Dynasty Rankings (10 Viewers)

[SSOG]

As I mentioned even last year when the Saints were rolling, the Saints line S-U-C-K-S. They were able to mask it last year with the gimmicky offense to keep the rush offguard, but that's not there anymore and when the line has to put their hands down, dig in, and do what every other line in the league has to do they have proven to be one of the worst in the league.Don't make this a rational discussion. When someone bases there arguments purely on statistics not allowing for context you can't win. We have had a relatively mild winter in CO thus far. As with other such years my average drive time to work is quicker than years when it snows more. SSOG would have you believe that road conditions, traffic, accidents all have little to do with drive time just as strength of schedule and overall team performance have to do with an individuals personal statistics. It's not what you see, it's the numbers.

Would I?Look, I've never said that Reggie Bush is never going to amount to anything, I've said that he hasn't produced yet and he CERTAINLY hasn't justified his cost. That's a simple fact. I've also said that his career to date compares more favorably to Ron Dayne's than Tiki Barber's. That's another fact. I'm not saying that Bush is the next Ron Dayne, I'm just providing a contrary comparison for all those who seem stuck on the whole Bush = Barber thing.Since you bring up context, though, let's discuss this. Reggie Bush is currently producing the least out of any NFL RB. ANY NFL RB. In order to blame that kind of performance entirely on context, New Orleans would have to be far and away the worst offensive system for an RB in the entire league, and I just don't buy that. If you don't buy that, either, then some of the blame *HAS* to fall on Bush.

I have the same kind of gut feeling about the blasphemous Westbrook-LT comparison. Comparing Westbrook to a guy that gets a MINIMUM of 15+ TD's EVERY year must be coming from somebody that is a SLAVE to yardage numbers, and even there, LT is a yardage beast himself. If Westbrook was as durable as LT, then maybe the comparison would be valid. But for a guy that seems to rarely get even 20 carries in a game, the volume of the numbers that LT puts up still gives him a pretty huge advantage, IMO.

I don't get any points for how a player produced 2 years ago. What I see right now is one RB who is producing significantly better numbers than the other, and who also has significantly less wear on the tires. And yes, for the record, I do primarily play in yardage-heavy leagues, but I think Westbrook is a dynasty stud regardless of scoring system, but even more so in yardage-heavy or PPR leagues.

 

[Burning Sensation]

F&L, do you not see why people think players should climb the rankings after a stretch of good games, particularly young players?

 

[SSOG]

Please forgive this aside because it's certainly not meant to be a venomous screed against anybody in particular.Has anybody else noticed that nothing emboldens an owner quite like a hot streak by one of "his guys"? SSOG can speak to this statement better than I can because he's more conversant with metrics, but there's a reason why analysts don't take a player's evaluation seriously when he's coming off his best game of the season. The player is not going to stay at that superlative level every week, so the stats are skewed after an unusually big game. Without trying to single out any specific posters, let's just take a sampling of some recent debates:I had Jason Campbell as low as 7 value points -- down with Chad Pennington and J.P. Losman -- a few weeks ago while he wasn't looking so hot. Did we hear from anybody who had faith in him at the time? Nope. Was anybody so sold on Campbell's ability that they were willing to stick up for him while he was on a cold streak? Did anybody show anticipation and challenge the ranking before he reeled off a few good games?Greg Jennings is 20 catches and 200 yards behind Donald Driver, but he has a huge edge in TDs at this stage of the season. I don't remember too many guys pimping him two months ago when he was coming off an injury and about 40 points lower in the rankings -- down in Ronald Curry territory. Where were the Jennings believers when he was injury-prone and struggling to get his job back from James Jones?Where was the Westbrook over Tomlinson love back when Westbrook was watching from sidelines for the Eagles' Week Four game? Where was the Marques Colston stud talk when the Saints started the season at the bottom of the league in scoring?The lowest I've ranked Joseph Addai was the week he shared carries with Kenton Keith. I lowered him to 75 points and dropped him to ~10th amongst RBs that week, and I didn't hear a peep from the Addai camp until reeled off a couple good games thereafter.Where are the "Eli is a Top 10 Franchise QB" backers this week? Where was the love for Philip Rivers a couple of weeks ago? Why did nobody scold me for dropping Frank Gore a couple of weeks ago? Ditto on Larry Fitzgerald when I dropped him for a week or two coming off a disappointing start. Where were the Ronnie Brown faithful back in Week 2? Why won't anybody volunteer that Vince Young is too low right now? Laurence Maroney? Lee Evans? Stick to your guns. Have faith in your evaluations.I realize, in a way, it's only human nature. We wonder who is going to take us seriously if we argue that a guy in the crapper is worth more than a guy playing over his ahead. You're running the risk of putting yourself out there to be mocked by the rest of the board. I understand that. And yet -- this may seem counterintuitive -- I have a lot more respect for someone who anticipates a return to full value while "his guys" are slumping. Better yet, it's the one anticipating a player jumping to the next level in-season who is showing off some real fantasy football enlightenment. I appreciate a guy like EBF for throwing in a Mark Clayton or Reggie Williams while they're down. Is he going to be right most of the time? Maybe, maybe not. But he's better than most at evaluating fantasy football talent, and he's at least trying to stay ahead of the curve rather than chasing points. That's where the real acumen lies./offsoapbox

For what it's worth, I'd be more than happy to discuss any of "my guys" while they're cold (and have done so with Lee Evans all season long- I've consistently called him a must-start every time there's been a Lee Evans thread), it just happens that most of the time people are talking about someone is when that player is relevant. I'm also just here for the player discussion and I don't really check the give-and-take in the player rankings.

F&L, do you not see why people think players should climb the rankings after a stretch of good games, particularly young players?

I don't think he's saying that at all, or he wouldn't raise players after a hot streak like he does.I think what F&L is saying (and feel free to smack me down if I'm out of line here, F&L) is that we should probably spend less time talking about who was really good for the last 4 weeks and spend more time trying to figure out who is going to be really good for the next 4 weeks. I do agree that there's a lot of a "buy high, sell low" mentality in here sometimes (guilty as charged), while we probably need to focus more on buy low, sell high.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

F&L, do you not see why people think players should climb the rankings after a stretch of good games, particularly young players?

Yes, but you're missing my point. All of the players I've mentioned have climbed the rankings after a stretch of good games. People are not clamoring for them to climb the rankings. They're clamoring because their guys haven't climbed the rankings high enough.My point is that if you evaluate somebody -- let's say Jason Campbell since he was the first one I listed -- as a good young player, then you should stick to your evaluation when he's playing poorly. If there are quite a few people who are very high on Jason Campbell, why wouldn't they question his ranking when it was at its absolute nadir knowing that this was just a bump in the road for a talented young player with a bright future? I think that's acumen worth rewarding.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I think what F&L is saying (and feel free to smack me down if I'm out of line here, F&L) is that we should probably spend less time talking about who was really good for the last 4 weeks and spend more time trying to figure out who is going to be really good for the next 4 weeks. I do agree that there's a lot of a "buy high, sell low" mentality in here sometimes (guilty as charged), while we probably need to focus more on buy low, sell high.

Exactly. I don't mind questioning of rankings. That's what they're there for. I just think the conversation is more productive (and more interesting) when we talk about anticipation as opposed to second guessing.I think you hit the nail on the head: who is going to be good the next 4 weeks is a much more useful question than who is getting shafted due to their recent hot streak.Before I get ahead of myself, I'm not saying that a statement like the following is no good: "hey, I see Jennings keeps moving up the rankings, but I have him higher in my own personal rankings since he's shown that he has a skill for scoring touchdowns." That's a statement that can debated intelligently, and it gets us talking about how Jennings is going to do going forward. And I think Cowboys#1 approached it well with Colston: let's bring this topic to the table. Has Marques Colston reached the elite WR tier at this stage of his career? We know he's been white hot the past month. Can we expect that to continue going forward?

 

[benm3218]

Well in the spirit of the last post, I am going to go out on a limb and throw in a players name that is not even ranked....

Robert Royal.

He seems to have a good hands and is a huge target. I noticed that Edwards hit him pretty often in the games he played.

With Edwards back we might find that he warrants ranking in a few weeks....

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Please forgive this aside because it's certainly not meant to be a venomous screed against anybody in particular.Has anybody else noticed that nothing emboldens an owner quite like a hot streak by one of "his guys"? SSOG can speak to this statement better than I can because he's more conversant with metrics, but there's a reason why analysts don't take a player's evaluation seriously when he's coming off his best game of the season. The player is not going to stay at that superlative level every week, so the stats are skewed after an unusually big game. Without trying to single out any specific posters, let's just take a sampling of some recent debates:I had Jason Campbell as low as 7 value points -- down with Chad Pennington and J.P. Losman -- a few weeks ago while he wasn't looking so hot. Did we hear from anybody who had faith in him at the time? Nope. Was anybody so sold on Campbell's ability that they were willing to stick up for him while he was on a cold streak? Did anybody show anticipation and challenge the ranking before he reeled off a few good games?Greg Jennings is 20 catches and 200 yards behind Donald Driver, but he has a huge edge in TDs at this stage of the season. I don't remember too many guys pimping him two months ago when he was coming off an injury and about 40 points lower in the rankings -- down in Ronald Curry territory. Where were the Jennings believers when he was injury-prone and struggling to get his job back from James Jones?Where was the Westbrook over Tomlinson love back when Westbrook was watching from sidelines for the Eagles' Week Four game? Where was the Marques Colston stud talk when the Saints started the season at the bottom of the league in scoring?The lowest I've ranked Joseph Addai was the week he shared carries with Kenton Keith. I lowered him to 75 points and dropped him to ~10th amongst RBs that week, and I didn't hear a peep from the Addai camp until reeled off a couple good games thereafter.Where are the "Eli is a Top 10 Franchise QB" backers this week? Where was the love for Philip Rivers a couple of weeks ago? Why did nobody scold me for dropping Frank Gore a couple of weeks ago? Ditto on Larry Fitzgerald when I dropped him for a week or two coming off a disappointing start. Where were the Ronnie Brown faithful back in Week 2? Why won't anybody volunteer that Vince Young is too low right now? Laurence Maroney? Lee Evans? Stick to your guns. Have faith in your evaluations.I realize, in a way, it's only human nature. We wonder who is going to take us seriously if we argue that a guy in the crapper is worth more than a guy playing over his ahead. You're running the risk of putting yourself out there to be mocked by the rest of the board. I understand that. And yet -- this may seem counterintuitive -- I have a lot more respect for someone who anticipates a return to full value while "his guys" are slumping. Better yet, it's the one anticipating a player jumping to the next level in-season who is showing off some real fantasy football enlightenment. I appreciate a guy like EBF for throwing in a Mark Clayton or Reggie Williams while they're down. Is he going to be right most of the time? Maybe, maybe not. But he's better than most at evaluating fantasy football talent, and he's at least trying to stay ahead of the curve rather than chasing points. That's where the real acumen lies./offsoapbox

Erm, isn't this exactly what man are doing right now with Reggie Bush?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Erm, isn't this exactly what man are doing right now with Reggie Bush?

No. Not at all. I posted a piece from Rotoworld's Gregg Rosenthal, which pointed out among other things that Reggie Bush's explosiveness has been found somewhat wanting as a NFL RB. That piece spurred debate about where Reggie Bush is at this stage of his career.It had nothing to do with where Bush was ranked at all.

 

[Whiplash Inc.]

Earnest Graham in tier 4 is still a bit low, IMHO.

 

[Homer]

I have the same kind of gut feeling about the blasphemous Westbrook-LT comparison. Comparing Westbrook to a guy that gets a MINIMUM of 15+ TD's EVERY year must be coming from somebody that is a SLAVE to yardage numbers, and even there, LT is a yardage beast himself. If Westbrook was as durable as LT, then maybe the comparison would be valid. But for a guy that seems to rarely get even 20 carries in a game, the volume of the numbers that LT puts up still gives him a pretty huge advantage, IMO.

I don't get any points for how a player produced 2 years ago. What I see right now is one RB who is producing significantly better numbers than the other, and who also has significantly less wear on the tires. And yes, for the record, I do primarily play in yardage-heavy leagues, but I think Westbrook is a dynasty stud regardless of scoring system, but even more so in yardage-heavy or PPR leagues.

Well, Westbrook's had a better month of November than LT, yes, but does that wipe out an entire career of having a workhouse role and DOMINANT fantasy numbers and make up for the fact that Westbrook's TD numbers are dwarfed by LT's throughout their careers? Has LT lost something? Is the Chargers offense broken to the point where he's not going to produce numbers like in the past? I doubt it.The heavy usage over his career seems to be more of an argument in FAVOR of LT's continued value -- he has always THRIVED with all that use. Westbrook hasn't carried a full load in his career because he keeps getting boo boos that don't allow it. And he still loses carries at the goalline.Westbrook won't be ranked ahead of LT in ANY rankings in ANY scoring system going into next year because the raw volume numbers just aren't there. To say he's 'fresher' because he hasn't been able to carry a full load and misses a game or two every year is rather silly to me.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Why is Benson ranked below Adrian Peterson (of CHI)? I see Peterson as having close to zero value next year - he's a career backup - whereas Benson at least has a chance of being a starter. Thoughts?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Why is Benson ranked below Adrian Peterson (of CHI)? I see Peterson as having close to zero value next year - he's a career backup - whereas Benson at least has a chance of being a starter. Thoughts?

Let's get this out of the way early: Benson is repulsively terrible. He runs at age 24 like Shaun Alexander runs at age 30. I just moved Benson down from the 25 point tier last night. He's done for the year, so he can't help you this year.What's in store for him next year? We're talking about the same franchise that wasted their Super Bowl window insisting that Rex Grossman was not an unmitigated disaster at QB, so you can't put anything past them. But common sense says they can't go into next season with Cedric Benson as their workhorse RB. They have to bring in somebody at least as insurance to split carries. Once that insurance policy gets in there, it won't take long to shove shabby Benson to the sidelines where he belongs.At least Adrian Peterson can help you the rest of this season. When can Cedric Benson help you? Even if he gets a full load of carries next season, he's only hurting your lineup if you use him.

 

[gianmarco]

Great post, F&L. I think we all fall into that trap sometimes of thinking our projections as faulty when a player we like hits a cold streak. But, just because it's not posted on here doesn't mean people are giving up hope on them. I think the best way to "fix" that is to do a weekly evaluation of "buy low" candidates as you've done on here intermittently. Guys who are slumping but who should rebound and explain why. Of course, it would have to be taken with a grain of salt as there will be supporters of just about anyone and some slumps are more than just slumps.

I can think of one off the top of my head, especially because I was asking to have him moved up:

1. Cotchery--He still has to "breakout", so he's never been a hot commodity, but he has been very consistent and productive nonetheless until the past couple of weeks. As a Cotchery owner in one league who recently acquired him, it's frustrating to see him struggle, but I think this is his low point (well, can't get much lower). He struggled against a very tough Pitt defense and last week, in a seemingly good matchup, also came up empty. However, all WR's have games where they disappear. Some will say that the absence of Coles and his struggles suggest he can't handle the #1 role. But, you also have to consider that Clemens is now the starter and they probably haven't had enough time to work together. He is a guy that I think should rebound just fine and still has the potential to be a legit #2 fantasy WR along the lines of a Hines Ward.

About Colston, I do believe he should be a tier 1 WR as well. I think his slow start was a direct correlation to Brees and the entire Saints' offense struggles. Now, I know that elite players should still be able to perform well under most any circumstances, but even the best of them have had slow streaks when their teams have struggled as bad as the Saints did. If you look at all the WRs listed in tier 1, they've all gone through it, some for even longer than others. But, the reason I think Colston deserves to be in that top tier is his ability to absolutely take over a game. Colston has been an absolute stud for 5 weeks in a row, catching no fewer than 7 balls for those 5 weeks and hitting at least 110 yds or 1+ TDs in every game. This is the kind of production that a lot of people were expecting, the only difference is it has come later in the year. If you look at his game log, he's put up 2 stinkers, 3 average games, and 6 studly games (from a PPR perspective)

Stinker: 3/45/0

4/31/0

Average: 6/47/0

4/68/0

1/2/1

Studly: 8/70/1

7/93/1

8/85/3

8/129/0

9/118/0

10/159/0

There are only a handful of WR's that can put up games like that, and they are all in tier 1. Add to the fact that he's only in his 2nd year, and this is a guy I would try really hard to get and hold onto in a dynasty league. He definitely has more value in PPR leagues, but even in non-PPR, those are impressive #'s. What I would offer up is think about if he had STARTED the season with those studly games. He would have been in that top tier and then we'd have started wondering why he was slowing down. Instead, since he was coming off his rookie season, we all questioned whether he would able to repeat and he failed in the beginning of the year to overwhelm so he started to get written off. These past 5 weeks have shown that last year wasn't a fluke, that he has the ability and the confidence from the Saints staff to be a big part of the offense even with a playmaker like Bush, and from watching him, he is just as talented as any of those other guys at the top.

Anyway, great stuff from all as always.

 

[benm3218]

Benson = turd

F & L - Here is one that I wrestle with. How good could Olsen be if they had a good QB? You hear rumors of McNabb moving to Chicago, I am sure thats a long shot. But, don't the Bears have to bring in someone new next year? Based on the Bears getting a new QB for next year, could you see Olsen ever cracking the top of the Tier 2 TE's?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Earnest Graham in tier 4 is still a bit low, IMHO.

So you think he's more Rudi Johnson in '03 as opposed to Samkon Gado in '05? Is here to stay for good or just a flash in the pan patching over the hole at RB for half a season?He's probably somewhere in between. I think he'll stay involved in the offense somewhat next year, but I don't believe he has a window of a few years where he's going to be the unquestioned starter in Tampa Bay. I think right now is the perfect time to sell high on Earnest Graham if you find someone who believes he's a stud for the next year or two. Either way, there's a more in-depth Earnest Graham breakdown on page 23, post #1127 & #1144 from just last week.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Benson = turdF & L - Here is one that I wrestle with. How good could Olsen be if they had a good QB? You hear rumors of McNabb moving to Chicago, I am sure thats a long shot. But, don't the Bears have to bring in someone new next year? Based on the Bears getting a new QB for next year, could you see Olsen ever cracking the top of the Tier 2 TE's?

It seems that there's more to the McNabb rumors this time around. I think he'd be a great fit in Chicago, and lord knows they have a gaping hole at QB. Whether it's McNabb or someone else, I'd say there's a very good chance of a new starting QB in Chicago next season. What's interesting with Olsen is that he didn't really take off until Griese was under center. Part of that was because he had some injuries early in the season, but Griese seemed to consciously seek out Olsen where Grossman hasn't done so as much. So the quarterback definitely has an influence on value.Can Olsen move into the Witten/Gonzalez/Cooley tier down the line? I don't see why not. It might not happen anytime soon, and there may be a few growing pains along the way, but I think the playmaking ability is there. It's tough to predict with any kind of sureness because there are so many variables involved in Chicago's offensive future, but I think you have to be impressed by his talent.

 

[spec1alk]

Please forgive this aside because it's certainly not meant to be a venomous screed against anybody in particular.

Has anybody else noticed that nothing emboldens an owner quite like a hot streak by one of "his guys"? SSOG can speak to this statement better than I can because he's more conversant with metrics, but there's a reason why analysts don't take a player's evaluation seriously when he's coming off his best game of the season. The player is not going to stay at that superlative level every week, so the stats are skewed after an unusually big game. Without trying to single out any specific posters, let's just take a sampling of some recent debates:

I had Jason Campbell as low as 7 value points -- down with Chad Pennington and J.P. Losman -- a few weeks ago while he wasn't looking so hot. Did we hear from anybody who had faith in him at the time? Nope. Was anybody so sold on Campbell's ability that they were willing to stick up for him while he was on a cold streak? Did anybody show anticipation and challenge the ranking before he reeled off a few good games?

Greg Jennings is 20 catches and 200 yards behind Donald Driver, but he has a huge edge in TDs at this stage of the season. I don't remember too many guys pimping him two months ago when he was coming off an injury and about 40 points lower in the rankings -- down in Ronald Curry territory. Where were the Jennings believers when he was injury-prone and struggling to get his job back from James Jones?

Where was the Westbrook over Tomlinson love back when Westbrook was watching from sidelines for the Eagles' Week Four game? Where was the Marques Colston stud talk when the Saints started the season at the bottom of the league in scoring?

The lowest I've ranked Joseph Addai was the week he shared carries with Kenton Keith. I lowered him to 75 points and dropped him to ~10th amongst RBs that week, and I didn't hear a peep from the Addai camp until reeled off a couple good games thereafter.

Where are the "Eli is a Top 10 Franchise QB" backers this week? Where was the love for Philip Rivers a couple of weeks ago? Why did nobody scold me for dropping Frank Gore a couple of weeks ago? Ditto on Larry Fitzgerald when I dropped him for a week or two coming off a disappointing start. Where were the Ronnie Brown faithful back in Week 2? Why won't anybody volunteer that Vince Young is too low right now? Laurence Maroney? Lee Evans? Stick to your guns. Have faith in your evaluations.

I realize, in a way, it's only human nature. We wonder who is going to take us seriously if we argue that a guy in the crapper is worth more than a guy playing over his ahead. You're running the risk of putting yourself out there to be mocked by the rest of the board. I understand that. And yet -- this may seem counterintuitive -- I have a lot more respect for someone who anticipates a return to full value while "his guys" are slumping. Better yet, it's the one anticipating a player jumping to the next level in-season who is showing off some real fantasy football enlightenment. I appreciate a guy like EBF for throwing in a Mark Clayton or Reggie Williams while they're down. Is he going to be right most of the time? Maybe, maybe not. But he's better than most at evaluating fantasy football talent, and he's at least trying to stay ahead of the curve rather than chasing points. That's where the real acumen lies.

/offsoapbox

I should have posted a couple weeks ago then about Jason Campbell. I will agree that he will never be a solid top 10 QB, but I see him lingering in the 11-15 range. He is a good NFL QB and that means his job is secure. He can also get better. He has not been starting that long and its not like WAS is the class of the league as regards WRs. I have never been a big S Moss believer and Randle El/Lloyd are not instilling fear in any DBs. Maybe the question is "If Campbell had a WR like Steve Smith, would he be significantly more productive?"I could see Campbell putting up better numbers if he had a WR like the ones in the first tier of F&Ls rankings.

I think the whole "Campbell is better than Eli" talk has more to do with Eli than it does with Campbell. I don't see Campbell moving above Eli on his own merits, but I could see Eli dropping below Campbell on his merits (or lack thereof).

I will admit that I was not a high Jennings believer until the DEN game. Now I regret trading him in the offseason.

At first look I thought anyone who thinks westbrook is better than LT is kidding themselves. But after looking at the numbers, Westbrook put up a very nice season last year with 1916 combined yds and 11 tds with 77 recs. He is on pace for another very good season. If westy can finish out this year on that pace I may start to agree than he is getting closer to LT but I would still not trade westy for LT straight up. LT has a huge lead in TDs. Since 2002 LT has never finished with less than 15 TDs in a season, 15 (2002), 17 (2003), 18 (2004), 20 (2005), 31 (2006). Westbrook has had 11 (2003), 9 (2004), 7 (2005), 11 (2006) TDs. Also, Westbrook is averaging missing 2 games a year. LT has missed 1 game (2004) since he was drafted. So, while Westbrook is definitely a RB1 for a fantasy team, he is not equal or better than LT.

I will admit that I had lost faith in Colston.

I don't know that I agree that VY is too low. I think he is fine where he is at. I don't like running QBs. They carry a higher risk of injury.

I think Maroney and Evans are where they should be right now and ONLY because I think they will have good rebound years next season. They are horrible this year and if I were to rank them they would both be outside the top 25 in redraft right now. Next season both players should be in a better position to succeed. Evans needs QB consistency. Maroney needs Moss to be gone and for the NEP to not throw on EVERY friggin play. One a weekly fantasy football radio show, the broadcaster felt that Maroney was punished for scoring last week because he didn't see much action after that.

I will say that I am still very high on Evans. I think that if he can get the same QB under center for more than 3 weeks, he may do alright. They also need some kind of a threat opposite him.

I have no problem with you dropping Gore. Never cared for him. Terrible QB, Terrible OL, Terrible Team (I like the HC though). Coupled with 2 knee replacements...

 

[spec1alk]

Can you point me to the post of your reasoning on Michael Turner. Thanks.

 

[spec1alk]

LJ may need another drop. The way Kolby Smith is playing, it looks like a RBBC is developing in KC. Thoughts from KC Homers?

F&L, not trying a "should I do this trade" question but your comments on westbrook got me thinking. His value will possibly never be higher after this season. Should I try to move him in a non-ppr start 3 RB league? If so, who should I be targeting? PHI does have an average-to-difficult schedule the rest of the way (SEA, NYG, @DAL, @NOS).

 

[valhallan]

As a Saints fan and Bush dynasty owner, I watch Reggie very closely every week. Prior to my NFL team drafting him, I thought his game wouldn't translate well in the pros. I saw some of his college games and was impressed by his abilities just as much as everyone else, but found he was constantly getting the ball in wide-open spaces and rarely had to break any tackles. Situations like that are rare in the NFL, so I was very curious to see if he'd be able to make big plays with defenders much closer to him.

Thus far, I feel my initial prognosis was correct. I won't go on about his stats (only a few 20+ yard gains, sub 4 ypc), but I will comment on the running style that I see from him vs. other backs.

There are two things he does very often that I rarely see successful NFL runners do:

- he stops dead, spreads his feet wide, and shimmy-stomps his legs in an attempt to fake out the defenders

- he flails his limbs

Both of these moves are extremely problematic in the NFL. The first fools no one and quickly shrinks any space that Reggie might have had upon initially getting the ball. It's most commonly seen on wide screen passes that predictably end swiftly with the defender taking an angle that forces Bush out of bounds for a 4 yard gain.

The second move is somewhat related to the first, but happens more when Reggie actually gains the second level between the tackles. It's very hard to explain, especially if you haven't seen him much, but I'll do my best to describe it. He tends to have wide, grand movements with his arms and legs. This is in stark contrast to runners like Brian Westbrook, Frank Gore, and Marshawn Lynch, who maintain their extremeties in very compact areas. They take shorter, more powerful steps and keep their legs churning upon impact. Reggie takes longer, weaker strides and provides a broad area for defenders to disrupt his progress. Rather than being like a sleak dot that slides past the X's in tight spaces, he's like a cat stuck in a plastic bag with all four limbs randomly shooting out bumps in all directions. Defenders then have to aim for the general vicinity of him to make a stop, rather than needing to key on one particular area and use proper tackling form like they do with the more successful runners mentioned above. I understand that Reggie is taller than the prototypical back, but he's far from the "upright" runner cliche.

I expected this in his first season, but I did not expect it to continue with so little positive progress in his second season. To me, he looked just the same last week in game number 29 as he did in game number 1.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Why is Benson ranked below Adrian Peterson (of CHI)? I see Peterson as having close to zero value next year - he's a career backup - whereas Benson at least has a chance of being a starter. Thoughts?

Let's get this out of the way early: Benson is repulsively terrible. He runs at age 24 like Shaun Alexander runs at age 30. I just moved Benson down from the 25 point tier last night. He's done for the year, so he can't help you this year.What's in store for him next year? We're talking about the same franchise that wasted their Super Bowl window insisting that Rex Grossman was not an unmitigated disaster at QB, so you can't put anything past them. But common sense says they can't go into next season with Cedric Benson as their workhorse RB. They have to bring in somebody at least as insurance to split carries. Once that insurance policy gets in there, it won't take long to shove shabby Benson to the sidelines where he belongs.At least Adrian Peterson can help you the rest of this season. When can Cedric Benson help you? Even if he gets a full load of carries next season, he's only hurting your lineup if you use him.

Thanks F&L, this makes sense to me. If I understand correctly, you're basically saying that Benson has little-to-no value because he won't be a workhorse RB next year. Got it. I still see Peterson ranked too high - only because I place a very low dynasty value on having a player for weeks 13-17, with little go-forward value next year. But in general, I get your point.

 

[Q-Bert]

As a Saints fan and Bush dynasty owner, I watch Reggie very closely every week. Prior to my NFL team drafting him, I thought his game wouldn't translate well in the pros. I saw some of his college games and was impressed by his abilities just as much as everyone else, but found he was constantly getting the ball in wide-open spaces and rarely had to break any tackles. Situations like that are rare in the NFL, so I was very curious to see if he'd be able to make big plays with defenders much closer to him.

Thus far, I feel my initial prognosis was correct. I won't go on about his stats (only a few 20+ yard gains, sub 4 ypc), but I will comment on the running style that I see from him vs. other backs.

There are two things he does very often that I rarely see successful NFL runners do:

- he stops dead, spreads his feet wide, and shimmy-stomps his legs in an attempt to fake out the defenders

- he flails his limbs

Both of these moves are extremely problematic in the NFL. The first fools no one and quickly shrinks any space that Reggie might have had upon initially getting the ball. It's most commonly seen on wide screen passes that predictably end swiftly with the defender taking an angle that forces Bush out of bounds for a 4 yard gain.

The second move is somewhat related to the first, but happens more when Reggie actually gains the second level between the tackles. It's very hard to explain, especially if you haven't seen him much, but I'll do my best to describe it. He tends to have wide, grand movements with his arms and legs. This is in stark contrast to runners like Brian Westbrook, Frank Gore, and Marshawn Lynch, who maintain their extremeties in very compact areas. They take shorter, more powerful steps and keep their legs churning upon impact. Reggie takes longer, weaker strides and provides a broad area for defenders to disrupt his progress. Rather than being like a sleak dot that slides past the X's in tight spaces, he's like a cat stuck in a plastic bag with all four limbs randomly shooting out bumps in all directions. Defenders then have to aim for the general vicinity of him to make a stop, rather than needing to key on one particular area and use proper tackling form like they do with the more successful runners mentioned above. I understand that Reggie is taller than the prototypical back, but he's far from the "upright" runner cliche.

I expected this in his first season, but I did not expect it to continue with so little positive progress in his second season. To me, he looked just the same last week in game number 29 as he did in game number 1.

Great Posting. This is the kind of insight I've been wanting on Reggie Bush. I've seen practically none of his games so this sort of analysis helps me understand the context of his stats.

 

[Q-Bert]

Earnest Graham in tier 4 is still a bit low, IMHO.

So you think he's more Rudi Johnson in '03 as opposed to Samkon Gado in '05?

This is a fantastic analogy. We have several players right now who can be put into this question.Ryan GrantEarnest GrahamJustin FargasKolby SmithI think all four of these guys are much closer to Samkon Gado than to Rudi Johnson. In fact, I think that Ryan Grant is probably the only one with a better than 50% shot at being his teams starting running back next year. And even then I don't know how productive we can expect him to be. Even on his big plays he doesn't look like a dynamic player to me. I think he has good balance and very good vision but he lacks the top end quickness and speed to be a truly elite player. Against the Lions he had a big 30 yard run that was very impressive. But even as a die hard Packer fan, I was thinking that it would have been a touchdown if he was faster.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

LJ may need another drop. The way Kolby Smith is playing, it looks like a RBBC is developing in KC. Thoughts from KC Homers?

Whoa, hold on a second here. One good game against the worst run defense in football isn't going to get anyone talking about a RBBC. It's LJ's job as long as he's healthy. Kolby Smith is just another guy.

F&L, not trying a "should I do this trade" question but your comments on westbrook got me thinking. His value will possibly never be higher after this season. Should I try to move him in a non-ppr start 3 RB league? If so, who should I be targeting? PHI does have an average-to-difficult schedule the rest of the way (SEA, NYG, @DAL, @NOS).

You can't deal Westbrook unless you get a stud in return. You should be targeting Adrian Peterson or Steven Jackson.

 

[Q-Bert]

I should have posted a couple weeks ago then about Jason Campbell. I will agree that he will never be a solid top 10 QB, but I see him lingering in the 11-15 range. He is a good NFL QB and that means his job is secure. He can also get better. He has not been starting that long and its not like WAS is the class of the league as regards WRs. I have never been a big S Moss believer and Randle El/Lloyd are not instilling fear in any DBs. Maybe the question is "If Campbell had a WR like Steve Smith, would he be significantly more productive?"I could see Campbell putting up better numbers if he had a WR like the ones in the first tier of F&Ls rankings.I think the whole "Campbell is better than Eli" talk has more to do with Eli than it does with Campbell. I don't see Campbell moving above Eli on his own merits, but I could see Eli dropping below Campbell on his merits (or lack thereof).

Whenever I have seen Campbell play I have been impressed. I've never seen him look flustered even when things were going poorly. He stands tall in the pocket and every throw looks the same, whether he has a nice clean pocket with no pressure or whether he is about to get drilled in the face. He has a rocket for an arm and was very accurate in college. My main concern is that with the surrounding cast that he has right now, and the offensive system in place, that his upside is very limited. If his situation improved I think he could be a top 10 QB. He is the kind of player whose value is really dependent on your situation. I have Peyton Manning as my starter and love having Campbell as my backup. He has a fairly high floor so I feel very confident that he will not have a stinker of a game for the one week per year when I start him. If Manning has an injury I would feel good about plugging Campbell in for a few weeks to get me by. If my starter was Jay Cutler, I would be terrified that I was going to end up with two QBs who will never be top performers.

 

[Q-Bert]

I will admit that I was not a high Jennings believer until the DEN game. Now I regret trading him in the offseason.

I was dead wrong about Jennings. After his camp and early season injuries I was ready to write him off. I could have easily acquired him for a song earlier in the year and repeatedly passed on trade offers. Every week I am more and more impressed with the guy.

 

[valhallan]

Time to fess up on Lee Evans. I jumped ship and sold him while his value was high two weeks ago in both dynasty leagues. To be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues....but I'm not looking back on ole Lee Evans. I just got tired of the Bills passing game doing their best Panthers' running game impression. Starter is underwhelming, backup may be the future, don't trust the coaches to know the answers, and all options are underwhelming.

If this is how you feel, why is it not reflected in your rankings? I don't necessarily disagree, but it's strange to read something like this and then see that he hasn't moved at all in your rankings. As an Evans owner, I'd trade him straight up for many of the young guns immediately beneath him (Holmes, Bowe, Jennings) and maybe even go all the way to Cotchery.

Why won't anybody volunteer that Vince Young is too low right now?

Before week 11 I thought Young was too high and traded him for Schaub. I don't regret that decision thus far. I think quarterback is the position that most needs consistency in fantasy football or you'll get eaten up by the other 8 or 9 teams that do have a reliable starter. If the trend of trying to become a pocket passer continues (which seems likely), I think for every 25 point game Vince squeaks out (which will rarely come in the matchup you'd expect), he'll probably have 4 absolute clunkers and get nicked up on a regular basis. I just don't like the risk/reward of wasting a roster space for a guy like that. For the record, I do subscribe to the talent over situation mantra but it seems different for quarterbacks. Talent in a passer are things like poise, smarts, and accuracy - not speed. I really don't see Vince having an advantage in any of those three areas over Schaub and quite possibly guys like Edwards and Clemens.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Why is Benson ranked below Adrian Peterson (of CHI)? I see Peterson as having close to zero value next year - he's a career backup - whereas Benson at least has a chance of being a starter. Thoughts?

Let's get this out of the way early: Benson is repulsively terrible. He runs at age 24 like Shaun Alexander runs at age 30. I just moved Benson down from the 25 point tier last night. He's done for the year, so he can't help you this year.What's in store for him next year? We're talking about the same franchise that wasted their Super Bowl window insisting that Rex Grossman was not an unmitigated disaster at QB, so you can't put anything past them. But common sense says they can't go into next season with Cedric Benson as their workhorse RB. They have to bring in somebody at least as insurance to split carries. Once that insurance policy gets in there, it won't take long to shove shabby Benson to the sidelines where he belongs.At least Adrian Peterson can help you the rest of this season. When can Cedric Benson help you? Even if he gets a full load of carries next season, he's only hurting your lineup if you use him.

Thanks F&L, this makes sense to me. If I understand correctly, you're basically saying that Benson has little-to-no value because he won't be a workhorse RB next year. Got it.

I'm basically saying Benson has little-to-no value because he's an awful RB. A byproduct of being a bad RB is that he won't be a workhorse RB next year unless the Bears continue their pattern of being unable to learn from their recent past mistakes.

I still see Peterson ranked too high - only because I place a very low dynasty value on having a player for weeks 13-17, with little go-forward value next year. But in general, I get your point.

IMO, he's not much different than Earnest Graham, Justin Fargas, Jesse Chatman, and Kolby Smith. All are going to start the rest of the way, all are less than ideal as lead backs, all will face some level competition for work in the future whether it's straight to the bench or a fair shake, and all have a shot to put a stamp on this job or another job for next season. I think Peterson will put up better stats the next 4 weeks than Benson put up in any 4 week stretch, especially when you factor in his receiving ability...which is completely lacking in Benson's game.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Time to fess up on Lee Evans. I jumped ship and sold him while his value was high two weeks ago in both dynasty leagues. To be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues....but I'm not looking back on ole Lee Evans. I just got tired of the Bills passing game doing their best Panthers' running game impression. Starter is underwhelming, backup may be the future, don't trust the coaches to know the answers, and all options are underwhelming.

If this is how you feel, why is it not reflected in your rankings? I don't necessarily disagree, but it's strange to read something like this and then see that he hasn't moved at all in your rankings. As an Evans owner, I'd trade him straight up for many of the young guns immediately beneath him (Holmes, Bowe, Jennings) and maybe even go all the way to Cotchery.

What am I supposed to be reflecting? I traded him while he was at a higher value because I needed players on playoff teams due to the nature of my leagues? I'm frustrated with Lee Evans, and he has moved down in the rankings. I moved Colston, Boldin, and Calvin Johnson ahead of him in the past couple of weeks. With his talent, I wouldn't feel comfortable moving him below Jennings, Holmes, et al., who I believe are being extremely overvalued by the "hot streak crowd" lately. Just because I'm frustrated with a guy's performance doesn't mean I'm giving up on him completely. I didn't trade him for Jennings or Holmes (and certainly not Cotchery), so why would I rank them above him?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Earnest Graham in tier 4 is still a bit low, IMHO.

So you think he's more Rudi Johnson in '03 as opposed to Samkon Gado in '05?

This is a fantastic analogy. We have several players right now who can be put into this question.Ryan GrantEarnest GrahamJustin FargasKolby SmithI think all four of these guys are much closer to Samkon Gado than to Rudi Johnson. In fact, I think that Ryan Grant is probably the only one with a better than 50% shot at being his teams starting running back next year. And even then I don't know how productive we can expect him to be. Even on his big plays he doesn't look like a dynamic player to me. I think he has good balance and very good vision but he lacks the top end quickness and speed to be a truly elite player. Against the Lions he had a big 30 yard run that was very impressive. But even as a die hard Packer fan, I was thinking that it would have been a touchdown if he was faster.

I tend to agree. I think Ryan Grant is the guy with the best chance to hold onto the job thru next season. But none of these backs are as talented as guys like Chester Taylor and LaMont Jordan were when they got their opportunities. And Taylor & Jordan are (were?) the posterchildren for RBs who will always have to fend off competition for their jobs. If Taylor & Jordan weren't dynamic enough to hold off the competition for more than one good season, what does that say about this crowd? If you're a below average NFL starter at your position, you have very little job security. The NFL is like the Old West: when you're no longer the quickest gun, there are always young punks looking to take you down.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I should have posted a couple weeks ago then about Jason Campbell. I will agree that he will never be a solid top 10 QB, but I see him lingering in the 11-15 range. He is a good NFL QB and that means his job is secure. He can also get better. He has not been starting that long and its not like WAS is the class of the league as regards WRs. I have never been a big S Moss believer and Randle El/Lloyd are not instilling fear in any DBs. Maybe the question is "If Campbell had a WR like Steve Smith, would he be significantly more productive?"

I see this argument for young QBs all the time, and I'm not sure it holds any water.Argument on here last year for both Losman & Grossman going into this season: They're both young, their jobs are secure, and they made major improvement during the 2006 season. As they're young and improving, further improvement should be expected in 2007. It doesn't always work that way. From the Rex Grossman conversation back on page 7, post #337:

I don't figure Grossman's numbers will improve. Why do we always assume a player is going to get better when they're not playing well? How often does it work that way? I think it's safer to assume that Rex will lose his job before his play improves.

What's different about Jason Campbell right now versus J.P. Losman at this time last year or Rex Grossman mid-year last year or Alex Smith mid-year last year? I'd say all of those QBs were more highly regarded at various times throughout last season than Campbell is right now. Just because he's young and improving at times during this season, doesn't mean he's turned the corner and has become a true franchise QB any more than J.P. Losman was a true franchise QB heading into this season.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Can you point me to the post of your reasoning on Michael Turner. Thanks.

I'll look around for it.What kind of reasoning are you looking for? Do you think he's too low? Too high?

 

[valhallan]

Time to fess up on Lee Evans. I jumped ship and sold him while his value was high two weeks ago in both dynasty leagues. To be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues....but I'm not looking back on ole Lee Evans. I just got tired of the Bills passing game doing their best Panthers' running game impression. Starter is underwhelming, backup may be the future, don't trust the coaches to know the answers, and all options are underwhelming.

If this is how you feel, why is it not reflected in your rankings? I don't necessarily disagree, but it's strange to read something like this and then see that he hasn't moved at all in your rankings. As an Evans owner, I'd trade him straight up for many of the young guns immediately beneath him (Holmes, Bowe, Jennings) and maybe even go all the way to Cotchery.

What am I supposed to be reflecting? I traded him while he was at a higher value because I needed players on playoff teams due to the nature of my leagues? I'm frustrated with Lee Evans, and he has moved down in the rankings. I moved Colston, Boldin, and Calvin Johnson ahead of him in the past couple of weeks. With his talent, I wouldn't feel comfortable moving him below Jennings, Holmes, et al., who I believe are being extremely overvalued by the "hot streak crowd" lately. Just because I'm frustrated with a guy's performance doesn't mean I'm giving up on him completely. I didn't trade him for Jennings or Holmes (and certainly not Cotchery), so why would I rank them above him?

I've been watching your ranking on Evans all year waiting for it to fall because I just don't believe I have a top 15 dynasty receiver in him. Upon reading the post that I quoted above, I went to page 1 to see your new rankings and he didn't move. Seemed strange to me. If not his status as a top 15 dynasty receiver, what else is there to "fess up on Lee Evans" about? The streaky play and weak quarterbacking is the same story we've read for 4 years now. Sorry to be nitpicking your rankings, as I see that's gotten tiresome. I do appreciate the work and dialogue you've contributed and created with this thread.

 

[spec1alk]

Can you point me to the post of your reasoning on Michael Turner. Thanks.

I'll look around for it.What kind of reasoning are you looking for? Do you think he's too low? Too high?

I think he is too high, but rather than say that I figured I would read your reasoning first. I would look for it myself, but this thread is huge.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Time to fess up on Lee Evans. I jumped ship and sold him while his value was high two weeks ago in both dynasty leagues. To be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues....but I'm not looking back on ole Lee Evans. I just got tired of the Bills passing game doing their best Panthers' running game impression. Starter is underwhelming, backup may be the future, don't trust the coaches to know the answers, and all options are underwhelming.

If this is how you feel, why is it not reflected in your rankings? I don't necessarily disagree, but it's strange to read something like this and then see that he hasn't moved at all in your rankings. As an Evans owner, I'd trade him straight up for many of the young guns immediately beneath him (Holmes, Bowe, Jennings) and maybe even go all the way to Cotchery.

What am I supposed to be reflecting? I traded him while he was at a higher value because I needed players on playoff teams due to the nature of my leagues? I'm frustrated with Lee Evans, and he has moved down in the rankings. I moved Colston, Boldin, and Calvin Johnson ahead of him in the past couple of weeks. With his talent, I wouldn't feel comfortable moving him below Jennings, Holmes, et al., who I believe are being extremely overvalued by the "hot streak crowd" lately.

Just because I'm frustrated with a guy's performance doesn't mean I'm giving up on him completely. I didn't trade him for Jennings or Holmes (and certainly not Cotchery), so why would I rank them above him?

Funny thing is, Evans, Jennings and Holmes are all basically the same player talent wise, maybe you just dont watch those players enough to notice. The only real difference is supporting cast. I also dont think you can call Holmes and Jennings supporters part of a "hot streak" crowd. Some of us actually believe they are that talented and are performing like they should, and NOT just having a career month. Personally, i had Holmes ranked right behind Evans in the low teens before the season started, with Jennings in the low twenties. It obviously is now easier for me to say Holmes and Jennings should be higher in your rankings because i liked them all along. It is also understandable why you would not have them ranked any higher, as you did not like either player before the season started and are now adjusting accordingly.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Time to fess up on Lee Evans. I jumped ship and sold him while his value was high two weeks ago in both dynasty leagues. To be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues....but I'm not looking back on ole Lee Evans. I just got tired of the Bills passing game doing their best Panthers' running game impression. Starter is underwhelming, backup may be the future, don't trust the coaches to know the answers, and all options are underwhelming.

If this is how you feel, why is it not reflected in your rankings? I don't necessarily disagree, but it's strange to read something like this and then see that he hasn't moved at all in your rankings. As an Evans owner, I'd trade him straight up for many of the young guns immediately beneath him (Holmes, Bowe, Jennings) and maybe even go all the way to Cotchery.

What am I supposed to be reflecting? I traded him while he was at a higher value because I needed players on playoff teams due to the nature of my leagues? I'm frustrated with Lee Evans, and he has moved down in the rankings. I moved Colston, Boldin, and Calvin Johnson ahead of him in the past couple of weeks. With his talent, I wouldn't feel comfortable moving him below Jennings, Holmes, et al., who I believe are being extremely overvalued by the "hot streak crowd" lately.

Just because I'm frustrated with a guy's performance doesn't mean I'm giving up on him completely. I didn't trade him for Jennings or Holmes (and certainly not Cotchery), so why would I rank them above him?

Funny thing is, Evans, Jennings and Holmes are all basically the same player talent wise, maybe you just dont watch those players enough to notice. The only real difference is supporting cast. I also dont think you can call Holmes and Jennings supporters part of a "hot streak" crowd. Some of us actually believe they are that talented and are performing like they should, and NOT just having a career month. Personally, i had Holmes ranked right behind Evans in the low teens before the season started, with Jennings in the low twenties. It obviously is now easier for me to say Holmes and Jennings should be higher in your rankings because i liked them all along. It is also understandable why you would not have them ranked any higher, as you did not like either player before the season started and are now adjusting accordingly.

There's so much wrong here I don't know where to start. I did like both Holmes and Jennings before the season, and on at least one occasion I used Jennings as an example of a player who was much more talented than his perceived value coming off a season where he was playing injured and all of the attention was on the Packers' failure to get Moss...while they already had a talented complement to Driver. Secondly, I do watch the players enough to notice, and Lee Evans is a more talented all-around receiver than both. He's Jennings equal in the redzone and superior as a possession WR. He's as explosive as Holmes and superior in the redzone. Give him Favre or Roehtlisberger in those offenses, and he'd explode.

Thirdly, I do think Holmes and Jennings are performing like they should and are NOT having career months. I do believe Greg Jennings' TD total is aberrant, but that doesn't mean I don't think he's not a talented player.

 

[SSOG]

I have the same kind of gut feeling about the blasphemous Westbrook-LT comparison. Comparing Westbrook to a guy that gets a MINIMUM of 15+ TD's EVERY year must be coming from somebody that is a SLAVE to yardage numbers, and even there, LT is a yardage beast himself. If Westbrook was as durable as LT, then maybe the comparison would be valid. But for a guy that seems to rarely get even 20 carries in a game, the volume of the numbers that LT puts up still gives him a pretty huge advantage, IMO.

I don't get any points for how a player produced 2 years ago. What I see right now is one RB who is producing significantly better numbers than the other, and who also has significantly less wear on the tires. And yes, for the record, I do primarily play in yardage-heavy leagues, but I think Westbrook is a dynasty stud regardless of scoring system, but even more so in yardage-heavy or PPR leagues.

Well, Westbrook's had a better month of November than LT, yes, but does that wipe out an entire career of having a workhouse role and DOMINANT fantasy numbers and make up for the fact that Westbrook's TD numbers are dwarfed by LT's throughout their careers? Has LT lost something? Is the Chargers offense broken to the point where he's not going to produce numbers like in the past? I doubt it.The heavy usage over his career seems to be more of an argument in FAVOR of LT's continued value -- he has always THRIVED with all that use. Westbrook hasn't carried a full load in his career because he keeps getting boo boos that don't allow it. And he still loses carries at the goalline.Westbrook won't be ranked ahead of LT in ANY rankings in ANY scoring system going into next year because the raw volume numbers just aren't there. To say he's 'fresher' because he hasn't been able to carry a full load and misses a game or two every year is rather silly to me.

Like I said, reasonable minds may disagree, but when I look at Tomlinson I see an RB with very heavy usage who just suffered a PRECIPITOUS drop in ypc, and historical numbers haven't been kind to players in that position (see Ahman Green, Jamal Lewis, Larry Johnson, and Ricky Williams for four recent examples). I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt to some extent because of what he's done so far, but I'd be lying if I said I believed he has more than 2 more quality years left in him (and by quality years, I mean top-10 years).Also, you make it sound like Westbrook has been chopped liver. He was easily top 5 in the league in PPG last season even in non yardage-heavy or PPR systems (and even better in either system). He's leading the league so far this year. When I see Westbrook, I see someone still on the upswing of his career while Tomlinson is on the downswing, regardless of what their respective ages are. Given comparable production, I'd rather have the guy on the upside, but the fact that Tomlinson has been so good for so long does at least make me think twice about saying it.

Also, Westbrook is averaging missing 2 games a year. LT has missed 1 game (2004) since he was drafted. So, while Westbrook is definitely a RB1 for a fantasy team, he is not equal or better than LT.

Four of Westy's missed games were actually DNP - Coach's Decisions after Philly sewed up its seeding in 2005 and Reid sat his starters and mailed in the rest of the season. Only once in his career has Westy missed more than a game to injury in a single season.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I've been watching your ranking on Evans all year waiting for it to fall because I just don't believe I have a top 15 dynasty receiver in him. Upon reading the post that I quoted above, I went to page 1 to see your new rankings and he didn't move. Seemed strange to me. If not his status as a top 15 dynasty receiver, what else is there to "fess up on Lee Evans" about? The streaky play and weak quarterbacking is the same story we've read for 4 years now. Sorry to be nitpicking your rankings, as I see that's gotten tiresome. I do appreciate the work and dialogue you've contributed and created with this thread.

If you've been watching all year, then you know he was about 7th to start the season...well within Tier One. I've dropped him several times throughout the year to get him to 15th.I don't know what you mean that he didn't move when you went back to check. I didn't move him in between your two posts today. I've moved him down gradually over the past three weeks behind Calvin Johnson, Colston, & Boldin. I'm confused by this. I "fessed up" on Lee Evans because I've been among his biggest backers for over a year now, and I'm admitting that I had to trade him for players on playoff teams while his value was relatively high. Just one sentence later, I said "to be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues." I fessed up to trading him because I needed players on good NFL teams. I didn't say I was bailing on him because he sucks.I guess what this exchange comes down to is that you want me to say that Lee Evans isn't a Top 15 dynasty WR, when I believe that's exactly what he is -- right in the 15 range among dynasty WRs.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Can you point me to the post of your reasoning on Michael Turner. Thanks.

I'll look around for it.What kind of reasoning are you looking for? Do you think he's too low? Too high?

I think he is too high, but rather than say that I figured I would read your reasoning first. I would look for it myself, but this thread is huge.

I thought there were a couple of posts on Turner, but this was all I could find from back in July:

QUOTE(Giveeem6 @ Jul 26 2007, 01:50 PM) *Hi F&L,I just have a question about your Michael Turner ranking. I was wondering why MT was ranked in tier 4 based on '08 forward. Shouldn't his tier 4 ranking apply to '07? Because after the '07 season, he'll probably be a starter somewhere in '08, thus,... a bump in his ranking. Can you elaborate please?Thanks----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I stated that I'm giving him this ranking due to his '08 value because he doesn't have much value for the '07 season. You're not going to use him this year as anything more than a roster spot. You have to weigh his dynasty value knowing that you can't start him this year whereas you probably can start a player like Edgerrin James, Ahman Green, or Deuce McAllister.If you have 2 stud RBs on your roster and can afford to stash Michael Turner, then he's worth a lot more to you than an underwhelming veteran RB. On the other hand, if you're struggling for RB production on a weekly basis, you may not have the luxury of keeping Turner ahead of guys who will produce when you need it this year.

If you have a glaring need for a RB2 on your roster this year, then maybe Turner isn't worth as much to you. But like I said earlier, if you can afford to stash him then his value is very high.There's very little chance that he's not a starting RB for some team next season. We don't know the exact circumstances, and he could end up in a poor situation just as likely as a great situation. But he has the talent, and he should be a starter next season. Can you say that with enthusiasm for the guys below him?

 

[spec1alk]

I guess the problem I have with Turner being so high is that while he has talent, we have not seen it on the field as a full-time back. The most he has played was last season in mop-up duty and behind what was a stellar OL. I guess I am just more skeptical about his value in the future. After looking at the guys below him, I am somewhat mixed. It seems like he is listed very high, but then all the guys below him are nothing special. I think RBs are just very difficult to rank this year. Too many teams are using 2-3 RB in committees diluting their value. That coupled with the injuries and the re-advent of the forward pass just makes all the guys around where you have him in the tier 3 kind of lukewarm.

How is MB3 not closer to MJD?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I guess the problem I have with Turner being so high is that while he has talent, we have not seen it on the field as a full-time back. The most he has played was last season in mop-up duty and behind what was a stellar OL. I guess I am just more skeptical about his value in the future. After looking at the guys below him, I am somewhat mixed. It seems like he is listed very high, but then all the guys below him are nothing special. I think RBs are just very difficult to rank this year. Too many teams are using 2-3 RB in committees diluting their value. That coupled with the injuries and the re-advent of the forward pass just makes all the guys around where you have him in the tier 3 kind of lukewarm.

This is what I mean when I mention the word "anticipation" all the time. The idea is to make an educated guess on a player's ability from the evidence you have before he plays full time. It's going to be too late to get him at a good value if you have to wait to see him dominate before you realize he's a good full-time back. Turner isn't an Adrian Peterson-level talent, but we went through the same conversation with Peterson all offseason. People were skeptical of a high ranking for Peterson because he had never been a fulltime back in the NFL. I think that kind of attitude is a recipe for losing in dynasty leagues where you have to anticipate better than the rest of the guys in your league in order to win year in and year out to fulfill the definition of a "dynasty" team.

How is MB3 not closer to MJD?

I know I've covered this one before in-depth on multiple occasions. Short, short cliff's notes version: I believe MJD is more explosive, better homerun hitter, more talented, and a better receiver. In the past I believed MJD had a much better situation because Fred Taylor is on his last legs, and Julius Jones was getting the ball as much or more than Barber. With DAL's RB situation up in the air next season, I'm not sure who gets the edge in situation. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

One bottom guy I like a little bit is Patrick Cobbs. Cobbs played for North Texas when I lived in Houston and lead D1 (I think) in rushing. If he didn't, it was close. He doesn't have electric physical metrics, but he runs hard and tough. I see him as a poor man's Domanick Davis. I then saw him run in preseason 06 for NE, and he looked like their best back. While it was only preseason, he showed decent vision and the willingness to fight for yards. Usually guys like this don't get a chance to show what they can do, because they are buried on the depth chart. But, with Brown out, Chatman nicked and Ricky IR'ed, he might just have a chance to run for a few plays. If he does, I think he might be the best healthy back on the roster. If you are at the end of waiver priority list, next week may be too late to grab him.

 

[SSOG]

I know I've covered this one before in-depth on multiple occasions. Short, short cliff's notes version: I believe MJD is more explosive, better homerun hitter, more talented, and a better receiver. In the past I believed MJD had a much better situation because Fred Taylor is on his last legs, and Julius Jones was getting the ball as much or more than Barber. With DAL's RB situation up in the air next season, I'm not sure who gets the edge in situation. We'll have to wait and see.

I agree. MJD is definitely one of "my guys" (along with Westy, Evans, and Walker). Despite my reputation as just a stats guy, I actually do watch the games, and I haven't seen a young RB pass the "eye test" so spectacularly in a long time. There's nothing that that kid can't do- running, receiving, or blocking- and I don't just mean do, I mean do as well as anyone in the league. He's explosive, he's amazingly powerful, he's smart, he's hard-working, he has great hands. Basically, he's everything that Reggie Bush was supposed to be. I think he's going to be a capital S, capital T, capital U, capital D for a long, long time. In fact, I think F&L has him ranked too low- I'd put him above McGahee, Lynch, Portis, and Bush.

 

[PantherPower]

I just refuse to give up on Bush. He trains as hard as LT, and has a boat load of physical gifts. I just think it may take him 2 or 3 years to really hit his stride. He wouldn't be the first player that took a few years to break out (Tiki, Westy come to mind)

 

[munchkin]

........some of the blame *HAS* to fall on Bush.

That I will un-categorically agree with.

 

[Timberlend]

This thread is a god sent to keeper league owners. Thank so much for the time you give to these posts guys. Fear & Loathing, along with others....THANK YOU!

 

[Burning Sensation]

Time to fess up on Lee Evans. I jumped ship and sold him while his value was high two weeks ago in both dynasty leagues. To be fair, I probably would have kept him if I wasn't playing in playoff leagues....but I'm not looking back on ole Lee Evans. I just got tired of the Bills passing game doing their best Panthers' running game impression. Starter is underwhelming, backup may be the future, don't trust the coaches to know the answers, and all options are underwhelming.

If this is how you feel, why is it not reflected in your rankings? I don't necessarily disagree, but it's strange to read something like this and then see that he hasn't moved at all in your rankings. As an Evans owner, I'd trade him straight up for many of the young guns immediately beneath him (Holmes, Bowe, Jennings) and maybe even go all the way to Cotchery.

What am I supposed to be reflecting? I traded him while he was at a higher value because I needed players on playoff teams due to the nature of my leagues? I'm frustrated with Lee Evans, and he has moved down in the rankings. I moved Colston, Boldin, and Calvin Johnson ahead of him in the past couple of weeks. With his talent, I wouldn't feel comfortable moving him below Jennings, Holmes, et al., who I believe are being extremely overvalued by the "hot streak crowd" lately.

Just because I'm frustrated with a guy's performance doesn't mean I'm giving up on him completely. I didn't trade him for Jennings or Holmes (and certainly not Cotchery), so why would I rank them above him?

Funny thing is, Evans, Jennings and Holmes are all basically the same player talent wise, maybe you just dont watch those players enough to notice. The only real difference is supporting cast. I also dont think you can call Holmes and Jennings supporters part of a "hot streak" crowd. Some of us actually believe they are that talented and are performing like they should, and NOT just having a career month. Personally, i had Holmes ranked right behind Evans in the low teens before the season started, with Jennings in the low twenties. It obviously is now easier for me to say Holmes and Jennings should be higher in your rankings because i liked them all along. It is also understandable why you would not have them ranked any higher, as you did not like either player before the season started and are now adjusting accordingly.

There's so much wrong here I don't know where to start. I did like both Holmes and Jennings before the season, and on at least one occasion I used Jennings as an example of a player who was much more talented than his perceived value coming off a season where he was playing injured and all of the attention was on the Packers' failure to get Moss...while they already had a talented complement to Driver. Secondly, I do watch the players enough to notice, and Lee Evans is a more talented all-around receiver than both. He's Jennings equal in the redzone and superior as a possession WR. He's as explosive as Holmes and superior in the redzone. Give him Favre or Roehtlisberger in those offenses, and he'd explode.

Thirdly, I do think Holmes and Jennings are performing like they should and are NOT having career months. I do believe Greg Jennings' TD total is aberrant, but that doesn't mean I don't think he's not a talented player.

I think you overestimate Lee Evans abilities as a possession WR. The only thing Evans has on either of those two WR's is experience. That might be enough right now to rank him ahead of Jennings and Holmes despite the disadvantage of a below averge supporting cast, but i think the futures of Holmes and Jennings are brighter than Evans.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Any thoughts on Aaron Rodgers' future while he's playing tonight? I thought he was clearly not ready to play in the NFL when he was drafted, but sitting behind Favre for a few years has done wonders for him. This is the best he's ever looked by far...

Kitrick? What say ye?

 

[EBF]

Any thoughts on Aaron Rodgers' future while he's playing tonight? I thought he was clearly not ready to play in the NFL when he was drafted, but sitting behind Favre for a few years has done wonders for him. This is the best he's ever looked by far...Kitrick? What say ye?

Not watching the game, but I saw a lot of him in college. He showed flashes of brilliance and seemed almost unstoppable at times. I had him rated as the top QB in the class at the time of my 2005 rookie drafts. People got down on him when he failed to impress early on in GB, but there were quiet rumblings that he was steadily making strides. He's definitely an intriguing guy in a dynasty. I've been keeping him on my bench in Hyperactive for two years and I'm pretty pleased with the stats he's putting up tonight. I view his value as comparable to that of Trent Edwards. The nice thing about Rodgers is that he has a better supporting cast and thus seems to have a little more short-term FF upside.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Any thoughts on Aaron Rodgers' future while he's playing tonight? I thought he was clearly not ready to play in the NFL when he was drafted, but sitting behind Favre for a few years has done wonders for him. This is the best he's ever looked by far...

Kitrick? What say ye?

Not watching the game, but I saw a lot of him in college. He showed flashes of brilliance and seemed almost unstoppable at times. I had him rated as the top QB in the class at the time of my 2005 rookie drafts. People got down on him when he failed to impress early on in GB, but there were quiet rumblings that he was steadily making strides. He's definitely an intriguing guy in a dynasty. I've been keeping him on my bench in Hyperactive for two years and I'm pretty pleased with the stats he's putting up tonight. I view his value as comparable to that of Trent Edwards. The nice thing about Rodgers is that he has a better supporting cast and thus seems to have a little more short-term FF upside.

No "nfl.com/live" for you? The break-ins are annoying, but it's better than nothing...