatever other mental handicaps prevent them from reaching the full extent of their physical potential.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Logic would seem to indicate that a player can learn to concentrate and overcome inferior mental aspects of the game much easier than overcoming physical deficiencies.

I don't think that's true at all. Some people are simply smarter than others. Sure, the less intelligent guys can study their butts off, just like the less athletic guys can turn into gym rats, but eventually there's always a hard cap, a maximum limit they can achieve. I think things like focus and concentration are pretty similar. You can work to improve them, just like you work to improve your speed or strength, but you're always limited to some extent by what nature gave you to work with.I think accuracy is something similar. Prevailing wisdom seems to be that you can "coach up" accuracy, but I don't think there's a whole lot of evidence supporting it. I think, at the end of the day, some people are always going to be less disciplined, or less focused, or be less able to deal with adversity, or have whatever other mental handicaps prevent them from reaching the full extent of their physical potential.

I'll go even further... I think that things like 'vision,' being able to set your man up and then time a second move to wrong-foot him, being able to imagine six LB and DBs in motion ahead of the snap and "see" where the hole is going to be, and being able to track a ball in the air aren't much more susceptible to post-adult improvement than speed. By the time you finish college the basic building blocks are either there or they aren't. And IMO this is why so many highly drafted WRs fail; they don't have the basic abilities necessary to succeed at the single most important skill for a WR - providing a big window for his QB to get him the ball (either by using his size well to gain position or by using footwork and speed to gain separation). Running fast and having great hands for an NFL WR are nice, but giving the QB a good target is the WRs bread and butter skill. That's why Boldin (slow slow slow) and Terrell Owens (average to poor hands) can be such awesome NFL WRs.90%+ of the time guys can either do this when they enter the NFL, or they can't. And guys who get productively bigger after they arrive in the NFL and guys who were playing against inferior competition in college and didn't have to fully develop their talent to succeed make up most of the exceptions.

 

[spon23]

SSOG- was wondering if you planned on posting your Dynasty rankings anytime soon? I have a start-up draft in a week and would love to be able to have access to your rankings if possible. thanks

 

[SSOG]

SSOG- was wondering if you planned on posting your Dynasty rankings anytime soon? I have a start-up draft in a week and would love to be able to have access to your rankings if possible. thanks

Yes, almost certainly. I don't want to ruin too many surprises, but a few last-minute kinks are being worked out and the rankings should hopefully be live online sometime this upcoming week. I'll be sure to post a link for you guys the second I have one.

 

[Sabertooth]

I wonder about the high bust rate as well. To hear you guys tell it, all the information is there before a player ever enters the NFL and we should be able to predict the good players rather easily because they either have the athletics or they don't. And they either "get it" or they don't. So we should be able to built a quadrant with athletics on one axis and football skills on the other and anyone that falls into the Yes-Yes quadrant will succeed.

Obviously it isn't that simple, so how do you account for all the busts and conversely Marques Colstons.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I wonder about the high bust rate as well. To hear you guys tell it, all the information is there before a player ever enters the NFL and we should be able to predict the good players rather easily because they either have the athletics or they don't. And they either "get it" or they don't. So we should be able to built a quadrant with athletics on one axis and football skills on the other and anyone that falls into the Yes-Yes quadrant will succeed. Obviously it isn't that simple, so how do you account for all the busts and conversely Marques Colstons.

Saber - don't you think the athletics component is relatively easy to measure? It seems to me that the other axis - football skills - is far tougher to accurately ID because players come from vastly different systems in college (some which play to their skills, others which might not) and are surrounded by a different level of talent & athletic ability in college. So despite your comments above, I haven't seen anyone in here saying we should easily be able to predict success.....but rather that we fool ourselves into thinking players who lack "football instincts and skills" will suddenly develop them out of nowhere. Guys like Troy Williamson and DHB come to mind immediately.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Obviously it isn't that simple, so how do you account for all the busts and conversely Marques Colstons.

BTW - this is a mindset I see exhibited in the SP frequently....taking the results of a small sample size and using it to justify a broad statement. We have little way of knowing how Colston's career would have unfolded without Payton/Brees. I don't think it's far-fetched to suggest that they have helped put Colston in a position to be successful. (Do we think that Donald Driver would have been as good as he is in, say, Buffalo?) But regardless, even if guys like Colston/Driver/P Holmes have been successful as late round picks (or free agents), the vast majority of late round picks are out of the league very quickly. So directionally, the draft provides a good indicator of talent + likelihood of success.

 

[Sabertooth]

Obviously it isn't that simple, so how do you account for all the busts and conversely Marques Colstons.

BTW - this is a mindset I see exhibited in the SP frequently....taking the results of a small sample size and using it to justify a broad statement. We have little way of knowing how Colston's career would have unfolded without Payton/Brees. I don't think it's far-fetched to suggest that they have helped put Colston in a position to be successful. (Do we think that Donald Driver would have been as good as he is in, say, Buffalo?) But regardless, even if guys like Colston/Driver/P Holmes have been successful as late round picks (or free agents), the vast majority of late round picks are out of the league very quickly. So directionally, the draft provides a good indicator of talent + likelihood of success.

I think draft position gives us a tool to gauge talent. It is probably the best tool we've got but that doesn't mean it is a good tool. I agree that the bust rate of late rounders is way higher than early rounders too. So what are we left with? Situation? That is probably just as good of an indicator as draft position.Say you have a Cleveland Browns first rounder at WR vs a Indianapolis 3rd rounder? I tend to view that Indy player as more likely to succeed even if I never watched either player play a game.

 

[MountainMan0726]

Thoughts on Devin Thomas vs. Malcom Floyd in a Dynasty League? Thomas was ranked higher on this site a few months ago, but how much has the VJax news elevated Floyd as far as a non-PPR Dynasty option?

Is Thomas basically a boom/bust, with higher ceiling/floor than the steady production Floyd will deliver short-term? I have room to add 1 of the 2.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Thoughts on Devin Thomas vs. Malcom Floyd in a Dynasty League? Thomas was ranked higher on this site a few months ago, but how much has the VJax news elevated Floyd as far as a non-PPR Dynasty option? Is Thomas basically a boom/bust, with higher ceiling/floor than the steady production Floyd will deliver short-term? I have room to add 1 of the 2.

I'm done with Devin Thomas. Give me Floyd.

 

[EBF]

I wonder about the high bust rate as well. To hear you guys tell it, all the information is there before a player ever enters the NFL and we should be able to predict the good players rather easily because they either have the athletics or they don't. And they either "get it" or they don't. So we should be able to built a quadrant with athletics on one axis and football skills on the other and anyone that falls into the Yes-Yes quadrant will succeed.

Obviously it isn't that simple, so how do you account for all the busts and conversely Marques Colstons.

Saber - don't you think the athletics component is relatively easy to measure? It seems to me that the other axis - football skills - is far tougher to accurately ID because players come from vastly different systems in college (some which play to their skills, others which might not) and are surrounded by a different level of talent & athletic ability in college.

I don't think athletic ability is always easy to measure. Consider the case of Shonn Greene vs. Darren McFadden. Who is a better athlete? A lot of people would probably say McFadden. The media puts a huge emphasis on 40 times. It's really the only combine drill that the casual football fan understands. They don't know what a 38" vertical means, but they know that 4.3 in the 40 is blazing speed while 4.6 is kind of slow. Hence why a guy with 4.3 40 time might be labeled more athletic than a guy with a 4.6 40 time, even if the 4.6 guy is superior in every other physical category that's important for his position (balance, power, initial quickness, leverage, hip fluidity, lateral agility). When evaluating a prospect, you have to look deeper than the overall athleticism and ask yourself whether he has the specific type of athletic skills that his job requires. Different sports and different positions within those sports demand different functions. Usain Bolt might be a better athlete than Michael Phelps, but that doesn't mean he's a better swimmer. While he might be a superior athlete overall, he's probably inferior in the specific areas of athleticism involved with becoming an elite swimmer. When it comes to swimming, he doesn't have the right type of athletic ability. Different functions demand different forms. That's why there's a "type" of body that predominates at CB, DE, OT, etc. Some positions have a narrow range (you're not going to see any 5'10" 220 pound offensive tackles in the NFL). Other positions have a broader range (Terrell Owens and DeSean Jackson are both elite NFL receivers despite massive differences in body type). The common thread is that successful athletes have a certain combination of the "right" athletic gifts that allows them to excel at their specific task.

It's not always easy to evaluate athletic ability because you can be seduced by elite athletes whose rare gifts in 1-2 categories distract you from their deficiencies in other areas. Darren McFadden is an elite athlete, but IMO he doesn't have the right type of athleticism to be a successful NFL RB.

So despite your comments above, I haven't seen anyone in here saying we should easily be able to predict success.....but rather that we fool ourselves into thinking players who lack "football instincts and skills" will suddenly develop them out of nowhere. Guys like Troy Williamson and DHB come to mind immediately.

Yep. Some busts are hard to predict, but some are pretty easy. Consider guys like Darrius Heyward-Bey and RB Chris Henry. They both have ideal athletic ability on paper, yet neither of them consistently dominated his college competition (Henry was actually quite awful). If these guys had a huge athletic ability edge over their college competition and still didn't dominate, what makes you think things will be any different in the NFL where everyone trying to stop them is stronger/faster/better?

Every now and then there's a brilliant talent who struggles in college because his coaches woefully misuse him, but in general it's a huge red flag if an alleged elite NFL talent isn't making his college competition look like exactly what they are: a bunch of amateur punks destined for careers selling real estate.

 

[PNRZ]

I'm done with Devin Thomas. Give me Floyd.

I'm still hanging on to D.Thomas for dear life. Since we're on the topic of evaluating athletes for the bust column, what can I learn here from my buddy Devin and his failure to turn into a solid NFL WR? Dominated in his junior year of college, second WR taken in the 2008 draft. In the NFL the #2 spot on the depth chart has not been locked down by any superior talent - he should have taken it.Height: 6-2 Weight: 218 Age: 23. Combine top performer 40yd 4.4sec, Broad Jump 10.06ft. At his pro day he had a 33-inch vertical jump, 16 reps in the bench press.Looking at his draft profile the only thing that stands out is the 1 year wonder possiblity, and poor blocking skills. From what I read, his problem in the NFL is getting open?

 

[az_prof]

I don't know what's wrong with Devin Thomas and I really haven't seen him play enough in the NFL to make a judgement.

But someone mentioned Colston, and he is a good example of another complicating factor: small school guys are hard to project because you don't know how much football talent they really have since their college competition was so poor. This is why guys like him get overlooked sometimes and surprise. He has both the athleticism and the football talent to be very good, but we couldn't really know that.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I'm done with Devin Thomas. Give me Floyd.

I'm still hanging on to D.Thomas for dear life. Since we're on the topic of evaluating athletes for the bust column, what can I learn here from my buddy Devin and his failure to turn into a solid NFL WR? Dominated in his junior year of college, second WR taken in the 2008 draft. In the NFL the #2 spot on the depth chart has not been locked down by any superior talent - he should have taken it.Height: 6-2 Weight: 218 Age: 23. Combine top performer 40yd 4.4sec, Broad Jump 10.06ft. At his pro day he had a 33-inch vertical jump, 16 reps in the bench press.Looking at his draft profile the only thing that stands out is the 1 year wonder possiblity, and poor blocking skills. From what I read, his problem in the NFL is getting open?

I don't know how you could predict his problems. My sense is he's really immature and has preferred the social scene to football dedication.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I don't think athletic ability is always easy to measure. Consider the case of Shonn Greene vs. Darren McFadden. Who is a better athlete? A lot of people would probably say McFadden. The media puts a huge emphasis on 40 times. It's really the only combine drill that the casual football fan understands. They don't know what a 38" vertical means, but they know that 4.3 in the 40 is blazing speed while 4.6 is kind of slow. Hence why a guy with 4.3 40 time might be labeled more athletic than a guy with a 4.6 40 time, even if the 4.6 guy is superior in every other physical category that's important for his position (balance, power, initial quickness, leverage, hip fluidity, lateral agility).

When evaluating a prospect, you have to look deeper than the overall athleticism and ask yourself whether he has the specific type of athletic skills that his job requires. Different sports and different positions within those sports demand different functions. Usain Bolt might be a better athlete than Michael Phelps, but that doesn't mean he's a better swimmer. While he might be a superior athlete overall, he's probably inferior in the specific areas of athleticism involved with becoming an elite swimmer. When it comes to swimming, he doesn't have the right type of athletic ability. Different functions demand different forms. That's why there's a "type" of body that predominates at CB, DE, OT, etc. Some positions have a narrow range (you're not going to see any 5'10" 220 pound offensive tackles in the NFL). Other positions have a broader range (Terrell Owens and DeSean Jackson are both elite NFL receivers despite massive differences in body type). The common thread is that successful athletes have a certain combination of the "right" athletic gifts that allows them to excel at their specific task.

It's not always easy to evaluate athletic ability because you can be seduced by elite athletes whose rare gifts in 1-2 categories distract you from their deficiencies in other areas. Darren McFadden is an elite athlete, but IMO he doesn't have the right type of athleticism to be a successful NFL RB.

I'm not sure we disagree on anything you wrote. Of course it's important to measure "the right type of athleticism." That seems intuitively obvious to me.The point is that athletic ability IS measurable (caveat: like any other use of metrics, you need to be certain you select the right metrics) whereas "football skills" are far more subjective. I don't really think that's in dispute.

 

[coolnerd]

I wonder about the high bust rate as well. To hear you guys tell it, all the information is there before a player ever enters the NFL and we should be able to predict the good players rather easily because they either have the athletics or they don't. And they either "get it" or they don't. So we should be able to built a quadrant with athletics on one axis and football skills on the other and anyone that falls into the Yes-Yes quadrant will succeed.

Obviously it isn't that simple, so how do you account for all the busts and conversely Marques Colstons.

Saber - don't you think the athletics component is relatively easy to measure? It seems to me that the other axis - football skills - is far tougher to accurately ID because players come from vastly different systems in college (some which play to their skills, others which might not) and are surrounded by a different level of talent & athletic ability in college.

I don't think athletic ability is always easy to measure. Consider the case of Shonn Greene vs. Darren McFadden. Who is a better athlete? A lot of people would probably say McFadden. The media puts a huge emphasis on 40 times. It's really the only combine drill that the casual football fan understands. They don't know what a 38" vertical means, but they know that 4.3 in the 40 is blazing speed while 4.6 is kind of slow. Hence why a guy with 4.3 40 time might be labeled more athletic than a guy with a 4.6 40 time, even if the 4.6 guy is superior in every other physical category that's important for his position (balance, power, initial quickness, leverage, hip fluidity, lateral agility). When evaluating a prospect, you have to look deeper than the overall athleticism and ask yourself whether he has the specific type of athletic skills that his job requires. Different sports and different positions within those sports demand different functions. Usain Bolt might be a better athlete than Michael Phelps, but that doesn't mean he's a better swimmer. While he might be a superior athlete overall, he's probably inferior in the specific areas of athleticism involved with becoming an elite swimmer. When it comes to swimming, he doesn't have the right type of athletic ability. Different functions demand different forms. That's why there's a "type" of body that predominates at CB, DE, OT, etc. Some positions have a narrow range (you're not going to see any 5'10" 220 pound offensive tackles in the NFL). Other positions have a broader range (Terrell Owens and DeSean Jackson are both elite NFL receivers despite massive differences in body type). The common thread is that successful athletes have a certain combination of the "right" athletic gifts that allows them to excel at their specific task.

It's not always easy to evaluate athletic ability because you can be seduced by elite athletes whose rare gifts in 1-2 categories distract you from their deficiencies in other areas. Darren McFadden is an elite athlete, but IMO he doesn't have the right type of athleticism to be a successful NFL RB.

So despite your comments above, I haven't seen anyone in here saying we should easily be able to predict success.....but rather that we fool ourselves into thinking players who lack "football instincts and skills" will suddenly develop them out of nowhere. Guys like Troy Williamson and DHB come to mind immediately.

Yep. Some busts are hard to predict, but some are pretty easy. Consider guys like Darrius Heyward-Bey and RB Chris Henry. They both have ideal athletic ability on paper, yet neither of them consistently dominated his college competition (Henry was actually quite awful). If these guys had a huge athletic ability edge over their college competition and still didn't dominate, what makes you think things will be any different in the NFL where everyone trying to stop them is stronger/faster/better?

Every now and then there's a brilliant talent who struggles in college because his coaches woefully misuse him, but in general it's a huge red flag if an alleged elite NFL talent isn't making his college competition look like exactly what they are: a bunch of amateur punks destined for careers selling real estate.

Pat Kirwin has attempted to capture explosiveness with his Kerwin Explosiveness Index (Vertical jump, broad jump, and bench press). Every year I can remember seeing players who look quick and explosive on the feild, but run ordianary 40 times. Want to say this year it was Dexter Mccluster who stood out in this way. This is a decent what to look for in the combine article which I will try to remember link to in February.Edit: I will I don't know the exact formulas, I understand that some NFL teams (90% percent sure the Texans use one) have total athletic measurements that they apply. As I remember a guy like D. Ryans tested well under Kirwin's Index and the Texans measurement dispite an ordinary to ok 40 time.

http://www.nfl.com/combine/story/09000d5d8...n-meets-the-eye

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Several days late on the Urgency discussion, but I use it and take SSOG's approach, although more for end of the roster players than first round QBs. I used it just a couple of weeks ago when Harry Douglas was dropped. My last two WRs are Steve Johnson and Sammie Stroughter. I have Douglas one spot ahead of Johnson and six ahead of Stroughter in a PPR league (and yes, I'm higher on Stroughter than most). But I think that Johnson and Stroughter both have higher Urgency this year than Douglas. Johnson should show he is the WR2 there with TO gone and even with poor QB play I think I should know what I have by week 10 or so. Stroughter will also show early whether he is a keeper because he is right in the middle of a youth explosion in Tampa. With two highly drafted WRs in Williams and Benn, I expect to see whether Stroughter is just a slot/WR3 guy this year, especially since I think Freeman can become an excellent long term starter there.

Douglas on the other hand is coming off a lost season to a knee injury, which usually takes some time to shake off and get back fully in the flow. Plus he is going to a very stable situation in terms of coach, QB, RB and WR1, so I think it less likely that he "explodes" soon.

As a result of this analysis, I left Douglas on the wire (someone else picked him up pretty quickly).

Not sure it was the right move, but that's how I use "Urgency" in my dynasty league.

 

[GreatLakesMike]

I'm done with Devin Thomas. Give me Floyd.

I'm still hanging on to D.Thomas for dear life. Since we're on the topic of evaluating athletes for the bust column, what can I learn here from my buddy Devin and his failure to turn into a solid NFL WR? Dominated in his junior year of college, second WR taken in the 2008 draft. In the NFL the #2 spot on the depth chart has not been locked down by any superior talent - he should have taken it.Height: 6-2 Weight: 218 Age: 23. Combine top performer 40yd 4.4sec, Broad Jump 10.06ft. At his pro day he had a 33-inch vertical jump, 16 reps in the bench press.Looking at his draft profile the only thing that stands out is the 1 year wonder possiblity, and poor blocking skills. From what I read, his problem in the NFL is getting open?

I don't know how you could predict his problems. My sense is he's really immature and has preferred the social scene to football dedication.

Lazy and stupid are not good traits. I invested heavily in Thomas a few years ago and I've been cutting bait while he still has "some" value.

 

[renesauz]

For those who have touted Charles Scott...Philly is now listing him as a backup FB. If he can't beat out journeyman Eldra Buckly to be RB3, he holds no value in any but the most ridiculously deep leagues.

In other news, McCoy has shown better lower body strength and has been heavily involved in the passing game in camp. While there has certainly been reason to pause, he represents terrific value in PPR leagues right now.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

For those who have touted Charles Scott...Philly is now listing him as a backup FB. If he can't beat out journeyman Eldra Buckly to be RB3, he holds no value in any but the most ridiculously deep leagues.

Every article I've read from multiple different sources (Team Website, Inquirer & Daily News, Wilmington News Journal) has Scott already passing Buckley while seeing most of his snaps at tailback. I think they're experimenting with him at both spots early in camp, but he's still seen as a power running back more than a potential fullback. I'm taking a wait and see approach to this depth chart, just as I am with Jamaal Charles/Thomas Jones. We're barely a week into camp.

 

[spon23]

Hi guys. I was wondering if I could get some opinions on Peterson versus MJD. I have 1.02 in a dynasty PPR start-up draft and am having a really tough time making a decision between those two. Rice is also in the mix, but am not sure I'm as comfortable with him as the other two (only 1 great year). I've also considered trying to trade down to pick 5 or 6 and taking Rogers. 10 team league, PPR (.5 for RBs, 1pt for WR/TE, 6pt/TD, 5pt/TD passing). I'd welcome any thoughts. Thanks!

 

[SSOG]

Hi guys. I was wondering if I could get some opinions on Peterson versus MJD. I have 1.02 in a dynasty PPR start-up draft and am having a really tough time making a decision between those two. Rice is also in the mix, but am not sure I'm as comfortable with him as the other two (only 1 great year). I've also considered trying to trade down to pick 5 or 6 and taking Rogers. 10 team league, PPR (.5 for RBs, 1pt for WR/TE, 6pt/TD, 5pt/TD passing). I'd welcome any thoughts. Thanks!

I prefer MJD. Others prefer Peterson. You can't go wrong with either.As for why I prefer MJD to Peterson... last year, the 12-4 Vikings finished 2nd in points and 5th in yards, while the 7-9 Jaguars finished 24th and 18th, respectively. The Vikings also fielded the much more expensive and heralded offensive line. Despite that, MJD put up essentially identical aggregate statistics to ADP (1765/16 vs. 1819/18) and better rate stats (4.5 ypa vs. 4.4 ypa, 2 fumbles vs. 7 fumbles). I strongly suspect that Adrian Peterson wasn't at 100% last season, but I'm not sure about that, and even that presents a risk all its own. I'd rather bet on the guy who's producing stud numbers in his personal worst case scenario over the guy that's producing equal numbers in his personal best case scenario... but really, it's all just splitting hairs. As I said, you can't go wrong with either.

 

[MongoL3]

For those who have touted Charles Scott...Philly is now listing him as a backup FB. If he can't beat out journeyman Eldra Buckly to be RB3, he holds no value in any but the most ridiculously deep leagues.In other news, McCoy has shown better lower body strength and has been heavily involved in the passing game in camp. While there has certainly been reason to pause, he represents terrific value in PPR leagues right now.

I thought McCoy would represent good value last year when westbrook went out, that blew up in my face....

 

[HenryMuto]

Hi guys. I was wondering if I could get some opinions on Peterson versus MJD. I have 1.02 in a dynasty PPR start-up draft and am having a really tough time making a decision between those two. Rice is also in the mix, but am not sure I'm as comfortable with him as the other two (only 1 great year). I've also considered trying to trade down to pick 5 or 6 and taking Rogers. 10 team league, PPR (.5 for RBs, 1pt for WR/TE, 6pt/TD, 5pt/TD passing). I'd welcome any thoughts. Thanks!

We just had our draft picks drawn Monday for my new Dynasty league and I also drew the 2nd pick and assuming the guy at 1 takes CJ I am going to probably take Peterson and I don't have much time to debate it because our slow draft starts on Saturday. I love Ray Rice but Peterson was the unquestioned #1 player in fantasy football at this time last year and has proven it 3 straight years so I see no reason to get off this bus. We also use PPR scoring at 1 pt though.So that is my vote go Peterson since I am actually going to do it myself. I would take Rice over Drew myself. Forget taking Rodgers sure he will play another 10 years and the RB will play only 5 but you can get a really good QB later but a guy like Peterson is going to give you a huge advantage at RB for the next 5 years. I would not trade down.

 

[SSOG]

We just had our draft picks drawn Monday for my new Dynasty league and I also drew the 2nd pick and assuming the guy at 1 takes CJ I am going to probably take Peterson and I don't have much time to debate it because our slow draft starts on Saturday. I love Ray Rice but Peterson was the unquestioned #1 player in fantasy football at this time last year and has proven it 3 straight years so I see no reason to get off this bus. We also use PPR scoring at 1 pt though.

I wouldn't say unquestioned. I had him at #3 behind Fitzgerald and Jones-Drew. I was hardly the only one to prefer Jones-Drew, either. Or Fitzgerald, for that matter.

 

[Herm23]

Hi guys. I was wondering if I could get some opinions on Peterson versus MJD. I have 1.02 in a dynasty PPR start-up draft and am having a really tough time making a decision between those two. Rice is also in the mix, but am not sure I'm as comfortable with him as the other two (only 1 great year). I've also considered trying to trade down to pick 5 or 6 and taking Rogers. 10 team league, PPR (.5 for RBs, 1pt for WR/TE, 6pt/TD, 5pt/TD passing). I'd welcome any thoughts. Thanks!

I prefer MJD. Others prefer Peterson. You can't go wrong with either.As for why I prefer MJD to Peterson... last year, the 12-4 Vikings finished 2nd in points and 5th in yards, while the 7-9 Jaguars finished 24th and 18th, respectively. The Vikings also fielded the much more expensive and heralded offensive line. Despite that, MJD put up essentially identical aggregate statistics to ADP (1765/16 vs. 1819/18) and better rate stats (4.5 ypa vs. 4.4 ypa, 2 fumbles vs. 7 fumbles). I strongly suspect that Adrian Peterson wasn't at 100% last season, but I'm not sure about that, and even that presents a risk all its own. I'd rather bet on the guy who's producing stud numbers in his personal worst case scenario over the guy that's producing equal numbers in his personal best case scenario... but really, it's all just splitting hairs. As I said, you can't go wrong with either.

I tend to see this argument a lot whenever anyone attempts to justify placing MJD ahead of Peterson and I continue to not grasp at all where it comes from. In no way, shape, or form was Peterson in anything close to a best case scenario last season. Sure, he had an awful lot of goal line opportunities that resulted in a record number of short yardage touchdowns, but that is the ONLY thing that could be classified as being in his favor last season. Let us review:- He saw a collapse in the level of play of his offensive line. They were supposed to be an elite NFL unit and many people assumed they performed that way all season, but in reality it was average at best and anyone that watched a fair amount of Vikings games would probably even argue they performed as a below average unit (possibly even worse than Jacksonville). MJD had FAR, FAR more running lanes all season and was not forced to constantly make a defender miss or break a tackle behind the line of scrimmage simply to gain yards, as Peterson had to do much of the year.

- He went from being the centerpiece and focal point of the offense to being second fiddle with the arrival of Favre, which can not be understated. An elite level running back with decent pieces around him that is the centerpice of his offense is almost a mortal lock to produce elite stats (barring injury). An elite level running back with decent pieces around him that is the 2nd or 3rd option on his offense, while still a safe bet to produce above average stats, is far from a lock to produce elite level stats. Last year, MJD had a pro bowl QB (however much a joke that pro bowl designation was), a decent offensive line, and a semi- breakout wide receiver in Mike Sims-Walker...all while being the focus of the offense and the 1 person they consistantly made a concerted effort to keep heavily involved (I even distinctly remember a fuss being made about his lack of involvement after an early'ish game against the Titans last year). Peterson, meanwhile, has a lot of weapons around him, but clearly was "forced" to take a backseat to Favre, Rice, Percy, and company. This means less plays drawn up directly for him, less force feeding, and marginally less stats in general because of it.

- He had Chester Taylor eating into his 3rd down work. This is by far the most important piece, as it severely hurt his production in PPR leagues and cost him receiving yards and td's in all formats. Once again, anyone who watched Vikings games with any regularity is very aware that Peterson has more than enough receiving skills to be an every down back, he just wasn't given the opportunity last year because Taylor was so adept at it.

Fast forward to this season and compare:

- He still has what is an overrated offensive line playing in front of him, but at least Hutchinson will be healthy and Sullivan will have another year under his belt, which should warrent at least a small upgrade. Hutchinson is an elite level player when healthy (which he was not most of last year) and capable of anchoring a side of an offensive line when he is "right".

- He still won't be the centerpiece of the offense as long as Favre is in town (and trust me, he will play this year), but Favre is another year older and more banged up, Percy is still dealing with migraines, and Sidney Rice is banged up, meaning there is a decent chance they will focus on the run more than they did last season.

- He is now the 1st, 2nd, AND 3rd down back (or at least will take a much larger piece of the 3rd down work, even if it isn't his exclusively). This will mean many more receiving opportunities and given his gamebreaking ability any time he touches the ball, allow him more TD opportunities. If we assume he regresses with his goal line TD's, as I think is reasonable since he produced them at a historic rate last season, the 3rd down work and potential TD's that will result should at least help buffer some of the decline.

Long story longer, I see NOTHING about Peterson's season last year that could possibly be construed as a best case scenario. To me, there is a very large gap between Peterson and MJD and I would be taking Peterson 100% of the time (for what it's worth, I consider Peterson #1 with a bullet and believe he is more skilled and a safer bet than Chris Johnson, but that is a discussion for another day).

 

[gianmarco]

Hi guys. I was wondering if I could get some opinions on Peterson versus MJD. I have 1.02 in a dynasty PPR start-up draft and am having a really tough time making a decision between those two. Rice is also in the mix, but am not sure I'm as comfortable with him as the other two (only 1 great year). I've also considered trying to trade down to pick 5 or 6 and taking Rogers. 10 team league, PPR (.5 for RBs, 1pt for WR/TE, 6pt/TD, 5pt/TD passing). I'd welcome any thoughts. Thanks!

I prefer MJD. Others prefer Peterson. You can't go wrong with either.As for why I prefer MJD to Peterson... last year, the 12-4 Vikings finished 2nd in points and 5th in yards, while the 7-9 Jaguars finished 24th and 18th, respectively. The Vikings also fielded the much more expensive and heralded offensive line. Despite that, MJD put up essentially identical aggregate statistics to ADP (1765/16 vs. 1819/18) and better rate stats (4.5 ypa vs. 4.4 ypa, 2 fumbles vs. 7 fumbles). I strongly suspect that Adrian Peterson wasn't at 100% last season, but I'm not sure about that, and even that presents a risk all its own. I'd rather bet on the guy who's producing stud numbers in his personal worst case scenario over the guy that's producing equal numbers in his personal best case scenario... but really, it's all just splitting hairs. As I said, you can't go wrong with either.

I tend to see this argument a lot whenever anyone attempts to justify placing MJD ahead of Peterson and I continue to not grasp at all where it comes from. In no way, shape, or form was Peterson in anything close to a best case scenario last season. Sure, he had an awful lot of goal line opportunities that resulted in a record number of short yardage touchdowns, but that is the ONLY thing that could be classified as being in his favor last season. Let us review:- He saw a collapse in the level of play of his offensive line. They were supposed to be an elite NFL unit and many people assumed they performed that way all season, but in reality it was average at best and anyone that watched a fair amount of Vikings games would probably even argue they performed as a below average unit (possibly even worse than Jacksonville). MJD had FAR, FAR more running lanes all season and was not forced to constantly make a defender miss or break a tackle behind the line of scrimmage simply to gain yards, as Peterson had to do much of the year.

- He went from being the centerpiece and focal point of the offense to being second fiddle with the arrival of Favre, which can not be understated. An elite level running back with decent pieces around him that is the centerpice of his offense is almost a mortal lock to produce elite stats (barring injury). An elite level running back with decent pieces around him that is the 2nd or 3rd option on his offense, while still a safe bet to produce above average stats, is far from a lock to produce elite level stats. Last year, MJD had a pro bowl QB (however much a joke that pro bowl designation was), a decent offensive line, and a semi- breakout wide receiver in Mike Sims-Walker...all while being the focus of the offense and the 1 person they consistantly made a concerted effort to keep heavily involved (I even distinctly remember a fuss being made about his lack of involvement after an early'ish game against the Titans last year). Peterson, meanwhile, has a lot of weapons around him, but clearly was "forced" to take a backseat to Favre, Rice, Percy, and company. This means less plays drawn up directly for him, less force feeding, and marginally less stats in general because of it.

- He had Chester Taylor eating into his 3rd down work. This is by far the most important piece, as it severely hurt his production in PPR leagues and cost him receiving yards and td's in all formats. Once again, anyone who watched Vikings games with any regularity is very aware that Peterson has more than enough receiving skills to be an every down back, he just wasn't given the opportunity last year because Taylor was so adept at it.

Fast forward to this season and compare:

- He still has what is an overrated offensive line playing in front of him, but at least Hutchinson will be healthy and Sullivan will have another year under his belt, which should warrent at least a small upgrade. Hutchinson is an elite level player when healthy (which he was not most of last year) and capable of anchoring a side of an offensive line when he is "right".

- He still won't be the centerpiece of the offense as long as Favre is in town (and trust me, he will play this year), but Favre is another year older and more banged up, Percy is still dealing with migraines, and Sidney Rice is banged up, meaning there is a decent chance they will focus on the run more than they did last season.

- He is now the 1st, 2nd, AND 3rd down back (or at least will take a much larger piece of the 3rd down work, even if it isn't his exclusively). This will mean many more receiving opportunities and given his gamebreaking ability any time he touches the ball, allow him more TD opportunities. If we assume he regresses with his goal line TD's, as I think is reasonable since he produced them at a historic rate last season, the 3rd down work and potential TD's that will result should at least help buffer some of the decline.

Long story longer, I see NOTHING about Peterson's season last year that could possibly be construed as a best case scenario. To me, there is a very large gap between Peterson and MJD and I would be taking Peterson 100% of the time (for what it's worth, I consider Peterson #1 with a bullet and believe he is more skilled and a safer bet than Chris Johnson, but that is a discussion for another day).

With the exception of the very bottom as I see these top guys as all close to each other, I agree with what was said. I think a lot of people generally overstate how "good" AP's situation was last year. In particular, the O-line was definitely average to below-average and the creativity of the playcalling (i.e., running AP up the middle over and over and over) left a lot to be desired.

 

[ookook]

So I have a dynasty draft coming up and have come to see some merits in takng Rodgers in the first round, perhaps Brees. Non-PPR.

The question becomes: How early? 1.06? 1.05? 1.04?

How early is too early?

 

[GreatLakesMike]

So I have a dynasty draft coming up and have come to see some merits in takng Rodgers in the first round, perhaps Brees. Non-PPR.The question becomes: How early? 1.06? 1.05? 1.04?How early is too early?

AP, MJD, CJ, R Rice, AJ, Fitz, Calvin, Rodgers.IMO, any of those players warrant a 1st pick in a start-up dynasty, no matter the position. Personally, I'd take Rogers last out of those guys. I'm breaking out of my cocoon, but I'm still a bit old school when it comes to drafting QB's.

 

[LessThanZero]

So I have a dynasty draft coming up and have come to see some merits in takng Rodgers in the first round, perhaps Brees. Non-PPR.The question becomes: How early? 1.06? 1.05? 1.04?How early is too early?

4pt passing TDs or 6pt passing TDs?Had a decent amount of discussion about this when I took him at 1.09 in my startup. Depends on who goes where. Non-PPR might push him up a bit, but 4pt passing TDs would push him down a bit. I felt like 1.08 was the earliest. But if the 8 guys I expected to go in the top 8 were all gone at 1.09, I felt like Rodgers was an easy choice there. Even in non-PPR I don't think I could take him above 1.07 -- the big 4 RBs + Fitz, AJ would all be ranked higher for me. Rodgers is also the only QB I'd consider taking in the first.Getting ready for the live rookie draft in my main league in a couple weeks, and as usual the rookie class is shaking out a bit differently than I expected. Odd scoring system, but the gist is that it's very QB-favorable, probably as much as a start 2 QB league. So I guarantee that Bradford will go top 4, and Tebow and Clausen will both go by 2.03.To boil it down: Anyone think it's crazy to pass on Ben Tate for a QB (Tebow or Clausen) and/or a WR (Thomas, Williams, or Golden Tate) at 1.08/1.09? I'm thoroughly unsold on Ben Tate, and usually try to stick to my gut feelings about players as it's served me pretty well. But passing on him that far down strikes me as possibly crazy. I just can't help thinking that since I've got no need positions, I'd rather take a pair of WRs or a WR/QB at that spot. Frankly, I like all five of those players above more than Ben Tate as dynasty prospects. If he does fall to me, it means at least one of them is off the board, but with the 1.08/1.09/1.12 picks, I can pass on Tate (the guy with 1.10 is RB-starved and would instantly take him) and grab three of the guys I listed above. The best option would be to try and trade the 1.08 away to an RB-starved team of course, but never any guarantee a deal can get worked out.

 

[J-Dawg]

I would pass on Ben Tate too but I wouldn't pass on either Williams or Tate to take Tebow or Clausen. I'm not a big fan of either player and I think that you would be waiting a longer period of time for them to produce, if they ever do, whereas both WRs have a chance to give you instant production.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I moved up (or back) to picks 5-6 to snag Dem Thomas in all but one of my dynasties this year. So I don't think it's crazy at all. IMO after the consensus top tier is gone (four picks this year), just be sure to get a player you really like. No one will remember if the rookie bust/sensation on your roster was taken at #6 or #10 and you can get too cute moving down to where a player "ought" to be drafted - missing out on the guys you want entirely.

 

[SSOG]

I tend to see this argument a lot whenever anyone attempts to justify placing MJD ahead of Peterson and I continue to not grasp at all where it comes from. In no way, shape, or form was Peterson in anything close to a best case scenario last season. Sure, he had an awful lot of goal line opportunities that resulted in a record number of short yardage touchdowns, but that is the ONLY thing that could be classified as being in his favor last season. Let us review:- He saw a collapse in the level of play of his offensive line. They were supposed to be an elite NFL unit and many people assumed they performed that way all season, but in reality it was average at best and anyone that watched a fair amount of Vikings games would probably even argue they performed as a below average unit (possibly even worse than Jacksonville). MJD had FAR, FAR more running lanes all season and was not forced to constantly make a defender miss or break a tackle behind the line of scrimmage simply to gain yards, as Peterson had to do much of the year.

I'll agree that his line didn't play up to its billing, but the fact remains that his line is more talented and better compensated than Jones-Drew's, yet Jones-Drew still averaged more yards per carry.

- He went from being the centerpiece and focal point of the offense to being second fiddle with the arrival of Favre, which can not be understated. An elite level running back with decent pieces around him that is the centerpice of his offense is almost a mortal lock to produce elite stats (barring injury). An elite level running back with decent pieces around him that is the 2nd or 3rd option on his offense, while still a safe bet to produce above average stats, is far from a lock to produce elite level stats. Last year, MJD had a pro bowl QB (however much a joke that pro bowl designation was), a decent offensive line, and a semi- breakout wide receiver in Mike Sims-Walker...all while being the focus of the offense and the 1 person they consistantly made a concerted effort to keep heavily involved (I even distinctly remember a fuss being made about his lack of involvement after an early'ish game against the Titans last year). Peterson, meanwhile, has a lot of weapons around him, but clearly was "forced" to take a backseat to Favre, Rice, Percy, and company. This means less plays drawn up directly for him, less force feeding, and marginally less stats in general because of it.

The guy still had whopping 357 touches. Maybe if he was the "centerpiece of the offense" he might have gotten another 20 touches or so, but there's a limit on how high he can go. Meanwhile, if he was the "centerpiece of the offense", he would also be the centerpiece of the defensive gameplan, which means while his attempts would go up, his efficiency per attempt would likely go down.

- He had Chester Taylor eating into his 3rd down work. This is by far the most important piece, as it severely hurt his production in PPR leagues and cost him receiving yards and td's in all formats. Once again, anyone who watched Vikings games with any regularity is very aware that Peterson has more than enough receiving skills to be an every down back, he just wasn't given the opportunity last year because Taylor was so adept at it.

Chester scored two TDs last year. One, two. Dos. Do you really think that Chester Taylor ate into Peterson's TD production last year? He certainly ate into Peterson's reception total, which is relevant in PPR leagues, but remember that Peterson still had a whopping 357 touches, so it's not like the potential for that many more touches was there.Basically, Peterson got an uberstud workload (357 touches!) without getting an uberstud's share of the defense's attention (thanks to Mssrs. Favre, Rice, and Harvin). That's what I'd call a "best case scenario". Meanwhile, Maurice Jones-Drew logged 365 touches as the one and only focus of every defense he ever faced, and MJD still managed to essentially match Peterson in production.

So I have a dynasty draft coming up and have come to see some merits in takng Rodgers in the first round, perhaps Brees. Non-PPR.The question becomes: How early? 1.06? 1.05? 1.04?How early is too early?

I'd go as early as 1.07, after the big 4 RBs, Fitz, and Andre. Yes, I'd take him over Calvin. I'd take Brees somewhere near the 1st/2nd turn, depending on who was still on the board (I'd prefer the big 4 RBs, Fitz, Andre, Rodgers, Calvin, Austin, Roddy, Gore, and possibly Stewart).

 

[Instinctive]

So I have a dynasty draft coming up and have come to see some merits in takng Rodgers in the first round, perhaps Brees. Non-PPR.

The question becomes: How early? 1.06? 1.05? 1.04?

How early is too early?

4pt passing TDs or 6pt passing TDs?

Had a decent amount of discussion about this when I took him at 1.09 in my startup. Depends on who goes where. Non-PPR might push him up a bit, but 4pt passing TDs would push him down a bit. I felt like 1.08 was the earliest. But if the 8 guys I expected to go in the top 8 were all gone at 1.09, I felt like Rodgers was an easy choice there. Even in non-PPR I don't think I could take him above 1.07 -- the big 4 RBs + Fitz, AJ would all be ranked higher for me. Rodgers is also the only QB I'd consider taking in the first.

It doesn't matter at all. Over the course of the season, a 15 TD difference means an additional 30 point difference in points. That's 2 points a game. Does practically nothing to alter when you take a QB. A top QB is valuable because there's only 3 (or 4 with Romo or Brady...) and not becaus ehe scores a lot of points. If the top 10 QBs scored 102, the next 10 scored 100, and the next ten scored 98 points PER GAME, then I would take the last QB...it's only a 4 point disadvantage. 6 vs 4 is practically useless to determine QB value.That said, I would, and have, taken Rodgers as early as 1.04. He's top 5 production at his position for a DECADE. Ask Peyton Manning's owner how the last 10 years have been, if he took him in a start up in the 1st going into his 3rd year as a starter...the RBs probably all flame out in 5 years, maybe 7. And even then, new guys bust on the scene all the time. The top 3 QBs for what's about to be 3 years are Rodgers, Manning, Brees. Manning and Brees for an extra year. Manning for like 7 years before any of the top RBs came inot the league.

 

[Ernol]

We just had our draft picks drawn Monday for my new Dynasty league and I also drew the 2nd pick and assuming the guy at 1 takes CJ I am going to probably take Peterson and I don't have much time to debate it because our slow draft starts on Saturday. I love Ray Rice but Peterson was the unquestioned #1 player in fantasy football at this time last year and has proven it 3 straight years so I see no reason to get off this bus. We also use PPR scoring at 1 pt though.

I wouldn't say unquestioned. I had him at #3 behind Fitzgerald and Jones-Drew. I was hardly the only one to prefer Jones-Drew, either. Or Fitzgerald, for that matter.

That was 2 years ago (when Peterson was the unquestioned #1). In the PPR startups I drafted last year (the year of the WR), Peterson regularly went after Calvin and Fitz and even went after Calvin, Fitz and Andre Johnson in one league in particular. He also was drafted 25-50% of the time behind MJD (in the startups I drafted). I think its pretty close, but I like MJD over Peterson. Like Peterson, MJD is capable of carrying a monster load and scoring a ton of TDs, but unlike ADP, MJD is also likely to have a bunch of receptions/receiving yards. Very subjective, but I believe he will last longer than Peterson as well (he has less mileage at least).

 

[SSOG]

By the way, I'm absolutely stoked to announce that my rankings are finally live. The site's still not 100% where we want it to be, but we figure it's fit enough for human consumption, and I figure that the people who are drafting soon would rather have the rankings a couple of days early instead of waiting for everything to be all perfect. Try to keep that in mind and have a little bit of patience as we continue to update and tweak the site over the next couple of days. In the meantime, enjoy!

www.dynastyrankings.net

 

[EBF]

By the way, I'm absolutely stoked to announce that my rankings are finally live. The site's still not 100% where we want it to be, but we figure it's fit enough for human consumption, and I figure that the people who are drafting soon would rather have the rankings a couple of days early instead of waiting for everything to be all perfect. Try to keep that in mind and have a little bit of patience as we continue to update and tweak the site over the next couple of days. In the meantime, enjoy!

www.dynastyrankings.net

I just looked at the WR rankings. Nice work. I didn't see anything that I strongly disagree with. Some miscellaneous comments:- Regarding Dez, you can't assume anything about when he'll produce. The unfortunate injury might have derailed the possibility of a Boldin/Randy type of rookie year, but just because Witten and Austin are good doesn't mean Dez can't be better. Really. Cris Carter and Jake Reed were good. Neither one could keep Randy Moss from being Randy Moss. In dynasty, you don't pass on a difference maker just because he might be a year away from impact. Now whether or not you believe Dez is a difference maker is a different discussion. I'm in the yes camp. I think he combines the best aspects of Anquan Boldin and Reggie Wayne.

- On that note, I wouldn't say Roddy White is more talented than Reggie Wayne. In fact, it might be the other way around. Just because Wayne doesn't have any elite skills on paper doesn't mean he isn't an elite talent. He's one of the poster boys for "sneaky good" because his strengths are the kind that are difficult to quantify with numbers (i.e. body control, hand-eye coordination, overall fluidity). Greg Jennings is another guy who kinda fits this mold. Don't confuse "not 6'5" with 4.3 speed" for "not talented."

- In the past I've argued that Steve Smith and Santana Moss are basically the same guy. While even I would admit that it's a slight exaggeration (Smith is more consistent and more mentally tough), I don't think the gap is nearly as huge as most imply. Both are undersized speedsters with good strength whose production has suffered because of inconsistent QB play. Santana was a pretty high first round pick and a fantastic college player. He has a realistic chance to finish his career as one of the top 50 WRs to ever play the game. 1400 yards was certainly a career year, but the guy has skills.

- There are some other minor things I disagree with, but that's to be expected in personal rankings since they reflect one person's opinion of something that's pretty subjective. My list has MSW, Demaryius Thomas, Garcon, and M. Williams a few spots higher and I would be reluctant to hitch my dynasty wagon to guys like R. Moss and S. Smith CAR. I've been burned by the "yea he's old, but I'll take the points this year" philosophy more than I've been burned by the "next big thing" philosophy.

- The fact that you're pretty high on Steve Breaston/Brandon Tate and pretty low on Eddie Royal/Andre Roberts is a bit of a contradiction for me since the latter very much fit into the "return man as WR" mold. I actually think the latter duo might have more overall talent. Despite going fairly high in the FBG rookie drafts in which I've participated, Roberts seems to be flying under the radar as a dynasty prospect. He was a high pick when you consider the small school factor (it's been my experience that small school players tend to get drafted a little lower than their talent would suggest). He was picked higher than Breaston and might end up becoming a better version of the same player. It's not often that Bloom, Waldman, and I universally agree about a player. IIRC, we all liked Roberts. Is he a lock for success? No way, but he's an attractive buy low and throw-in candidate if you can pry him away from someone who drafted him with minimal enthusiasm. He should be on this list somewhere. At the very least above guys like Chambers, Walter, and Butler.

 

[Abrantes]

By the way, I'm absolutely stoked to announce that my rankings are finally live. The site's still not 100% where we want it to be, but we figure it's fit enough for human consumption, and I figure that the people who are drafting soon would rather have the rankings a couple of days early instead of waiting for everything to be all perfect. Try to keep that in mind and have a little bit of patience as we continue to update and tweak the site over the next couple of days. In the meantime, enjoy!

www.dynastyrankings.net

Wow! Looks awesome, SSOG. Great work (and a whole lot of it), and I hope to get a more thorough look at it tomorrow.

 

[Lott's Fingertip]

By the way, I'm absolutely stoked to announce that my rankings are finally live. The site's still not 100% where we want it to be, but we figure it's fit enough for human consumption, and I figure that the people who are drafting soon would rather have the rankings a couple of days early instead of waiting for everything to be all perfect. Try to keep that in mind and have a little bit of patience as we continue to update and tweak the site over the next couple of days. In the meantime, enjoy!

www.dynastyrankings.net

Just took a quick look and it looks great. Lists and rankings are fine, but reasons matter most.

 

[LessThanZero]

I would pass on Ben Tate too but I wouldn't pass on either Williams or Tate to take Tebow or Clausen. I'm not a big fan of either player and I think that you would be waiting a longer period of time for them to produce, if they ever do, whereas both WRs have a chance to give you instant production.

I assume you mean Golden Tate in the second reference there, since you're referring to WRs. Honestly, the more I look at it, I'm almost certainly going WR/WR, or RB/WR if Hardesty falls to me.*My question was more focused on whether I'm way undervaluing Ben Tate. But I'll play a little QB devil advocate here: I don't need instant production at WR (or anywhere really), so that's a non-factor. I'm think I'm also slightly higher on Tebow and Clausen than conventional Shark Pool wisdom. And finally: given how extremely QB-friendly this system is, and given that I think that Bradford, Tebow, and Clausen are the only QBs in this class with any hope of ever being fantasy-relevant, and given that it's a dynasty league, it's likely worth overpaying to get one of them. To illustrate: I'd be surprised, but certainly not shocked, if one of them went in the 5-7 range in this league to a QB-starved team.

*This is largely because I also have 1.12. If Clausen and Tebow are both available at 1.08/1.09, I'll be assured of getting one of them at 1.12 anyway based on the rosters of the guys picking at 1.10/1.11.

4pt passing TDs or 6pt passing TDs?

It doesn't matter at all. Over the course of the season, a 15 TD difference means an additional 30 point difference in points. That's 2 points a game. Does practically nothing to alter when you take a QB. A top QB is valuable because there's only 3 (or 4 with Romo or Brady...) and not becaus ehe scores a lot of points. If the top 10 QBs scored 102, the next 10 scored 100, and the next ten scored 98 points PER GAME, then I would take the last QB...it's only a 4 point disadvantage. 6 vs 4 is practically useless to determine QB value.

I wasn't arguing it's an inherently huge swing, I was just asking. But saying it doesn't matter AT ALL isn't correct. I get that there's a big pushback here on asking that question because lots of people misunderstand it -- more points must mean it's a big advantage!!! -- but it's not 100% irrelevant either. In most leagues, it's likely to produce only a marginal advantage. If the scoring system favors TDs more than yardage, then it matters more (see the weirdo scoring system in my sig and how it affects QB value as discussed above). If the top tier QBs that year are unlikely to score significantly more TDs than the second or third tiers, then it matters less. And so on. But yes, in nearly all scoring systems, combined with this year's strong QB class, mean it's a marginal factor. You shouldn't be moving QBs around by a full round based on it. But, for example, assuming otherwise standard scoring I can see differences in PPR vs. non-PPR and 4pt vs. 6pt pass TDs being enough to affect how I order Frank Gore, Calvin, and Aaron Rodgers at the 1.07-1.09 spots, which is where I'd generically rank them. If I would generically value them there, those differences are probably enough to nudge my rankings, even in a pretty marginal way. Non-PPR and 6pt pass TDs? I might bump Rodgers up to 1.07. PPR and 4pt pass TDs? I'd probably bump him down to 1.09. Given the question posed -- how early to take Rodgers -- it actually did make a difference to my answer.

By the way, I'm absolutely stoked to announce that my rankings are finally live. The site's still not 100% where we want it to be, but we figure it's fit enough for human consumption, and I figure that the people who are drafting soon would rather have the rankings a couple of days early instead of waiting for everything to be all perfect. Try to keep that in mind and have a little bit of patience as we continue to update and tweak the site over the next couple of days. In the meantime, enjoy!

www.dynastyrankings.net

Very cool. Any plans in the future to run generic strategy articles tailored to dynasty leagues?

 

[SSOG]

I just looked at the WR rankings. Nice work. I didn't see anything that I strongly disagree with. Some miscellaneous comments:

- Regarding Dez, you can't assume anything about when he'll produce. The unfortunate injury might have derailed the possibility of a Boldin/Randy type of rookie year, but just because Witten and Austin are good doesn't mean Dez can't be better. Really. Cris Carter and Jake Reed were good. Neither one could keep Randy Moss from being Randy Moss. In dynasty, you don't pass on a difference maker just because he might be a year away from impact. Now whether or not you believe Dez is a difference maker is a different discussion. I'm in the yes camp. I think he combines the best aspects of Anquan Boldin and Reggie Wayne.

- On that note, I wouldn't say Roddy White is more talented than Reggie Wayne. In fact, it might be the other way around. Just because Wayne doesn't have any elite skills on paper doesn't mean he isn't an elite talent. He's one of the poster boys for "sneaky good" because his strengths are the kind that are difficult to quantify with numbers (i.e. body control, hand-eye coordination, overall fluidity). Greg Jennings is another guy who kinda fits this mold. Don't confuse "not 6'5" with 4.3 speed" for "not talented."

- In the past I've argued that Steve Smith and Santana Moss are basically the same guy. While even I would admit that it's a slight exaggeration (Smith is more consistent and more mentally tough), I don't think the gap is nearly as huge as most imply. Both are undersized speedsters with good strength whose production has suffered because of inconsistent QB play. Santana was a pretty high first round pick and a fantastic college player. He has a realistic chance to finish his career as one of the top 50 WRs to ever play the game. 1400 yards was certainly a career year, but the guy has skills.

- There are some other minor things I disagree with, but that's to be expected in personal rankings since they reflect one person's opinion of something that's pretty subjective. My list has MSW, Demaryius Thomas, Garcon, and M. Williams a few spots higher and I would be reluctant to hitch my dynasty wagon to guys like R. Moss and S. Smith CAR. I've been burned by the "yea he's old, but I'll take the points this year" philosophy more than I've been burned by the "next big thing" philosophy.

- The fact that you're pretty high on Steve Breaston/Brandon Tate and pretty low on Eddie Royal/Andre Roberts is a bit of a contradiction for me since the latter very much fit into the "return man as WR" mold. I actually think the latter duo might have more overall talent. Despite going fairly high in the FBG rookie drafts in which I've participated, Roberts seems to be flying under the radar as a dynasty prospect. He was a high pick when you consider the small school factor (it's been my experience that small school players tend to get drafted a little lower than their talent would suggest). He was picked higher than Breaston and might end up becoming a better version of the same player. It's not often that Bloom, Waldman, and I universally agree about a player. IIRC, we all liked Roberts. Is he a lock for success? No way, but he's an attractive buy low and throw-in candidate if you can pry him away from someone who drafted him with minimal enthusiasm. He should be on this list somewhere. At the very least above guys like Chambers, Walter, and Butler.

Thanks EBF, I always love the feedback.- Regarding Dez, obviously it's hard to distill all of my thoughts on a player down into a single comment, so a little bit of the story got left out. Hopefully when we have the comment archives up and running (so I can get a string of comments on a player), that will become less of a problem. I'm a little bit leery of ranking a player that highly when I haven't watched him that much in college. There are a lot of people who I respect who are really going gaga over Dez, and while I'm perfectly willing to go out on a limb that thin, I won't do it unless I've seen enough reason to with my own two eyes. And with Dez, I just haven't had a chance yet. Furthermore, while I'm not entirely ruling out the possibility of Dez being productive early, the simple fact of the matter is that the PROBABILITY of him being productive early is very low. Larry Fitzgerald ranked 30th as a rookie. Calvin Johnson ranked 35th. Brandon Marshall ranked 89th. Desean Jackson posted one of the most wildly successful rookie campaigns in recent years... and finished 29th. While it's POSSIBLE that Dez is a fantasy contributor this year and next year, the PROBABILITIES of that outcome come in and reduce his expected value over the next two seasons. It's the same problem with Jonathan Stewart- sure, he COULD be a top-10 RB as early as this season, but it's less probable than the guys around him so he gets ranked lower than his talent would otherwise dictate.

- I've got respect for Wayne, who I think is a legit above-average NFL WR1... but I don't think he's a top 10 talent. I do think that Roddy is. I was a major Roddy White hater early in his career, but I've been duly impressed by how he's really stepped up his game. Few receivers in the game face more defensive attention than White (and Wayne isn't one of them), but he just keeps going out and producing.

- I agree that Santana is a very talented receiver, but I don't think he's anywhere near Smith's level. When Smith has played with QB play above the level of atrocious, he's averaged 90+ yards per game every time. Moss, on the other hand, reminds me a lot more of Lee Evans. Lots of shoulda woulda couldas, although with fewer QB excuses (for as little respect as he gets, Jason Campbell is still a monumental upgrade over Trent Edwards and Ryan Fitzpatrick). I like him a lot as a dynasty WR3 because he's definitely talented, but it's put up or shut up time.

- I'd probably be lower on Moss and Smiff in a dynasty startup, but in an established dynasty league, I think they're uber WR2s. I mean, Smiff is the same age as Reggie Wayne, and people are taking Wayne as their dynasty WR1. Smiff should produce comparable production at a discount cost.

-Regarding Andre Roberts, there are actually a few kinks being worked out of the bottom of the lists (some players not displaying, some rankings and tiers needing to be shored up, etc). A lot of that is stuff that's just going to be ironed out as we go. Regarding Royal, though... I don't view him as a returner playing WR. I view him as a WR who was pressed into service on returns because Denver didn't have any other options available. Despite his ridiculous game against SD where he had two punt return TDs in the first half, I still don't really think of him as a DoublePlus returner. Perhaps that's a fault on my part. I do think he should be up more in the 40-45 range, though, and plan on fixing that oversight with my next update.

As always, love the feedback. And before anyone mentions it, yes I know that the forums aren't working yet. We hope to have that fixed within the next day or two.

 

[seabronc]

SSOG-- really enjoy the rankings. Thanks for putting them up for all to see.

Would you ever consider trying to incorporate future draft picks into rankings or comments? I'm often curious where someone would rank something like a future top 3 pick compared to current players. I know that changes over the season and depending on league rules and makeup, but it's always an important benchmark for evaluating trades and I've never seen someone attempt to include it.

 

[SSOG]

By the way, I'm absolutely stoked to announce that my rankings are finally live. The site's still not 100% where we want it to be, but we figure it's fit enough for human consumption, and I figure that the people who are drafting soon would rather have the rankings a couple of days early instead of waiting for everything to be all perfect. Try to keep that in mind and have a little bit of patience as we continue to update and tweak the site over the next couple of days. In the meantime, enjoy!

www.dynastyrankings.net

Very cool. Any plans in the future to run generic strategy articles tailored to dynasty leagues?

Yup. We hope to have a couple of articles up within the week, and we'll expand from there. The goal is to make it very progressive, process-heavy, and strategy-heavy. I hate to speak in cliches, but sort of a "one stop shop" for all of a person's dynasty needs.I'm don't know if it's coming across just how excited I am about this project, but I'm sort of in fantasy-dork-nirvana at all the possibilities and features we're going to try to include. I don't want to get in trouble with the other guys for spilling state secrets or for making promises that might be impossible to deliver on, but even the little stuff is going to be pretty cool. For instance, we'll definitely be getting a rankings archive up, which will make us one of the very, very few sites where we're openly inviting scrutiny of our past predictions in an effort to identify where we were right, where we were wrong, and what processes need to be abandoned or changed going forward. I think the only limits will be the ones we place upon ourselves (or, more accurately, the ones our poor, overworked webmaster places on us ).

SSOG-- really enjoy the rankings. Thanks for putting them up for all to see.

Would you ever consider trying to incorporate future draft picks into rankings or comments? I'm often curious where someone would rank something like a future top 3 pick compared to current players. I know that changes over the season and depending on league rules and makeup, but it's always an important benchmark for evaluating trades and I've never seen someone attempt to include it.

I actually hadn't considered that, but that's a fantastic idea. I don't know how I could fit it in the rankings (would you rank the future picks against the WRs? The RBs? Both? Neither?), but it sounds like a great idea for an article- attempting to gauge the value of future draft picks vs. current players. Plus, in a year or two, we could revisit the article to see how well the early expectations held up and then tweak the expected value to hopefully be more accurate going forward.If you guys have any other suggestions about stuff that you'd like to see or other areas of dynasty where the coverage seems lacking, let us know. As I said, hopefully we'll have the forums working in a day or two, or you can shoot me an email at Adam@DynastyRankings.net.

 

[EBF]

- Furthermore, while I'm not entirely ruling out the possibility of Dez being productive early, the simple fact of the matter is that the PROBABILITY of him being productive early is very low. Larry Fitzgerald ranked 30th as a rookie. Calvin Johnson ranked 35th. Brandon Marshall ranked 89th. Desean Jackson posted one of the most wildly successful rookie campaigns in recent years... and finished 29th. While it's POSSIBLE that Dez is a fantasy contributor this year and next year, the PROBABILITIES of that outcome come in and reduce his expected value over the next two seasons.

Right, but in a dynasty you're not just drafting for next year. Nevermind the fact that Dez doesn't have to PRODUCE like a top 10 WR this season to carry top 10 WR trade value this season (see: Calvin, Crabtree during/after their rookie years). If you had the chance to draft Larry Fitzgerald before his rookie season in a dynasty startup, where would you take him knowing that he would be mediocre in FF during his first season but eventually brilliant?

I just don't see more than a handful of NFL receivers who have more talent than Dez Bryant and so I value him accordingly. That's a judgment call that I'm comfortable making. I don't have a problem with people who want to see some results first. I have the same "prove it to me" attitude about other players like Maclin and Wallace, who I wouldn't draft at their dynasty ADP.

My broader point was that if Dez is as good as people like me think he is, there's no telling when he'll blow up. Could be any time.

- I agree that Santana is a very talented receiver, but I don't think he's anywhere near Smith's level. When Smith has played with QB play above the level of atrocious, he's averaged 90+ yards per game every time. Moss, on the other hand, reminds me a lot more of Lee Evans. Lots of shoulda woulda couldas, although with fewer QB excuses (for as little respect as he gets, Jason Campbell is still a monumental upgrade over Trent Edwards and Ryan Fitzpatrick). I like him a lot as a dynasty WR3 because he's definitely talented, but it's put up or shut up time.

Smith and Moss have been in the league for the same number of years. They've both missed roughly an entire season because of injuries. Moss has 500 career receptions. Smith has 574. Moss 7443 career yards. Smith has 8330. Moss has 46 TDs. Smith has 50 TDs. There's a difference, but it's not really enormous. About 7 receptions and 100 yards per season over the course of their careers. Minimal considering the fact that Smith is usually lumped in with the uber talents and Moss is always relegated to the second or third tier. I think Smith/Evans/Moss are all similar. Good players stuck on bad teams with crappy quarterbacks. Smith is a little bit better than the other two. Not light years beyond them though.

-Regarding Andre Roberts, there are actually a few kinks being worked out of the bottom of the lists (some players not displaying, some rankings and tiers needing to be shored up, etc). A lot of that is stuff that's just going to be ironed out as we go. Regarding Royal, though... I don't view him as a returner playing WR. I view him as a WR who was pressed into service on returns because Denver didn't have any other options available. Despite his ridiculous game against SD where he had two punt return TDs in the first half, I still don't really think of him as a DoublePlus returner. Perhaps that's a fault on my part. I do think he should be up more in the 40-45 range, though, and plan on fixing that oversight with my next update.

Royal was known more as a return man than WR in college. From Wikipedia:"Led the ACC and ranked 10th in the nation with a 14.7-yard punt return average (31-455) and scored two touchdowns on punt returns . He Added 14 kickoff returns for 316 yards (22.6 avg.) and eight rushes for 112 yards (14.0 avg.) . Finished with 1,379 all-purpose yards (106.1 ypg.), he finished first in career all-purpose yards in school history (4,686), fourth in career receptions (119), fifth in receiving touchdowns (12) and sixth in receiving yards (1,778).[1] He was also the Atlantic Coast Conference's (ACC) all-time leader in punt return yards (1,296)."

Roberts is much like Royal. Royal is the player comparison that I usually use when I talk about him.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1662379

"Further adding to his resume is Roberts' outstanding punt return skills. He led the nation with a 19.2-yard return average in 2008, the 17th-best season average in NCAA history. His 461 yards gained via punt returns in 2008 rank fourth on the Southern Conference season-record list while his three runbacks for touchdowns as a junior tied the league's annual record. In his final season, he led the league and placed sixth nationally with an average of 15.5 yards per punt return.

Roberts' 1,160 yards gained via punt returns established a school career-record, as he became the seventh player in Southern Conference annals to gain over 1,000 yards in that category, ranking fourth all-time in league history with his yardage total. His average of 13.98 yards per punt return is the 18th-best in NCAA FCS history and placed fourth on the league record charts."