Dynasty Rankings (3 Viewers)

[Q-Bert]

WR1(Calvin Johnson) = WR6 (Hakeem Nicks) +WR12(Michael Crabtree)

Boy that's a lot to pay for CJ. He's awesome but I think Nicks is ascending into his tier -- to add Crabtree seems like it is way overpaying. I know I would never consider paying that amount for CJ.

My values are very top heavy.

 

[todisco1]

WR1(Calvin Johnson) = WR6 (Hakeem Nicks) +WR12(Michael Crabtree)

Boy that's a lot to pay for CJ. He's awesome but I think Nicks is ascending into his tier -- to add Crabtree seems like it is way overpaying. I know I would never consider paying that amount for CJ.

My values are very top heavy.

I hear you. I would sell CJ for Nicks/Crabtree in an instant.

 

[dawrecker]

By the way, work is continuing apace on our Cross-Positional Values (CPV). First, we've created our own VBD analog (it's based on production, but instead of being production above a certain arbitrary baseline, it's production adjusted for how likely you are to benefit from it- for instance, we have used historical start/sit data to find out that QB8 might get started X% of the time while QB12 gets started Y% of the time, so we adjust each player's scores accordingly). Then we've gone back and looked at 5-year averages at each position (the #1 RB scored XXX value points, the #2 RB scored YYY value points, and so on down the line). A 5-year span was chosen because true studs should easily be able to maintain production over a 5-year window, and then it's a sliding scale on down of 1 year wonders and guys who were consistently mediocre over the full 5-year span. Finally, we're working on some curve-fitting- messing with some formulas that allow us to smooth out all of the bumps and edges in the data so it's a nice smooth logarithmic value curve. Last but not least, we're going to set it up so that the values respond to tiering- players within a tier are valued more closely, with larger gaps at the tier breaks. Once that's all done, all I'll have to do is do my standard rankings, carefully assign my tiers, and voila... every single player will have an automatically generated value score that should be fully comparable across positions. Of course, then we'll need to take a mathematical look at the waiver wire and try to find the value of roster spots so that we can start using CPV to calculate trade values in many-for-few trades (because the initial version will really only work if both parties are receiving an equal number of quality, non-junk pieces).So, anyway, with that huge explanation aside, I could use some help from you guys. We're currently at the curve fitting stage, and we could use some outside opinions on trade values. If you guys could answer the following questions, it would really help us out. The names in parentheses are the guys who currently occupy that spot in my rankings, but if your rankings differ, use the guy who you would rank at that position- remember, we're trying to get GENERAL positional values, not debate the values of one individual player.Question #1: QB#1 (Aaron Rodgers) is worth QB#4 (Peyton Manning) + QB#???Question #2:RB#1 (Adrian Peterson) is worth RB#6 (Rashard Mendenhall) + RB#???Question #3:WR#1 (Larry Fitzgerald) is worth WR#6 (Hakeem Nicks) + WR#???Question #4:TE#1 (Jermichael Finley) is worth TE#4 (Jason Witten) + TE#???If anyone has any other equivalent values (i.e. "QB#3 = QB#5 + QB#18", or whatever), feel free to share them. The more data we get, the more accurate we can make our values going forward.Thanks in advance to everyone who helps out.

I think it goes back a little bit to how many you start at each position and how readily the players will be available on waivers. All of which it sounds like will be considered in your formula. That said for one of my leagues that is fairly RB heavy I would rate something like this based on drafting and trade habbits within the league. I do think the trade value curve should be flatter in dynasty than a straight re-draft but I'm not sure most people really play that way.QB#1 (Aaron Rodgers) is worth QB#4 (Peyton Manning) + QB10???Question #2:RB#1 (Adrian Peterson) is worth RB#6 (Rashard Mendenhall) + RB25???Question #3:WR#1 (Larry Fitzgerald) is worth WR#6 (Hakeem Nicks) + WR16???Question #4:TE#1 (Jermichael Finley) is worth TE#4 (Jason Witten) + TE7???

 

[Concept Coop]

I would argue that his value is exactly where it should be. Who would you move him for? The vast majority of owners would never trade a tier 1 guy for him, which rules out Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson, Maurice Jones Drew, and Ray Rice (weird freak outlier trades not withstanding). I assume most owners also would not trade a top level tier 2 player for him, which rules out Jamaal Charles, Rashard Mendenhall, and Arian Foster (although this grouping is at least a little more possible than the previous, particularly Foster). That leaves us looking at lower level tier 2 or tier 3 players for possible trades. Who here provides better value? McFadden? McCoy? Best? Mathews? Gore? Beanie? Bradshaw? Jackson? Moreno? Hillis? DeAngelo?I don't know about you, but personally I value him above all of these guys except McFadden (and even there I am 50/50). From a talent standpoint, Stewart blows them all away...and it's not particularly close.

Stewart does not blow them away talent wise. Gore, DeAngelo, and Jackson are equal or better talents. He is in the same boat as Beanie and the others. McFadden, McCoy, Gore, Bradshaw, Jackson...easily over Stewart for me. They help me win right now, and next year. Stewart is one, maybe even two years away, with an injury history. Worst comes to worst, give me McFadden (who I am not high on, even); I will win more this year, probably next, then I can trade McFadden plus something small for Stewart. Whatever I have to include in addition to McFadden is well worth the 2 years of RB1 production I would have missed out on holding on to Stewart. Not only that, but every year you delay a projection, or every year you project beyond the current, is done with less and less accuracy, as so much can change.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Yep. The thing about Stewart is that on talent alone he smokes almost anyone you could consider ranking above him. There's just no reason to sell right now unless you think his injuries will be a chronic problem. He's only 23 years old. His time will come. When it does, he'll be a top 5-10 dynasty RB again.

True. But what is the point of waiting, when you can get a top 5-10 dynasty back for him right now? He is not top 5-10 right now, that is his potential. I would settle something more proven, less promising, to a degree, like a McCoy or Bradshaw. Maybe proven isn't the best word. I guess I am refering to current procution.

I would put McCoy over Stewart right now for situation. Stewart is a better talent, but McCoy is still a great talent (give it up for the Eagles coaches, really, because both Vick and McCoy have no business being as polished as they are given what they looked like last year) and a great situation.I would definitely trade Stewart for Bradshaw if Stewart was my RB2 and I thought I could win now. That is a very small number of teams though. Maybe if you got this far starting Torain or BJGE, then downgrading Stewart to Bradshaw is a power move. Otherwise, I'd assume Stewart will have more value than Bradshaw next year, or at least that there'd be two Stewart lovers who'd still value him highly.I think McCoy is in a higher tier than Stewart and Bradshaw.

 

[Herm23]

I would argue that his value is exactly where it should be. Who would you move him for? The vast majority of owners would never trade a tier 1 guy for him, which rules out Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson, Maurice Jones Drew, and Ray Rice (weird freak outlier trades not withstanding). I assume most owners also would not trade a top level tier 2 player for him, which rules out Jamaal Charles, Rashard Mendenhall, and Arian Foster (although this grouping is at least a little more possible than the previous, particularly Foster). That leaves us looking at lower level tier 2 or tier 3 players for possible trades. Who here provides better value? McFadden? McCoy? Best? Mathews? Gore? Beanie? Bradshaw? Jackson? Moreno? Hillis? DeAngelo?

I don't know about you, but personally I value him above all of these guys except McFadden (and even there I am 50/50). From a talent standpoint, Stewart blows them all away...and it's not particularly close.

Stewart does not blow them away talent wise. Gore, DeAngelo, and Jackson are equal or better talents. He is in the same boat as Beanie and the others. McFadden, McCoy, Gore, Bradshaw, Jackson...easily over Stewart for me. They help me win right now, and next year. Stewart is one, maybe even two years away, with an injury history.

Worst comes to worst, give me McFadden (who I am not high on, even); I will win more this year, probably next, then I can trade McFadden plus something small for Stewart. Whatever I have to include in addition to McFadden is well worth the 2 years of RB1 production I would have missed out on holding on to Stewart. Not only that, but every year you delay a projection, or every year you project beyond the current, is done with less and less accuracy, as so much can change.

I'll give you DeAngelo, Jackson, and Gore, who I am discounting purely due to age and I'll give you McFadden who I think is in the same talent ballpark, but are you really trying to argue that Stewart isn't a more talented player than the rest? If your answer is yes, then the discussion can end there because we are worlds apart in our view of the player and nothing fruitful can be gained. I view Stewart as a SIGNIFICANT talent upgrade to the Beanie's, McCoy's, Mathews, etc... and you don't. It doesn't mean your opinion is wrong, you are foolish, or anything of that nature. It just means we can't meaningfully discuss this when we differ so greatly on our view of him.As for McFadden -vs- Stewart, as I said before the production now -vs- production later argument holds merit only when we are talking about players with similiar floors/ceilings. I think McFadden represents a player with a similiar floor/ceiling to Stewart, so I understand your point and admitted to as much in my original post. However, none of the others represent even close to the same floor/ceiling as Stewart in my opinion, meaning the wait for Stewart will end up being more than worth it.

 

[Q-Bert]

Question #1: QB#1 (Aaron Rodgers) is worth QB#4 (Peyton Manning) + QB#???Question #2:RB#1 (Adrian Peterson) is worth RB#6 (Rashard Mendenhall) + RB#???Question #3:WR#1 (Larry Fitzgerald) is worth WR#6 (Hakeem Nicks) + WR#???Question #4:TE#1 (Jermichael Finley) is worth TE#4 (Jason Witten) + TE#???If anyone has any other equivalent values (i.e. "QB#3 = QB#5 + QB#18", or whatever), feel free to share them. The more data we get, the more accurate we can make our values going forward.Thanks in advance to everyone who helps out.

QB1(Rodgers) = QB4 (Manning) + QB6(Ben Rothlisberger) + QB10(Kyle Orton)RB1(Chris Johnson) = RB6(Rashard Mendenhall) + RB14(DeAngelo Williams)WR1(Calvin Johnson) = WR6 (Hakeem Nicks) +WR12(Michael Crabtree)TE1(Jermichael Finley) = TE4(Dustin Keller) + TE8 (Dallas Clark)If you want more combinations just PM me. I maintain a spreadsheet of my top 120 players with a Trade Value assigned to each player.

Is your value position specific or universal? I need to start doing something like this, and am curious about yours. Any info you can offer in to your rankings, trade value, formula, or research would be much appreciated.

It is universal.Here is what I do:My league is a 12 team contract/salary cap league. Players were initially distributed via auction and every year we have a free agent auction and a rookie draft. Rookie salaries are set based on their position and what round of the NFL draft they were selected in.I allocate 80% of the total cap space to the top 60 players. I call these the "premium players".Multiply $1 x the number of players outside of the top 120. This is the allocated dollar values for the "minimum bid players".Subtract the allocated dollars for the premium players and the minimum bid players and whats left is allocated to players ranked 61-120. These are the "regular players".So now I have a pool of cap space for each of my groups of players. All that is left is to spread that value around among the premium and regular players.I somewhat arbitrarily assigned a dollar value to the #1 overall player and then just scale the rest of the players off of that guy using the goal seek function in excel.So now every player has a dollar value associated with him. Because of rounding I ended up with a lot of guys with the same value, so I just multiplied by 100 and I now have a trade value column. The value in terms of how I use it is that I can now evaluate trades based on roster efficiency. Whenever I am contemplating an offer I look at the total value I am giving/receiving and the total salary I am giving/receiving. I divide the value by the salary and I have a Value per Dollar number for what I am giving up and what I am getting back. Sometimes it makes sense to trade a better but more expensive guy for a lesser but cheaper player. I maintain my ranking of the top 120 players overall year round and use guys like SSOG and F&L to help me decide on guys outside my list. It allows me to limit the amount of effort I have to put in to maintaining my rankings. As of this moment my top 120 contains 20 QB, 39 RB, 45 WR, and 16 TE.

 

[Concept Coop]

Yep. The thing about Stewart is that on talent alone he smokes almost anyone you could consider ranking above him. There's just no reason to sell right now unless you think his injuries will be a chronic problem. He's only 23 years old. His time will come. When it does, he'll be a top 5-10 dynasty RB again.

True. But what is the point of waiting, when you can get a top 5-10 dynasty back for him right now? He is not top 5-10 right now, that is his potential. I would settle something more proven, less promising, to a degree, like a McCoy or Bradshaw. Maybe proven isn't the best word. I guess I am refering to current procution.

I would put McCoy over Stewart right now for situation. Stewart is a better talent, but McCoy is still a great talent (give it up for the Eagles coaches, really, because both Vick and McCoy have no business being as polished as they are given what they looked like last year) and a great situation.I would definitely trade Stewart for Bradshaw if Stewart was my RB2 and I thought I could win now. That is a very small number of teams though. Maybe if you got this far starting Torain or BJGE, then downgrading Stewart to Bradshaw is a power move. Otherwise, I'd assume Stewart will have more value than Bradshaw next year, or at least that there'd be two Stewart lovers who'd still value him highly.

I think McCoy is in a higher tier than Stewart and Bradshaw.

Me too, but he is only ahead of Bradshaw because of Bradshaw's legs. If you told me they would both stay healthy for 5 years, it would be a toss up.Which says a lot, because I HATED McCoy as a FF player last year. A lot has changed for that kid. He has looked really good, as has Bradshaw.

 

[Concept Coop]

I'll give you DeAngelo, Jackson, and Gore, who I am discounting purely due to age and I'll give you McFadden who I think is in the same talent ballpark, but are you really trying to argue that Stewart isn't a more talented player than the rest? If your answer is yes, then the discussion can end there because we are worlds apart in our view of the player and nothing fruitful can be gained. I view Stewart as a SIGNIFICANT talent upgrade to the Beanie's, McCoy's, Mathews, etc... and you don't. It doesn't mean your opinion is wrong, you are foolish, or anything of that nature. It just means we can't meaningfully discuss this when we differ so greatly on our view of him.As for McFadden -vs- Stewart, as I said before the production now -vs- production later argument holds merit only when we are talking about players with similiar floors/ceilings. I think McFadden represents a player with a similiar floor/ceiling to Stewart, so I understand your point and admitted to as much in my original post. However, none of the others represent even close to the same floor/ceiling as Stewart in my opinion, meaning the wait for Stewart will end up being more than worth it.

Hey, fair enough. I think McCoy and Beanie are right int he same park. I think is a step above Matthews, Best, Moreno and that group.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Another guy I forgot aboutonnie Avery WR STL: He's hit the injury bug his first two seasons, and he's hasn't even shown that much in the time that he was healthy, but I view Sam Bradford as a potential Peyton Manning type, so any guy who might become his #1 receiver is worth a stash in my book. In leagues with small rosters and no IR, he's probably already been dropped. Stash him.

Would you rather hold Avery over Danario or Clayton? I think Clayton will resign and has a great repoir with Bradford. Robinson and Gibson are also on the dynasty roster bubble. Seems like a big crapshoot. Which two are shining in STL for the next 3 years?

I'm only really interested in rostering Danario. He's the lottery ticket. He's the guy with top 10 potential. He may never play a full game, but he may be awesome. The other guys - including Amendola - are fliers. They'll probably sign or draft a WR1.

 

[Sabertooth]

How far has Jonathan Stewart fallen in dynasty rankings? His prospects for the future are no different than they were coming into the season.

well except for he is another year older, has missed ttime due to injury and unless Carolina improves the Oline QB situation (possible it couldnt be anyworse)What is everyones obsession with Stewart anyway? If I owned him I would move him to some Stewart lover, seems every dynasty league has a least 2, I'd let this guy be someone elses problem

Amen. Super overrated here for some reason.

Where do you rate him? I have him as a Top 30 guy right now. In with Felix Jones and guys like Brandon Jackson.

Wow, a couple reactions:- You have Felix and B Jackson in the same vicinity (as each other)? Really? At least Felix has upside. Jackson has proven that he isn't very talented- Most people still have Stewart as a top-10 dynasty RB. Which is nowhere near Felix and Brandon Jackson. I think you know this already, which makes it curious that you pretend having Stewart as a top-30 guy right now is somehow in line with the norm.

I was just going off the top of my head. Maybe bad examples. In dynasty I have Jonathan somewhere in the RB2 area. So maybe top 20 or so. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if that is too high.

 

[SSOG]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season? Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009) Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

 

[Concept Coop]

The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

Not that I have an issue with your ranking of Stewart, but should Stewart really have an advantage over a player a year or two older, who is producing? Ahmad Bradshaw and McFadden come to mind. Of course I value age, but the difference between 22 and 23-24 is very little in my mental rankings. If one is producing and the other is not, I go with the points, when the age difference is so small, and they are both young. If Stewart is going to be 24 by the time he give you anything anyway, why not get the immediate points from a 24 year old, instead of points from a 24 year old a year + down the line?

 

[Richard_the_Vampire]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

You're banking extraordinarily heavily on your subjective evaluation of Stewart's talent. I think this is a mistake.Stewart hasn't produced this year. He is on a bad, aging team that has no quarterback. His coach, and probably the only offensive scheme he has played in as a pro, will be out the door at the end of the season. Because of the lockout, e may not have time to study and/or learn a new system for next year until August, which could mean another bad year for Stewart.

And you seriously value a guy like that over McCoy or Bradshaw? Guys putting up RB1 numbers right now, who are in great situations and will likely stay in those situations beyond this year?

Borderline insane.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I'd like to get some opinions on Beanie Wells' prospects for the future.I was offered Beanie straight up for CJ Spiller in a dynasty league and I really don't know whether I should make that deal or not.... CJ clearly has been a disappointment, but Beanie can't seem to stay healthy.Appreciate your feedback!

Take wells, much more potential to be a featured back. I see too much of a reggie bush role for spiller.

What about his knees though?Anybody else wanna post their , SSOG, F&L? TIA.

I don't think anybody in here can tell you about his knees with any authority because we don't work for the Cardinals. If it was my choice, I'd rather have Beanie than Spiller.

 

[LOCO]

Thoughts on Dwill. I figure he would be a great low buy candidate, but curious if he is still consider a rb1.

 

[benm3218]

Thoughts on Dwill. I figure he would be a great low buy candidate, but curious if he is still consider a rb1.

On a different team thats a lock.

 

[BespokeJort]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

You're banking extraordinarily heavily on your subjective evaluation of Stewart's talent. I think this is a mistake.Stewart hasn't produced this year. He is on a bad, aging team that has no quarterback. His coach, and probably the only offensive scheme he has played in as a pro, will be out the door at the end of the season. Because of the lockout, e may not have time to study and/or learn a new system for next year until August, which could mean another bad year for Stewart.

And you seriously value a guy like that over McCoy or Bradshaw? Guys putting up RB1 numbers right now, who are in great situations and will likely stay in those situations beyond this year?

Borderline insane.

Kindly forgive me if I don't weep for the loss of John Fox and his offensive scheme.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

How far has Jonathan Stewart fallen in dynasty rankings? His prospects for the future are no different than they were coming into the season.

well except for he is another year older, has missed ttime due to injury and unless Carolina improves the Oline QB situation (possible it couldnt be anyworse)What is everyones obsession with Stewart anyway? If I owned him I would move him to some Stewart lover, seems every dynasty league has a least 2, I'd let this guy be someone elses problem

Amen. Super overrated here for some reason.

Where do you rate him? I have him as a Top 30 guy right now. In with Felix Jones and guys like Brandon Jackson.

Not that you asked me, but I have him higher than Felix and much higher than Jackson. I have him top 15-18, around the Knowshons, Beanies, and Greenes. I like his talent and think he is starting material, I am just sick of waiting and weary of the injuries. Some have him as high as top 5-6.

I agree with you. But I think you're in the minority. I think most people have him around RB6 or RB8.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

You're banking extraordinarily heavily on your subjective evaluation of Stewart's talent. I think this is a mistake.Stewart hasn't produced this year. He is on a bad, aging team that has no quarterback. His coach, and probably the only offensive scheme he has played in as a pro, will be out the door at the end of the season. Because of the lockout, e may not have time to study and/or learn a new system for next year until August, which could mean another bad year for Stewart.

And you seriously value a guy like that over McCoy or Bradshaw? Guys putting up RB1 numbers right now, who are in great situations and will likely stay in those situations beyond this year?

Borderline insane.

Kindly forgive me if I don't weep for the loss of John Fox and his offensive scheme.

LOL, very true but it does lead to some extra uncertainty about his future.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

that was my point, as a dynasty owner you have invested in him for 3 years of very meh production except for the back hlaf of one season.

I dont know about you but I play to win, not to just hold onto dudes and pray they live up to their hype

 

[The Real Hipster Doofus]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

Deangelo Williams >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fred Jackson

 

[benm3218]

Brandon Marshall..... Very accurately ranked by F&L and SSOG for the last 2 years.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

that was my point, as a dynasty owner you have invested in him for 3 years of very meh production except for the back hlaf of one season.

I dont know about you but I play to win, not to just hold onto dudes and pray they live up to their hype

Yeah my experience in Dynasty leagues has shown me that there is always a subset of owners who are trying to "time" their championship run. I almost never see that work. In a competitive league there should only be about 1 or 2 teams that just obviously will suck in the current year. Everyone else should be going balls to the wall from week 1 to week 13. It's hard for me to justify giving up current and/or proven production for a guy whose "talent" is great, but hasn't done much for most of his career. Especially at the RB position which is one that generally sees guys contribute in their first 2 years. Flags fly forever and all that. But that's just me.

 

[SSOG]

The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

Not that I have an issue with your ranking of Stewart, but should Stewart really have an advantage over a player a year or two older, who is producing? Ahmad Bradshaw and McFadden come to mind. Of course I value age, but the difference between 22 and 23-24 is very little in my mental rankings. If one is producing and the other is not, I go with the points, when the age difference is so small, and they are both young. If Stewart is going to be 24 by the time he give you anything anyway, why not get the immediate points from a 24 year old, instead of points from a 24 year old a year + down the line?

That's a fair question, I was strictly addressing the point that BSS raised that Stewart had been in the league for a while now, which I think is a non-issue because he's still as young or younger than pretty much every dynasty RB worth owning.

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

First off, the specific point BSS was making was that RBs have a short lifespan, and the Stewart had already "burned" 3 years of his. I was just countering that studies show that age, not years in the NFL, is the driving force behind an RB's decline, so the fact that Stewart has been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in the league 1 is irrelevant when determining how much career each back has left in front of him.Second off, I'd say Stewart has looked a heck of a lot better than average for a heck of a lot longer than 0.5 seasons. Dude averages 4.6 yards per carry for his career. He holds the record for most rushing yards in a player's first 3 starts. He was a top-24 RB as a rookie and a top-12 RB as a sophomore.

that was my point, as a dynasty owner you have invested in him for 3 years of very meh production except for the back hlaf of one season. I dont know about you but I play to win, not to just hold onto dudes and pray they live up to their hype

Again, I fail to see how someone like Jonathan Stewart is substantially different than someone like Mark Ingram. Both assets will require you waiting for a while before you can benefit. How much would you give up to acquire the #1 overall pick next season?

 

[thriftyrocker]

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years.

Are you freaking kidding me? He has done nothing this year. I will grant you that. But he "looked good" for the first 2 years. Almost in entirety. In that time he gave you 1.5 years of RB2 and .5 years of top 3 RB. He had 880 yards and 10 TDs his rookie year. Given the team is a colossal mess this year, to count him out because of 2010 is incredibly short sighted.Pop quiz, who has more career TDs - Stewart, McFadden or Mendenhall?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

Deangelo Williams >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fred Jackson

Eh, that's several too many '>' symbols in my opinion. Jackson is really pretty damn good. And now that DeAngelo is on IR and has been out the last several weeks, it must be Stewart's time to shine, right? Oh wait, he got hit too hard three weeks ago. Hell Goodson has shown more than Stewart this year. Anyway, I don't want to continue to argue the point. I think Stewart is overrated. I'm not positive he's ever going to be as special as the folks here think.

But hey, living in Charlotte married to a Panthers fan, I'd love to be wrong.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years.

Are you freaking kidding me? He has done nothing this year. I will grant you that. But he "looked good" for the first 2 years. Almost in entirety. In that time he gave you 1.5 years of RB2 and .5 years of top 3 RB. He had 880 yards and 10 TDs his rookie year. Given the team is a colossal mess this year, to count him out because of 2010 is incredibly short sighted.Pop quiz, who has more career TDs - Stewart, McFadden or Mendenhall?

Well, I was never that high on McFadden or really Mendenhall myself anyway. And their career TDs right now are irrelevant to me. I don't own him, so I didn't get them. I'm saying that of the people SSOG currently has ranked behind him (He's 8th right now, so Foster, Gore, McCoy, Mathews, Best, SJackson, Bradshaw, Hillis, DWilliams, Wells, Turner), I'd take all of them for Stewart and be confident that my near term production (2010, 2011) would likely be higher. Sure, maybe he adjusts well to the new coach next year, they get Otah back, the QBs mature and he is top 6-8 for 2012. But in that time I've probably given up production net/net in 1.5 seasons. Maybe conservatively you drop the young, unproven guys like Mathews, Best and Wells. Maybe you think Willis is a flash in the pan. Still, that's 7 guys he should be behind on my board.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

First off, the specific point BSS was making was that RBs have a short lifespan, and the Stewart had already "burned" 3 years of his. I was just countering that studies show that age, not years in the NFL, is the driving force behind an RB's decline, so the fact that Stewart has been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in the league 1 is irrelevant when determining how much career each back has left in front of him.Second off, I'd say Stewart has looked a heck of a lot better than average for a heck of a lot longer than 0.5 seasons. Dude averages 4.6 yards per carry for his career. He holds the record for most rushing yards in a player's first 3 starts. He was a top-24 RB as a rookie and a top-12 RB as a sophomore.

Understand now and agree with you on the age, not experience issue. I'm underplaying his performance, but only a bit. And I think others are overplaying his situation. Sure Otah will help. But they'll be getting a new coach and system and have 3 young QBs that have looked pretty bad. They're starting Brian St Pierre this week for pete's sake. What are they going to do next year, draft another QB? They need time to develop into a offensive system that fits his skills. I think that DeAngelo is better suited for a crappy offense (IMO, better lateral runner, shiftier, catches better, blocks better). So I think that he has the talent and could develop the situation to be top 10 in 2012 and top 3 in 2013. That's just a long way away for me. And that's not even mentioning the dings.Gotta hit the sack. Good talking to you guys.

 

[SSOG]

Understand now and agree with you on the age, not experience issue. I'm underplaying his performance, but only a bit. And I think others are overplaying his situation. Sure Otah will help. But they'll be getting a new coach and system and have 3 young QBs that have looked pretty bad. They're starting Brian St Pierre this week for pete's sake. What are they going to do next year, draft another QB? They need time to develop into a offensive system that fits his skills. I think that DeAngelo is better suited for a crappy offense (IMO, better lateral runner, shiftier, catches better, blocks better). So I think that he has the talent and could develop the situation to be top 10 in 2012 and top 3 in 2013. That's just a long way away for me. And that's not even mentioning the dings.Gotta hit the sack. Good talking to you guys.

Can I get your thoughts on the Mark Ingram or Trent Richardson comparison? If you played in a league that allowed you to roster players while they were still in college, what would you trade right now to acquire a Trent Richardson or Mark Ingram? What would you trade to acquire the #1 pick in the 2011 draft? How about the #1 pick in the 2012 draft?

 

[Homer]

One thing about dynasty rankings is seeing the forest through the trees:

If Jonathan Stewart is a top 10 dynasty back (and I'm not arguing he's NOT), that almost surely means your team has been counting on starting him every week this year.

Need I elaborate further on what a DISASTER your team's record SHOULD look like with that being the case?

It's great to engage in mental masturbation over what "could/would/should" be in the next several years. meanwhile, teams with Shonn Greene and Stewart are circling the drains jockeying for draft position where their owners will then draft Shonn G/Daily Show 2.0

 

[T.Rex]

Brandon Marshall..... Very accurately ranked by F&L and SSOG for the last 2 years.

LOLOLOOLLLLOOLLYeah last year he was a horrible top 5 WR.Think before you postTIA

 

[SSOG]

Brandon Marshall..... Very accurately ranked by F&L and SSOG for the last 2 years.

LOLOLOOLLLLOOLL

Yeah last year he was a horrible top 5 WR.

Think before you post

TIA

F&L and I make rankings for non-PPR leagues. Brandon Marshall has never been a top-5 WR in non-PPR leagues. He's been 9th, 11th, and 9th (and this year he's 28th). I've got him ranked 9th. F&L has got him ranked 11th. Neither of us were ever saying he was garbage, or unrosterable, or mediocre... we were just saying he was decidedly not top-5. I think that claim stands pretty strong right now.

One thing about dynasty rankings is seeing the forest through the trees:

If Jonathan Stewart is a top 10 dynasty back (and I'm not arguing he's NOT), that almost surely means your team has been counting on starting him every week this year.

Need I elaborate further on what a DISASTER your team's record SHOULD look like with that being the case?

It's great to engage in mental masturbation over what "could/would/should" be in the next several years. meanwhile, teams with Shonn Greene and Stewart are circling the drains jockeying for draft position where their owners will then draft Shonn G/Daily Show 2.0

Why should you be counting on him as a starter if he's ranked in the top 10?Let's look at it this way. Imagine you have the full and perfect benefit of hindsight. Where would you rank Arian Foster last November? Where would you rank Ray Rice in November of 2008? Where would you rank Calvin Johnson back in November 2007? In my opinion, with the full benefit of hindsight, I would have ranked all three of those players in the respective top 10s without flinching, blinking, or hesitating. It would literally be a no-brainer- I wouldn't even have to think about it, despite the fact that all three of those guys would have been getting you killed if you were starting them at the time.

I wish I was able to start Jonathan Stewart today, but I'm not. Still, these are not redraft rankings. Jonathan Stewart has a 7 year career ahead of him, and while the fact that he is not producing great numbers in one of those seven seasons is inconvenient, it's hardly a dealbreaker. I'd rather have an RB who was garbage today and a stud for the next 6 years than an RB who was a stud today and garbage for the next 6 years, even if I'm currently chasing a flag.

 

[jdoggydogg]

I don't know much about LeGarrette Blount. Any thoughts on his dynasty value?

 

[Kree]

One thing about dynasty rankings is seeing the forest through the trees:If Jonathan Stewart is a top 10 dynasty back (and I'm not arguing he's NOT), that almost surely means your team has been counting on starting him every week this year.Need I elaborate further on what a DISASTER your team's record SHOULD look like with that being the case?It's great to engage in mental masturbation over what "could/would/should" be in the next several years. meanwhile, teams with Shonn Greene and Stewart are circling the drains jockeying for draft position where their owners will then draft Shonn G/Daily Show 2.0

Maybe if your league started this or last year.

 

[corpcow]

I'm not arguing, you are. You are just pissed off for some weird reason. Dude, look at my original post quoted here.

Felix isn't a workhorse back becuase he has nver been one. EVER. College coaches, NFL coaches and knowledgeable people can see this. too bad you cant.

you know what forget it. felix is a featured workhorse back who is probably going to carry the ball over 300 times per year for the next 6-7 years. you're right.

"Deal with it." Is not arguing? What am I doing that you are not?Peyton Hillis wasn't a workhorse back, until he got the opportunity to start, then - guess what! - he was.

If Felix played for one of about 110 other schools, he would have started and got plenty of carries - he just happened to play behind an all time great.

If you read the very quote that you commented on, I never said he would, could, or should get 300 carries, especially for 6-7 years. In fact, I said he wasn't a 300 carry back. I said he could be a starting RB, and produce RB1 numbers.

This discussion has gotten really tiresome. You're just arguing with yourself in circles. We get it - you believe Felix Jones can be a 320 carry per year guy, most of us don't . But to compare him to Hillis or Turner strictly on lack of opportunity COMPLETELY misses the point. What most of us are saying is that Felix is not built to be a 320 carry guy - not because of lack of opportunity. There are guys who haven't had the opportunity to be feature backs (e.g., S-Jax in his early career behind HOF Faulk, Turner when he was behind one of the greatest PRO RBs ever in the history of the game, etc) who many of us have felt could and would be feature bellcows in the future. While I personally don't think Hillis can sustain this load indefinitely just given how much punishment he takes (and gives), I don't think anyone looked at him and said "here's a guy who can't handle 20 carries a game" from a physical perspective.

I think that Hornet's quote was taken somewhat out of context - I don't think he's really saying Felix can't be a workhorse just because he hasn't been, based on what he's said previously. Rather, we're saying he won't be a workhorse because we don't think he can be, based on injury history, how his coaches/GM have talked about him, and how he has been successful to this point (and he HAS made an impact at the NFL level).

I can't remember who said it - but I remember someone comparing MBIII to the everyday hooptie and Felix Jones as the Lamborghini that you only take out once in awhile (and spends a lot of time in the shop).

Anyway, moving on....

I don't know how I am the one arguing in circles, or responsible for the topic being "stale". I am simply replying to those that quote me, often without me addressing them directly, much like yourself. So if it is as simple as some agree, some don't, then why did you bring it up again? At the very least, don't accuse me to do what you are in fact doing yourself. And why do people keep putting words in my mouth? When did I say Felix could handle 320 carries? I didn't. If fact, I said the opposite.

You said Felix could be a 20+ carry and a lead back, did you not? Wouldn't that imply 320 carries? If the only point you're making is that he can ever have 20 carries in a single game, but don't think he can do it for an extended period, then you're saying the exact same thing as us and just arguing semantics. It's also a point that is completely irrelevant to a dynasty rankings thread.

So, that's the discussion we're having. Are you saying he can or can't be a 320 carry back? (I.e., 20 carries per game)?

 

[corpcow]

This is dynasty - and in the words of the Great One, "skate to where the puck is going, not where it's been".

Dynasty rankings, as SSOG pointed out above, are about ranking guys for their value over a number of years. Being top 10 doesn't necessarily mean he's performing at top 10 numbers right now - just that he has a better chance (in the ranker's opinion) to be a top 10 producer over that time. (And even that depends on the person doing the rankings - some of us put more emphasis on steady production, some of us put more emphasis on potential, etc).

I love Stevie Johnson, but in my PPR right now he's outperforming Marshall and Fitz who I also have. Does that mean I rank Stevie above either of those guys? Or if I didn't have him, would I trade either of those 2 for him? Of course not.

I'm working on a few things to model this and allow you to make decisions on these kinds of things... but in the meantime, just remember this dynamic. There are guys who

I have right now who are performing at a top 10 clip, but I would never invest a top 10 price in them because I'm concerned about their ability to sustain it. (For reasons like health, opportunity, whatever). So, I'm very glad I had guys like Hillis and Steve Johnson and Orton, but I'm not building around those guys...

In one of my leagues, a guy just gave up a lot to get Brandon Lloyd to be his WR1... That's a move I would never make because Lloyd is a classic example of someone who is capable of putting up top 10 numbers given the right circumstances but is not as likely to sustain that over an extended period of time. (To me, there's just too much risk that he doesn't, given that top 10 price tag. Strikes me as a classic sell-high).

True dynasties are built this way - sell when the price is high, buy when the price is low, and always make sure there's the right balance of potential and current performance. I've seen too many teams completely fall off the cliff, or constantly rebuild, because they don't have the right balance (and of course that shifts based on the "stage" of team you have).

 

[Sabertooth]

Brandon Marshall..... Very accurately ranked by F&L and SSOG for the last 2 years.

LOLOLOOLLLLOOLL

Yeah last year he was a horrible top 5 WR.

Think before you post

TIA

F&L and I make rankings for non-PPR leagues. Brandon Marshall has never been a top-5 WR in non-PPR leagues. He's been 9th, 11th, and 9th (and this year he's 28th). I've got him ranked 9th. F&L has got him ranked 11th. Neither of us were ever saying he was garbage, or unrosterable, or mediocre... we were just saying he was decidedly not top-5. I think that claim stands pretty strong right now.

One thing about dynasty rankings is seeing the forest through the trees:

If Jonathan Stewart is a top 10 dynasty back (and I'm not arguing he's NOT), that almost surely means your team has been counting on starting him every week this year.

Need I elaborate further on what a DISASTER your team's record SHOULD look like with that being the case?

It's great to engage in mental masturbation over what "could/would/should" be in the next several years. meanwhile, teams with Shonn Greene and Stewart are circling the drains jockeying for draft position where their owners will then draft Shonn G/Daily Show 2.0

Why should you be counting on him as a starter if he's ranked in the top 10?Let's look at it this way. Imagine you have the full and perfect benefit of hindsight. Where would you rank Arian Foster last November? Where would you rank Ray Rice in November of 2008? Where would you rank Calvin Johnson back in November 2007? In my opinion, with the full benefit of hindsight, I would have ranked all three of those players in the respective top 10s without flinching, blinking, or hesitating. It would literally be a no-brainer- I wouldn't even have to think about it, despite the fact that all three of those guys would have been getting you killed if you were starting them at the time.

I wish I was able to start Jonathan Stewart today, but I'm not. Still, these are not redraft rankings. Jonathan Stewart has a 7 year career ahead of him, and while the fact that he is not producing great numbers in one of those seven seasons is inconvenient, it's hardly a dealbreaker. I'd rather have an RB who was garbage today and a stud for the next 6 years than an RB who was a stud today and garbage for the next 6 years, even if I'm currently chasing a flag.

This is where I think you go wrong. You put too much value on that which may never be. Its like you are more interested in acquiring potential than production. Potential is great but it needs to stay on the bottom half of the roster, otherwise you are just going to get killed every single year. Guys like Bradshaw or Foster are far more valuable in dynasty than Stewart. Like 10 spots more valuable at least. Stewart is an RB3 until his production warrants an RB2 grade.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

No. Have you watched Mike Williams? The guy's a full grown man. Character issues? No one has more character issues than Terrell Owens, and he was a viable fantasy stud for years. Mike Williams is the real deal.

Full grown man just busted for DUI halfway through his rookie season.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Good discussion on Stewart, to me his value is still super high and Id look to move him if I owned him.

 

[Sabertooth]

Good discussion on Stewart, to me his value is still super high and Id look to move him if I owned him.

Maybe I play in a league with a far different mentality, but I can't get much for him.

 

[renesauz]

So you are telling me when you drafted him 3 years ago you expect minimal value for his first 3 years in the league?

you are also telling me that after his nice end to the 2009 season you expected minimal value this season?

Now if Deangelo is moved he might do ok this coming season, but who knows he has shown a tendency to get nicked up alot (sure he didnt miss a game until last week in his career but there always seems to be lingering achilles/foot injuries in 2009)

Now while his potential might be through the roof and greater than alot of people, he just isnt my kind of player.

RBs have a relative short life span in the NFL anyway, he has burned 3 years already.

Three years ago? I created a set of rankings at the beginning of the season based on my assumptions of how the season and future seasons would play out, and nothing that has happened so far this season has caused me to radically re-evaluate those assumptions. My ranking of Stewart was based on the assumption that he would add minimal value this year (I believe in his spotlight I said I was counting on low-end RB2 production), and a ton of value in future seasons. The value Stewart has added this year is much less than I thought it would be, but the difference between nonexistent and minimal is minimal, meaning that only requires a minimal adjustment to my initial valuations.The whole "burned 3 years already" thing is crazy. It doesn't matter how long he's been in the league, it matters how old he is. He's the same age as C.J. Spiller, so why does it matter that Stewart's been in the league 3 years while Spiller has only been in 1? I have 40 RBs in my top 5 tiers, and of those 40 backs, only FOUR were 22 or younger to start the season- Lesean McCoy, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, and Beanie Wells. And it's not like Mathews, Best, or Wells have made much of a case to be ahead of Stewart, at this point. The only back in the entire league who is both younger than Stewart and more productive than Stewart is Lesean McCoy (note: rounding age to the nearest whole year, so I'm sure there are some guys who are a couple of months younger than Stewart who are producing right now).

I disagree. He's been in the league for 3 years and looked good for .5 years. Spiller has been in the league for .5 years and hasn't looked good. I still don't know if Spiller will be good, but he basically has 2.5 more years to make the same impact as Stewart. So if I'm betting, do I bet that someone looking average for 2.5 years is a better bet than someone who has looked average for .5 years?

that was my point, as a dynasty owner you have invested in him for 3 years of very meh production except for the back hlaf of one season.

I dont know about you but I play to win, not to just hold onto dudes and pray they live up to their hype

So...this means he was badly over-valued a couple years ago...and any owner with a time machine should go back and trade him then when he was so badly over-rated. It also leads me to believe that he was STILL BADLY OVER-RATED coming into this season, as anything in the top 15-17 for a useless player is...well...too high.Unfortunately, this means nothing towards future evaluations. Top ten was way too high in August, but might well be appropriate come March. If there's reason to think he might be a top ten fantasy RB next year (and there is), then he's not a player a smart owner is likely to trade for less than top 10 value unless he is desperate for immediate help and making a playoff push...in which case he'd still not take less than top 15-20 value.

Stewart is the type of player who's immediate value (ranking) is highly dependant on the roster he's being considered for.

 

[humpback]

Anyone trade for or trade away Randy Moss lately? Is he still fetching #2 WR value?

 

[Concept Coop]

You said Felix could be a 20+ carry and a lead back, did you not? Wouldn't that imply 320 carries?

If the only point you're making is that he can ever have 20 carries in a single game, but don't think he can do it for an extended period, then you're saying the exact same thing as us and just arguing semantics. It's also a point that is completely irrelevant to a dynasty rankings thread.

So, that's the discussion we're having. Are you saying he can or can't be a 320 carry back? (I.e., 20 carries per game)?

If you are genuinely interested in my opinion of Felix Jones, and what he can and can't handle in the NFL, you can find in by reading my posts found on the last 5 pages or so.If you are tying to find a contradiction, for a reason other than to contribute to the thread, what is the point? What sense of gratification are you searching for?

As I said, and will not say again, I think Felix Jones can be the main back for a team. My point about 20 carries, was in response to those that said he could not be the main back, and used the fact that he hadn't had a 20 carry game as a reason why.

So no, I don't think he should be a 320 carry back, very few should be. Do I think he can? Sure. For a season, I think he could physically handle 320 carries. But I don't think it is smart, nor do I think it will happen. Nor do I think it is relevant, as I don't project it happening, thus, has no bearing on his dynasty value, which is what he are discussing.

 

[Concept Coop]

Anyone trade for or trade away Randy Moss lately? Is he still fetching #2 WR value?

Randy went for a late 1st rounder in a league of mine. I wouldn't have given up a first, however.

 

[Grimace59]

I was able to get him for Brandon Tate in a NonPPR/return yards league straight up.

 

[thriftyrocker]

I don't know much about LeGarrette Blount. Any thoughts on his dynasty value?

I said a few pages back I think he's worth a late 1st and is the only RB that emerged midseason that I think is worth much going into 2011. He's a risky start this year, but I think he has opportunity to grow into a solid RB. Given how few RBs are coming out next year, if you need youth at RB and are a playoff team, I would try to buy.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Understand now and agree with you on the age, not experience issue. I'm underplaying his performance, but only a bit. And I think others are overplaying his situation. Sure Otah will help. But they'll be getting a new coach and system and have 3 young QBs that have looked pretty bad. They're starting Brian St Pierre this week for pete's sake. What are they going to do next year, draft another QB? They need time to develop into a offensive system that fits his skills. I think that DeAngelo is better suited for a crappy offense (IMO, better lateral runner, shiftier, catches better, blocks better). So I think that he has the talent and could develop the situation to be top 10 in 2012 and top 3 in 2013. That's just a long way away for me. And that's not even mentioning the dings.Gotta hit the sack. Good talking to you guys.

Can I get your thoughts on the Mark Ingram or Trent Richardson comparison? If you played in a league that allowed you to roster players while they were still in college, what would you trade right now to acquire a Trent Richardson or Mark Ingram? What would you trade to acquire the #1 pick in the 2011 draft? How about the #1 pick in the 2012 draft?

I like both quite a bit although I'm weary of trading without knowing their situation and opportunity. So I would probably only trade a lower end RB2 or WR2 for them, unless I was a really bad team. I guess that my point with these posts is that Stewart makes me realize that personally, I think people in Dynasty league OVERRATE talent at the expense of situation and opportunity. I understand that usually the opposite happens, but I've decided that my approach is to stop spending so much time concentrating on what I think a guy may do, and spend more time worrying about what a guy has shown he can do. Maybe I'll regret this change in philosophy in a year or two, lol.Edit to add that I do realize you need a balance of present and future value to succeed in a dynasty league. I just think there is a point where you spend too long waiting for the talent to fulfill the promise. For me, Stewart reached that point when he's out with a bad concussion as DWill is put on IR. It just seems to not be in the cards for him to be a long term top 10 RB. Guess we'll see.

 

[Herm23]

Understand now and agree with you on the age, not experience issue.

I'm underplaying his performance, but only a bit. And I think others are overplaying his situation. Sure Otah will help. But they'll be getting a new coach and system and have 3 young QBs that have looked pretty bad. They're starting Brian St Pierre this week for pete's sake. What are they going to do next year, draft another QB? They need time to develop into a offensive system that fits his skills. I think that DeAngelo is better suited for a crappy offense (IMO, better lateral runner, shiftier, catches better, blocks better).

So I think that he has the talent and could develop the situation to be top 10 in 2012 and top 3 in 2013. That's just a long way away for me. And that's not even mentioning the dings.

Gotta hit the sack. Good talking to you guys.

Can I get your thoughts on the Mark Ingram or Trent Richardson comparison? If you played in a league that allowed you to roster players while they were still in college, what would you trade right now to acquire a Trent Richardson or Mark Ingram? What would you trade to acquire the #1 pick in the 2011 draft? How about the #1 pick in the 2012 draft?

I like both quite a bit although I'm weary of trading without knowing their situation and opportunity. So I would probably only trade a lower end RB2 or WR2 for them, unless I was a really bad team. I guess that my point with these posts is that Stewart makes me realize that personally, I think people in Dynasty league OVERRATE talent at the expense of situation and opportunity. I understand that usually the opposite happens, but I've decided that my approach is to stop spending so much time concentrating on what I think a guy may do, and spend more time worrying about what a guy has shown he can do.

Maybe I'll regret this change in philosophy in a year or two, lol.

Edit to add that I do realize you need a balance of present and future value to succeed in a dynasty league. I just think there is a point where you spend too long waiting for the talent to fulfill the promise. For me, Stewart reached that point when he's out with a bad concussion as DWill is put on IR. It just seems to not be in the cards for him to be a long term top 10 RB. Guess we'll see.

I agree to some extent with your general point. I agree that a lot of dynasty league owners tend to vastly underrate situation and opportunity. Yes, it can change quickly and make a mediocre talent that was playing above his head return to mediocrity very quickly. However, there are plenty of times where the situation remains constant for plenty long enough to make that mediocre talent a very viable fantasy product. I still believe that talent will end up trumping situation, but I also am not going to discount situation and the impact it can have completely (which I think I see happen from time to time from people in this thread).That being said, I think you are way off the mark with the bolded portion of your comment. Just as recently as last season, Stewart showed more than enough to justify saying that it IS in the cards for him to be a long term top 10 RB. I'm not sure why 1 bad half of a season on a historically bad Panther's offense would suddenly sway your view. Has this season been worse than anyone expected for Stewart? Sure, I think it has. Has he looked bad enough that his talent suddenly needs to be called into question (when everyone was able to confirm their belief that he is an elite talent based on his performance down the stretch last season)? No, I don't think so. He has been caught up in what is a historically bad Panther's offense. So let's look at the situation then- Stewart's chief competition for carries becomes an unrestricted free agent after this season (DeAngelo Williams) AND his head coach is leaving town after this season (John Fox). To me, this spells a situation that is primed to change rather quickly and most likely will be changing for the good. This seems like one of those times where it would be unwise to let situation and opportunity take precedence over talent.

Compare that situation to Houston and Arian Foster. Regardless of what you think about Foster from a talent standpoint (I think he is elite, but it is irrelevant for this discussion), his situation does not look likely to change anytime soon. This means that you can expect the same running back friendly system to be in place next year with the same general lack of competition (Ben Tate provides only marginal competition even if you don't believe in Foster's talent), being coached by the same coach. This seems like an example of situation and opportunity overriding talent (if you aren't a believer in Foster). He is showing that he can produce in this system and for this coach, doesn't have any overwhelming challenges for his job looming, and seems extremely likely to be back as the feature back in the same system and under the same coach next year. If the team does well next season (and actually lives up to potential/expectations), there's little to no reason to believe he won't also be there, in the same situation and circumstances, in 2012. Obviously there are several leaps of faith being taken with the Arian Foster example, however I'm just using it to try and illustrate when I believe talent is heads and shoulders more important than situation/opportunity and when I believe opportunity can overcome talent.