Dynasty Rankings (7 Viewers)

[gandalas]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...

2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )

2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round

2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th round

By the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...

2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.

2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

 

[Concept Coop]

I see your point but to be fair, I'm not using 30 picks. I'm using the next 7-10 picks in most cases. Using the next 30 picks we could start talking all kinds of players. So let's not exaggerate please.

I'll give you that the side I'm stating has more leeway because it has more opportunity. But my opinion still stands that you can find great players in the middle and end of the first round just as you can in the top 3. And you can find crap in the top 3 easily. So saying any pick that isn't in the top 3 isn't that valuable is a false statement, IMO.

Who said that?

 

[Go deep]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I see your point but to be fair, I'm not using 30 picks. I'm using the next 7-10 picks in most cases. Using the next 30 picks we could start talking all kinds of players. So let's not exaggerate please.

I'll give you that the side I'm stating has more leeway because it has more opportunity. But my opinion still stands that you can find great players in the middle and end of the first round just as you can in the top 3. And you can find crap in the top 3 easily. So saying any pick that isn't in the top 3 isn't that valuable is a false statement, IMO.

Who said that?

You pretty much did in Post 14550.... the one I've been responding to for three days stating example after example of how incorrect it is. "However, 1st round draft picks are not worth much to me, personally, before the draft order starts to materialize. The gap between a top 3 pick and the rest of the first round is usually huge. It is the difference between getting a Jahvid Best/Julio Jones or Tobi Gerhart/Golden Tate."

You forgot about the difference in McFadden/Stewart/Forte vs Ray Rice or Chris Johnson. And you speak of J. Best as if he's already in the HOF. Guy has two career games where he's reached at least 60 yards rushing. He hasn't exactly proven he's worth a top three pick yet.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

The only thing anyone is trying to prove is that rookie picks do have value.... outside of the top 3. I'm pretty comfortable in picking which rookies I like and don't like; others aren't. If you aren't comfortable you should trade them for veterans so you know what you're getting. Everyone misses on draft picks, trades, etc.... to each his own.

 

[Fodasme69]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

this made me laugh!

 

[Go deep]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

The only thing anyone is trying to prove is that rookie picks do have value.... outside of the top 3. I'm pretty comfortable in picking which rookies I like and don't like; others aren't. If you aren't comfortable you should trade them for veterans so you know what you're getting. Everyone misses on draft picks, trades, etc.... to each his own.

Since you are so comfortable with later picks, why dont you trade your early ones for later ones. Maybe you can trade someone in your league a top 5 pick straight up for a 2nd rounder?Seriously, why does someone saying they think top picks are more valuable than later picks mean he isnt comfortable with rookie picks?

 

[The Real Hipster Doofus]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

Agreed. I don't think there is any doubt that a good drafter can get some good values in the late 1st and beyond. This year in one league I ended up with Starks, Gronkowski and Moeaki in the 2nd-4th and I am happy with that haul. That doesn't in any way change the fact that statistically the top 3 picks have a WAYYY higher hit rate. Its like the argument that people say a lot in terms of college football recruiting. People will say "look at how many 3 star players are starring in the NFL and college. Obviously a 3 star is pretty much just as good of a player." Disregarding the fact that 5 stars for example may have a 40% hit rate, while 3 stars have a 15% hit rate, but there are a lot more of them. A talented recruiter (or drafter) can skew those percentages a bit in their favor, but in the end there are always much better chances of success when you go with the 5 stars (or top 3 picks). Hope what I am trying to say makes sense.

 

[Go deep]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

Agreed. I don't think there is any doubt that a good drafter can get some good values in the late 1st and beyond. This year in one league I ended up with Starks, Gronkowski and Moeaki in the 2nd-4th and I am happy with that haul. That doesn't in any way change the fact that statistically the top 3 picks have a WAYYY higher hit rate. Its like the argument that people say a lot in terms of college football recruiting. People will say "look at how many 3 star players are starring in the NFL and college. Obviously a 3 star is pretty much just as good of a player." Disregarding the fact that 5 stars for example may have a 40% hit rate, while 3 stars have a 15% hit rate, but there are a lot more of them. A talented recruiter (or drafter) can skew those percentages a bit in their favor, but in the end there are always much better chances of success when you go with the 5 stars (or top 3 picks). Hope what I am trying to say makes sense.

Makes perfect sense to me, but i am guessing some people are still not going to understand.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I for one have had great luck with my later rookie picks in the past 3 years...2008 - Jamaal Charles in the second round (who I then cut a year later )2009 - Mike Wallace in the 4th round2010 - Aaron Hernandez in the 4th roundBy the same token, I have busted with a number of my high draft picks...2008 - Darren McFadden in 2 leagues at 1.1. Did not see a return until this season.2009 - Beanie Wells and Moreno at 1.1 and 1.2. Wells has disappointed, and Moreno has not been as good as expected.

This proves absolutely nothing.

The only thing anyone is trying to prove is that rookie picks do have value.... outside of the top 3. I'm pretty comfortable in picking which rookies I like and don't like; others aren't. If you aren't comfortable you should trade them for veterans so you know what you're getting. Everyone misses on draft picks, trades, etc.... to each his own.

Since you are so comfortable with later picks, why dont you trade your early ones for later ones. Maybe you can trade someone in your league a top 5 pick straight up for a 2nd rounder?Seriously, why does someone saying they think top picks are more valuable than later picks mean he isnt comfortable with rookie picks?

Can you read? Did I say 2nd round picks are more valuable than top 3 picks (nice way of changing your stance to top 5)? I said you can find players that are just as good in those picks.F&L was all over the Chris Johnson bandwagon early on. Did F&L have to pick CJ in the top 3? But if you love the guy and you know you can get him outside of the top 3, then target a pick in that area which is MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE than a top 3 pick. All I'm trying to say is that picks 4 and beyond hold plenty of value and studs can be found there. I really think the nitpicky mindless crap from you and CC is why F&L has left his own thread. I'm done here before I become one of those guys.

 

[Concept Coop]

I really think the nitpicky mindless crap from you and CC is why F&L has left his own thread. I'm done here before I become one of those guys.

Mindless nitpicking? You are arguing that picks outside of the top 3 have value, when nobody suggested otherwise. It sounds as though you misunderstood my statement or misread it, maybe, which is fine. I do it all the time.No need to make this a personal matter, which is not cool at all. If you have any issues with me (I won't speak for GD), please PM and let me know. I don't want to hinder the thread at all, and if you feel I am doing so, please point out how and where.

 

[The Real Yoda]

And people wonder why the top dogs don't come around this thread anymore

 

[Tau837]

And people wonder why the top dogs don't come around this thread anymore

Used to be my favorite thread...

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

He doesn't post because he's noticed a trend, in his eyes and others I suppose, that a lot more people are, errr....less intelligent postings in here during the season - not to mention all the stupid ACF questions. So he waits to jump in until they clear out and the real discussion picks up in the offseason, both in volume as well as quality.

The off-season is definitely the prime time for dynasty discussion. But you're correct - the quality of content in this thread has gone way down, as is typical when any small group gets larger. Also, the discussions often boil down to the same unsolvable debates - talent vs. situation and/or personal dynasty philosophies. Quote wars go on and on over those two issues and rarely do we learn anything new. Anyone curious about F&L's thoughts can find them in this thread somewhere, and if there isn't a specific mention of your player you could probably deduce his opinion just by being familiar with his approach. And lastly.. he works for Rotoworld, not FBG.

Exactly. I encourage those of you that are new to this thread this year to go back a couple hundred pages and spend a hour reading some of the quality posts. Also, think before you post here. Not every thought in your brain has to be added to this thread. In the past, F&L and SSOG have tried to answer most if not all questions. The volume of posts has been so high, its nearly impossible to keep up. I can't speak for everyone, but I know I'm frustrated by the loss of those two posters in this thread. They've added high quality content to this thread for years, and earned the respect of many around here.

 

[squistion]

And people wonder why the top dogs don't come around this thread anymore

It is a shame because I really use to like this thread and recently it seems just a waste of time. I like a spirited discussion as much as anyone (and I have several with SSOG) but you have certain people here who argue back and forth over minutiae for literally several pages. I have put some of the worst offenders on ignore, but with all the people arguing with them ad naseum, I still can't get away from it. I think one should make whatever point they can in 2-3 responses max and then take it to a PM, as at that point it is only of interest to them.

 

[imagroid]

And people wonder why the top dogs don't come around this thread anymore

Used to be my favorite thread...

Man, people keep saying this and it keeps getting so maybe it's true? I sure hope not, cause if so, that is incredibly lame imo. I mean, too big for a FF thread? Meh.

 

[Concept Coop]

Exactly. I encourage those of you that are new to this thread this year to go back a couple hundred pages and spend a hour reading some of the quality posts. Also, think before you post here. Not every thought in your brain has to be added to this thread. In the past, F&L and SSOG have tried to answer most if not all questions. The volume of posts has been so high, its nearly impossible to keep up.

I can't speak for everyone, but I know I'm frustrated by the loss of those two posters in this thread. They've added high quality content to this thread for years, and earned the respect of many around here.

Not isulting you at all. But I don't quite get this logic. This is the best thread on the board. I don't know how anyone can read the general board, then complain about this thread. It is night and day, based on the number of insults, uninformative posts, AC questions, hyperbole, overreactions, and number of warnings issued out on a daily basis. If the top dogs are leaving this thread, they are not going to the general board, or any other forums that I am aware of - this is the best. Maybe GD, and R. Wreck and I did "bicker" over less than a page's worth of posts, but why is that such a big deal? I don't think anyones feelings were hurt, and while some may find it annoying, we were on topic and I think all three of us made good points and valid arguments.

Lastly, as far as the top dogs leaving, I don't think that is the case. I have only been here for a year, if you include my lurking, but I still see the same names. SSOG said he got a 2nd job, he is not updating his rankings, so I doubt he left because of any bickering. F&L did address above, but he still lurks quite a bit. I still see my favorite and very infomrative posters on a regular basis: Thrifty, RHD, AZ, EFB, and plenty of others.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Exactly. I encourage those of you that are new to this thread this year to go back a couple hundred pages and spend a hour reading some of the quality posts. Also, think before you post here. Not every thought in your brain has to be added to this thread. In the past, F&L and SSOG have tried to answer most if not all questions. The volume of posts has been so high, its nearly impossible to keep up.

I can't speak for everyone, but I know I'm frustrated by the loss of those two posters in this thread. They've added high quality content to this thread for years, and earned the respect of many around here.

Not isulting you at all. But I don't quite get this logic. This is the best thread on the board. I don't know how anyone can read the general board, then complain about this thread. It is night and day, based on the number of insults, uninformative posts, AC questions, hyperbole, overreactions, and number of warnings issued out on a daily basis. If the top dogs are leaving this thread, they are not going to the general board, or any other forums that I am aware of - this is the best. Maybe GD, and R. Wreck and I did "bicker" over less than a page's worth of posts, but why is that such a big deal? I don't think anyones feelings were hurt, and while some may find it annoying, we were on topic and I think all three of us made good points and valid arguments.

Lastly, as far as the top dogs leaving, I don't think that is the case. I have only been here for a year, if you include my lurking, but I still see the same names. SSOG said he got a 2nd job, he is not updating his rankings, so I doubt he left because of any bickering. F&L did address above, but he still lurks quite a bit. I still see my favorite and very infomrative posters on a regular basis: Thrifty, RHD, AZ, EFB, and plenty of others.

My feelings aren't hurt. I responded to one post you made, stated several examples of why I feel the way I feel and you've spent a dozen posts twisting my words around and your latest posts twisted your own words around. My issue is you love to twist words around and then have a 50 post debate over and over. And go to almost any page in this thread over the last six weeks and you've done it then too. You probably have 20 posts alone in this thread arguing about Ray Rice being top 3 vs top 5 one year and totally missing the general overall point of the debate with Rice.

Now I'm participating in one of these overblown way too many posts debates and I'm contributing to the mess of this thread. I'm going to try and stop though.

 

[squistion]

Exactly. I encourage those of you that are new to this thread this year to go back a couple hundred pages and spend a hour reading some of the quality posts. Also, think before you post here. Not every thought in your brain has to be added to this thread. In the past, F&L and SSOG have tried to answer most if not all questions. The volume of posts has been so high, its nearly impossible to keep up.

I can't speak for everyone, but I know I'm frustrated by the loss of those two posters in this thread. They've added high quality content to this thread for years, and earned the respect of many around here.

Not isulting you at all. But I don't quite get this logic. This is the best thread on the board. I don't know how anyone can read the general board, then complain about this thread. It is night and day, based on the number of insults, uninformative posts, AC questions, hyperbole, overreactions, and number of warnings issued out on a daily basis. If the top dogs are leaving this thread, they are not going to the general board, or any other forums that I am aware of - this is the best. Maybe GD, and R. Wreck and I did "bicker" over less than a page's worth of posts, but why is that such a big deal? I don't think anyones feelings were hurt, and while some may find it annoying, we were on topic and I think all three of us made good points and valid arguments.

Lastly, as far as the top dogs leaving, I don't think that is the case. I have only been here for a year, if you include my lurking, but I still see the same names. SSOG said he got a 2nd job, he is not updating his rankings, so I doubt he left because of any bickering. F&L did address above, but he still lurks quite a bit. I still see my favorite and very infomrative posters on a regular basis: Thrifty, RHD, AZ, EFB, and plenty of others.

My feelings aren't hurt. I responded to one post you made, stated several examples of why I feel the way I feel and you've spent a dozen posts twisting my words around and your latest posts twisted your own words around. My issue is you love to twist words around and then have a 50 post debate over and over. And go to almost any page in this thread over the last six weeks and you've done it then too. You probably have 20 posts alone in this thread arguing about Ray Rice being top 3 vs top 5 one year and totally missing the general overall point of the debate with Rice.

Now I'm participating in one of these overblown way too many posts debates and I'm contributing to the mess of this thread. I'm going to try and stop though.

That also is my perception.

 

[Concept Coop]

That also is my perception.

Thank you for being honest. I honestly appreciate it. I really enjoy this thread, and don't want to hinder it. But if I am a common denominator and am making it any less enjoyable for others, I don't mind being more of a lurker. But, can you please help me understand? Using this example, what words did I twist? And Wreck, misunderstandings are rarely the fault of one party. Maybe what you perceive to be twisting your words, is me not understanding what your point is, or vise versa. Just because I don't value Rice top 5, or value late 1st rounders as much as you, doesn't mean I "don't get it."

 

[squistion]

That also is my perception.

Thank you for being honest. I honestly appreciate it. I really enjoy this thread, and don't want to hinder it. But if I am a common denominator and am making it any less enjoyable for others, I don't mind being more of a lurker. But, can you please help me understand? Using this example, what words did I twist? And Wreck, misunderstandings are rarely the fault of one party. Maybe what you perceive to be twisting your words, is me not understanding what your point is, or vise versa. Just because I don't value Rice top 5, or value late 1st rounders as much as you, doesn't mean I "don't get it."

I have had you on ignore for quite awhile, so I can't give you any recent specifics. I honesty think you have some good points to make, but you have a tendency to It just appears that you are arguing over some of the finer points that really don't add anything to the discussion. Please don't misunderstand me. It is not that I want you to stop posting. It is just that at a certain point the discussion goes well beyond what it should IMO and that has been my issue here.

 

[Concept Coop]

I have had you on ignore for quite awhile, so I can't give you any recent specifics. I honesty think you have some good points to make, but you have a tendency to It just appears that you are arguing over some of the finer points that really don't add anything to the discussion. Please don't misunderstand me. It is not that I want you to stop posting. It is just that at a certain point the discussion goes well beyond what it should IMO and that has been my issue here.

Fair enough. I do have a "debate team" mentality. I genuinely enjoy it and assume those that I am talking to also have something to gain from the conversation we are having. I have been a regular of the internets for some time now and have honestly never had any issues, but I will watch it. Thanks.

 

[Concept Coop]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone.

Back on topic:

What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

 

[I was in the pool]

I say Jackson's stats fall 10-20% with a QB outside the top 10 in the NFL.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone. Back on topic:What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

We can look back a few pages to right before the trade deadliine for good discussion of this. SSOG argued he could be more of a target hog in Seattle, for example. I don't think Jackson is one-dimensional at all. He has been an excellent deep threat to compliment Rivers, but I think he can be a possession receiver if put into that role. I would be optimistic if he went to the Redskins give the total dearth of talent there. While Grossman is a poor NFL QB, he is a gunslinger who will create points; if Shanahan drafts someone, there is strong likelihood of productivity as well, given his track record with QBs. Of course there are other advantageous landing spots as well, as well as being franchised (or re-upped) by the Chargers.I don't know what to think of the Titans as a possibility. That would be a worse situation than Seattle.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone. Back on topic:What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

I think Jackson is certainly a talent, but with the SD offense not missing a beat without him in the line-up it does suggest a lot of his production is situational. Of course that doesn't mean there needs to be a big drop in his production somewhere else - in fact a change of scenary could mean more targets.I don't see Tennessee signing him with Britt's emergence but landing in Washington would likely be a good thing for him provided they bring in an adequate QB. Very quietly Santana Moss finished as a top 12 WR (ppr) this season, even though McNabb didn't exactly light the world on fire. Moss is probably better served as a complimentary WR at this stage and Jackson would likely be the focal point of a system that has yielded results. Look at what a similiar WR like Rod Smith did for years in Denver.

 

[Instinctive]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone. Back on topic:What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

I don't think he's one dimensional at all.Just because he has incredible deep ball talents doesn't mean he can't make those possession type plays (which i assume you are referring to). There have been a few games where on 3rd and 4, 3rd and 6, etc...VJax was the guy they went to for that all important short/intermediate route that needs to be caught.I would compare him to Hakeem Nicks. Actually, I would compare Hakeem Nicks to him - VJax was doin it for quite some time before Nicks was even drafted. If there is any way to get VJax now - and doubt there is, we all had our shot early on this year (on a side note, it seems every league I needed some WR help and wanted him, THRIFTY already owned him haha)I think he'll be fine anywhere, and might even be better. Can you imagine the guy signing with Indy, sort of like Moss going to NE? What about St. Louis, who showed interest in him this season? Cleveland to be Colt's playmaker?There are a ton of places he would be great in, and I can't really think of one where he wouldn't be productive (ok, maybe Carolina )

 

[Go deep]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone.

Back on topic:

What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

I dont think he is too one dimensional, but i dont think he is a WR1 on most/any other team other than SD. Like i have said before, its no coincidence that any WR that plays in SD has an insanely high YPC. That doesnt mean Jackson is just a product of the system, but he isnt talented enough to be a #1 on talent alone. Im trying to get WR1 value for him in one of my dynasty leagues, but im not having any luck. Dont tell my leaguemates, but i would be willing to take less.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone.

Back on topic:

What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

I dont think he is too one dimensional, but i dont think he is a WR1 on most/any other team other than SD. Like i have said before, its no coincidence that any WR that plays in SD has an insanely high YPC. That doesnt mean Jackson is just a product of the system, but he isnt talented enough to be a #1 on talent alone. Im trying to get WR1 value for him in one of my dynasty leagues, but im not having any luck. Dont tell my leaguemates, but i would be willing to take less.

how so?

 

[Concept Coop]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone. Back on topic:What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

We can look back a few pages to right before the trade deadliine for good discussion of this. SSOG argued he could be more of a target hog in Seattle, for example. I don't think Jackson is one-dimensional at all. He has been an excellent deep threat to compliment Rivers, but I think he can be a possession receiver if put into that role. I would be optimistic if he went to the Redskins give the total dearth of talent there. While Grossman is a poor NFL QB, he is a gunslinger who will create points; if Shanahan drafts someone, there is strong likelihood of productivity as well, given his track record with QBs. Of course there are other advantageous landing spots as well, as well as being franchised (or re-upped) by the Chargers.I don't know what to think of the Titans as a possibility. That would be a worse situation than Seattle.

I think a lot of SSOG's points could have been made for Brandon Marshall before he left Denver, Cutler and Orton. Not that they are not valid, or won't be proven to be true. But I am having a hard time placing his value, in a vacuum, outside of SD.

 

[Concept Coop]

I don't think he's one dimensional at all.Just because he has incredible deep ball talents doesn't mean he can't make those possession type plays (which i assume you are referring to). There have been a few games where on 3rd and 4, 3rd and 6, etc...VJax was the guy they went to for that all important short/intermediate route that needs to be caught.

His catch numbers have scared me - they have never been great. He gets his yards, mostly, through big chunks. That is why I worry that going to a team not capable or willing to air it out as much, might hurt his production. Then, I worry that he didn't get targets, because Gates was there is might be the best itermediate receiver the NFL.I do think he is one dimensional, that that one aspect of his game is exceptional. He doesn't seem to be able to beat corners in tight space, and seems to need room to get speed or burst. When the ball is in the air, he is great. But not all many teams can put it in the air like SD has.

 

[Go deep]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone.

Back on topic:

What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

I dont think he is too one dimensional, but i dont think he is a WR1 on most/any other team other than SD. Like i have said before, its no coincidence that any WR that plays in SD has an insanely high YPC. That doesnt mean Jackson is just a product of the system, but he isnt talented enough to be a #1 on talent alone. Im trying to get WR1 value for him in one of my dynasty leagues, but im not having any luck. Dont tell my leaguemates, but i would be willing to take less.

how so?

Honestly, not many WR's are, so its not really a knock against him.

 

[Go deep]

I don't think he's one dimensional at all.

Just because he has incredible deep ball talents doesn't mean he can't make those possession type plays (which i assume you are referring to). There have been a few games where on 3rd and 4, 3rd and 6, etc...VJax was the guy they went to for that all important short/intermediate route that needs to be caught.

His catch numbers have scared me - they have never been great. He gets his yards, mostly, through big chunks. That is why I worry that going to a team not capable or willing to air it out as much, might hurt his production. Then, I worry that he didn't get targets, because Gates was there is might be the best itermediate receiver the NFL.I do think he is one dimensional, that that one aspect of his game is exceptional. He doesn't seem to be able to beat corners in tight space, and seems to need room to get speed or burst. When the ball is in the air, he is great. But not all many teams can put it in the air like SD has.

This is what i have noticed. Im not sure if its his route running, or just his inabilty to get seperation. He has a good size/speed combo, and good hands, but i think having an accurate QB throwing him the ball, and Gates drawing alot of underneath coverage has masked some of his shortcomings. I dont think he will ever be a high catch guy for the reason stated, but if he ends up in a decent situation, he has the phyiscal tools to be a good WR.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone. Back on topic:What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

We can look back a few pages to right before the trade deadliine for good discussion of this. SSOG argued he could be more of a target hog in Seattle, for example. I don't think Jackson is one-dimensional at all. He has been an excellent deep threat to compliment Rivers, but I think he can be a possession receiver if put into that role. I would be optimistic if he went to the Redskins give the total dearth of talent there. While Grossman is a poor NFL QB, he is a gunslinger who will create points; if Shanahan drafts someone, there is strong likelihood of productivity as well, given his track record with QBs. Of course there are other advantageous landing spots as well, as well as being franchised (or re-upped) by the Chargers.I don't know what to think of the Titans as a possibility. That would be a worse situation than Seattle.

I think a lot of SSOG's points could have been made for Brandon Marshall before he left Denver, Cutler and Orton. Not that they are not valid, or won't be proven to be true. But I am having a hard time placing his value, in a vacuum, outside of SD.

Marshall in Denver was the opposite (statwise) of Vincent Jackson in San Diego though. Marshall was totally dependant on an outrageous number of targets as he generally hauled in over 100 balls but had a very low ypc. Jackson did much with very little on the other hand.Marshall struggled this season due to constantly being double teamed (which is why Bess had such a nice season) and becuase Henne struggled big time. Jackson could end up in a bad situation as Marshall did, so it is possible that he struggles as well, but I don't think we can draw the conlussion that Jackson will struggle just because Marshall did.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone.

Back on topic:

What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

We can look back a few pages to right before the trade deadliine for good discussion of this. SSOG argued he could be more of a target hog in Seattle, for example. I don't think Jackson is one-dimensional at all. He has been an excellent deep threat to compliment Rivers, but I think he can be a possession receiver if put into that role. I would be optimistic if he went to the Redskins give the total dearth of talent there. While Grossman is a poor NFL QB, he is a gunslinger who will create points; if Shanahan drafts someone, there is strong likelihood of productivity as well, given his track record with QBs. Of course there are other advantageous landing spots as well, as well as being franchised (or re-upped) by the Chargers.I don't know what to think of the Titans as a possibility. That would be a worse situation than Seattle.

I think a lot of SSOG's points could have been made for Brandon Marshall before he left Denver, Cutler and Orton. Not that they are not valid, or won't be proven to be true. But I am having a hard time placing his value, in a vacuum, outside of SD.

I think this makes sense when you consider that a WR's - more than any other skill position - production is largely situational. QB play, scheme, a secondary WR to draw coverage, o-line play, defensive play (does his team need to thrwo because its behind) are all very vital to whether or not a WR will have fantasy stats. Talent is important, but even the most talented WR (say Larry Fitzgerald) will struggle when those other factors work against him.

 

[Concept Coop]

Marshall in Denver was the opposite (statwise) of Vincent Jackson though. Marshall was totally dependant on an outrageous number of targets as he generally hauled in over 100 balls but had a very low ypc. Jackson did much with very little on the other hand.Marshall struggled this season due to constantly being double teamed (which is why Bess had such a nice season) and becuase Henne struggled big time. Jackson could end up in a bad situation as Marshall did, so it is possible that he struggles as well, but I don't think we can draw the conlussion that Jackson will struggle just because Marshall did.

To imply such was not my intention. I am just drawing parallels to the "target" points that SSOG made. Granted, Marshall had the targets and it was perceived that he have them duplicated, and Jackson doesn't and it is perceived that he can. But, being a "target hog" because you are the only weapon is not always a good thing. As you said, double teams are much more likely.Jackson seems easier to take out of a game than Marshall. Unlike my opinion of Jackson, Marshall can get open in short space - he is quick enough to do so. Marshall also moves better with the ball in his hands, after the catch. I think there are more ways to get Brandon Marshall the ball than there are to do the same for Jackson, whether it be bubble screens, hitches, or other short routes. Saying all this, Marshall was still limited in what he could do in the Miami offense.

 

[Redmen62]

I would argue that Bowe had a more dominant rookie season than either Bryant of Fitz.

Even if you subtract the game Bryant got hurt in, his numbers would still have only prorated to 55 rec, 684 yards, 8 TD's.

Fitzgerald had 58 rec, 780 yards, 8 TD's in his rookie season.

Bowe had 70 rec, 995 yards, 5 TD's in his rookie season.

As far as not expecting much over the next two years from this class of WR's, im not sure about that. I would temper my expectations for their rookie years, but i expect at least Green to put up a 1000 yard season by year 2(and maybe year 1 depending where he goes). I wouldnt be surprised to see at least one of the other guys to be a 1000 yard WR by their 2nd year either(my money is on Blackmon).

I'm not sure how you're arriving at those numbers for Dez... Including the game he got hurt, Bryant finished with 45 catches for 561 yards and 6 TDs. He missed the last four games after being put on IR (again, I'm including the game he got hurt AND the game he missed in week twelve with the previous ankle injury.) Pro-rating his numbers over the twelve games before he was put on IR for a full 16 games, he would finish with 60 catches for 746 yards and 8 TDs. Throw in the two return touchdowns he already earned, and you're talking about 10 TDs.

If you use the method you suggested (subtracting the game Bryant got hurt in, and I'm STILL leaving in the game he missed entirely in week twelve) then you're talking about pro-rated numbers of 65 catches, 814 yards, and 8.7 receiving TDs (plus the two return TDs he'd already earned.)

Also, Bryant did not miss week 12, he just didnt catch any passes.

Good point, I'd forgotten about that debacle....

 

[plyka]

You can argue that these years aren't representative of the average draft class, but this sort of phenomenon is not uncommon at the skill positions. In general, I think the talent gap between a RB or WR who's picked in the top 10 or the mid-late first round is not necessarily huge. This is something to keep in mind when you hear things like "AJ Green is clearly the 1.01 rookie pick." Green might well be a fine prospect, but don't sleep on the likes of Justin Blackmon and Julio Jones just because they might be drafted 5-15 spots lower. I'd say that they're all within the same tier and that within tiers, the difference in talent level tend to be minimal.

I think Blackmon in the right situation will be one of the best of the class (can you imagine him landing in Atlanta? I read that the other day and think he would benefit a lot from a landing spot like that). Green is the #1 guy to me - STL would be nice - but Julio Jones is going to struggle out of the gate in my opinion. Over time he may catch up, but I see a much longer time line for him to get productive as a WR3 or WR4 in fantasy.

It is a rare WR that comes right out of the gates and is a stud. Typically they take the Dwayne Bowe route and despite their talent, kind of suck it up their first 2-3 years until they "get it." Bowe didn't really suck, but he wasn't a worldbeater either until the 2nd half of this year. It's the old 3-year WR breakout. Guys like Fitzgerald and Dez Bryant are a rare breed, guys who can come out and dominate right off the bat.

I wouldn't expect much from any of the WRs this year or next. AJ Green and Julio are the dominant talents coming out, but we will see how long it takes for them to show that dominance in the NFL.

I would argue that Bowe had a more dominant rookie season than either Bryant of Fitz.Even if you subtract the game Bryant got hurt in, his numbers would still have only prorated to 55 rec, 684 yards, 8 TD's.

Fitzgerald had 58 rec, 780 yards, 8 TD's in his rookie season.

Bowe had 70 rec, 995 yards, 5 TD's in his rookie season.

As far as not expecting much over the next two years from this class of WR's, im not sure about that. I would temper my expectations for their rookie years, but i expect at least Green to put up a 1000 yard season by year 2(and maybe year 1 depending where he goes). I wouldnt be surprised to see at least one of the other guys to be a 1000 yard WR by their 2nd year either(my money is on Blackmon).

I'm not sure why you continue to use total points all the time. Especially with wr, this makes no sense. Dez didn't just miss one game, also there were a number of games early in the season when he didn't get much playing time, in which case you wouldn't have started him. Once dez got fully healthy and on the field he became a stud fantasy producer, until picking up injuries once again. Bowe played all games his rookie year if memory serves, and while his production was better than it was in his second year, I don't consider bowe's rookie year as his breakout year. This is probably why I was able to draft bowe at 60 overall in all my leagues this year. Dez bryant in a startup draft next year should easily go in the top 30.

 

[Ernol]

You can argue that these years aren't representative of the average draft class, but this sort of phenomenon is not uncommon at the skill positions. In general, I think the talent gap between a RB or WR who's picked in the top 10 or the mid-late first round is not necessarily huge. This is something to keep in mind when you hear things like "AJ Green is clearly the 1.01 rookie pick." Green might well be a fine prospect, but don't sleep on the likes of Justin Blackmon and Julio Jones just because they might be drafted 5-15 spots lower. I'd say that they're all within the same tier and that within tiers, the difference in talent level tend to be minimal.

I think Blackmon in the right situation will be one of the best of the class (can you imagine him landing in Atlanta? I read that the other day and think he would benefit a lot from a landing spot like that). Green is the #1 guy to me - STL would be nice - but Julio Jones is going to struggle out of the gate in my opinion. Over time he may catch up, but I see a much longer time line for him to get productive as a WR3 or WR4 in fantasy.

It is a rare WR that comes right out of the gates and is a stud. Typically they take the Dwayne Bowe route and despite their talent, kind of suck it up their first 2-3 years until they "get it." Bowe didn't really suck, but he wasn't a worldbeater either until the 2nd half of this year. It's the old 3-year WR breakout. Guys like Fitzgerald and Dez Bryant are a rare breed, guys who can come out and dominate right off the bat.

I wouldn't expect much from any of the WRs this year or next. AJ Green and Julio are the dominant talents coming out, but we will see how long it takes for them to show that dominance in the NFL.

I would argue that Bowe had a more dominant rookie season than either Bryant of Fitz.Even if you subtract the game Bryant got hurt in, his numbers would still have only prorated to 55 rec, 684 yards, 8 TD's.

Fitzgerald had 58 rec, 780 yards, 8 TD's in his rookie season.

Bowe had 70 rec, 995 yards, 5 TD's in his rookie season.

As far as not expecting much over the next two years from this class of WR's, im not sure about that. I would temper my expectations for their rookie years, but i expect at least Green to put up a 1000 yard season by year 2(and maybe year 1 depending where he goes). I wouldnt be surprised to see at least one of the other guys to be a 1000 yard WR by their 2nd year either(my money is on Blackmon).

I'm not sure why you continue to use total points all the time. Especially with wr, this makes no sense. Dez didn't just miss one game, also there were a number of games early in the season when he didn't get much playing time, in which case you wouldn't have started him. Once dez got fully healthy and on the field he became a stud fantasy producer, until picking up injuries once again. Bowe played all games his rookie year if memory serves, and while his production was better than it was in his second year, I don't consider bowe's rookie year as his breakout year. This is probably why I was able to draft bowe at 60 overall in all my leagues this year. Dez bryant in a startup draft next year should easily go in the top 30.

I’m getting Dez’s prorated stats at 64/795/9, which is pretty good considering he didn’t play as much at the beginning of the year. The numbers may not be stellar, but I would think Dez will make the top 15 in most PPR leagues next year (or at least I think he belongs there). On the other hand, Bowe’s first year was awfully impressive as well looking at the game logs. In year 2, he did even better going 86/1022/7 and was regularly drafted in the top 15 after that year. It was his third year that he busted. This is now his 4th year. From what I recall, he started out as a decent startable WR in year 1, became a megastud WR in year 2, busted in year 3, and became a megastud again in year 4. Bowe’s progression (minus the bust 3rd year) would be a good comparable for Dez. If Dez follows the progression (minus the bust 3rd year), he might be viewed as the No. 1 WR by the end of year 3.

 

[Go deep]

You can argue that these years aren't representative of the average draft class, but this sort of phenomenon is not uncommon at the skill positions. In general, I think the talent gap between a RB or WR who's picked in the top 10 or the mid-late first round is not necessarily huge. This is something to keep in mind when you hear things like "AJ Green is clearly the 1.01 rookie pick." Green might well be a fine prospect, but don't sleep on the likes of Justin Blackmon and Julio Jones just because they might be drafted 5-15 spots lower. I'd say that they're all within the same tier and that within tiers, the difference in talent level tend to be minimal.

I think Blackmon in the right situation will be one of the best of the class (can you imagine him landing in Atlanta? I read that the other day and think he would benefit a lot from a landing spot like that). Green is the #1 guy to me - STL would be nice - but Julio Jones is going to struggle out of the gate in my opinion. Over time he may catch up, but I see a much longer time line for him to get productive as a WR3 or WR4 in fantasy.

It is a rare WR that comes right out of the gates and is a stud. Typically they take the Dwayne Bowe route and despite their talent, kind of suck it up their first 2-3 years until they "get it." Bowe didn't really suck, but he wasn't a worldbeater either until the 2nd half of this year. It's the old 3-year WR breakout. Guys like Fitzgerald and Dez Bryant are a rare breed, guys who can come out and dominate right off the bat.

I wouldn't expect much from any of the WRs this year or next. AJ Green and Julio are the dominant talents coming out, but we will see how long it takes for them to show that dominance in the NFL.

I would argue that Bowe had a more dominant rookie season than either Bryant of Fitz.Even if you subtract the game Bryant got hurt in, his numbers would still have only prorated to 55 rec, 684 yards, 8 TD's.

Fitzgerald had 58 rec, 780 yards, 8 TD's in his rookie season.

Bowe had 70 rec, 995 yards, 5 TD's in his rookie season.

As far as not expecting much over the next two years from this class of WR's, im not sure about that. I would temper my expectations for their rookie years, but i expect at least Green to put up a 1000 yard season by year 2(and maybe year 1 depending where he goes). I wouldnt be surprised to see at least one of the other guys to be a 1000 yard WR by their 2nd year either(my money is on Blackmon).

I'm not sure why you continue to use total points all the time. Especially with wr, this makes no sense. Dez didn't just miss one game, also there were a number of games early in the season when he didn't get much playing time, in which case you wouldn't have started him. Once dez got fully healthy and on the field he became a stud fantasy producer, until picking up injuries once again. Bowe played all games his rookie year if memory serves, and while his production was better than it was in his second year, I don't consider bowe's rookie year as his breakout year. This is probably why I was able to draft bowe at 60 overall in all my leagues this year. Dez bryant in a startup draft next year should easily go in the top 30.

Im not sure what you are talking about when you say that I "continue to use total points all the time". In this case, i was just responding to a poster who said Dwayne Bowe "sucked it up his first two years", and Fitz and Bryant "dominated right off the bat".

Those are not even Bryants totals, i gave his numbers prorated over a 16 game season. As far as Dez not getting much playing time in the begining of the season, he had his season best in targets in the first game of the season. Im also not sure about Dez being on a tear until he went on IR. Over his last 3 games(before his injury), he caught 4 passes for 22 yards and a TD.

Bowe did play all 16 games as a rookie, not sure why that matters when i compare him to Bryants numbers prorated over a 16 game season though. Also, Bowes rookie year was not better than his 2nd year. After a 70 rec, 995 yard, 5 TD rookie year, he had a 86 rec, 1022 yard, 7 TD season. The reason you were able to draft Bowe 60 overall in your leagues was because of his 3rd season(last year) when he was suspended for PEDs and played hurt most the year.

Dez likely will go in the top 30 on a dynasty start-up next year, but i would bet so did Bowe after his rookie year, or pretty close to it.

 

[renesauz]

Thanks for the PM's, guys. Good to know I don't offend everyone. Back on topic:What kind of value does Vincent Jackson have outside of SD? Say a team the Redskins or Titans pick him up, is his talent enough to produce without a guy like Rivers throwing him the ball, or is he too one-dimensional to be a WR1 wihtout the SD offense?

Lot of varied responses to this, but put me in the minority that feels his numbers could go up. I see a talented #1 or 1B receiver who's played on a team with a QB who generally spreads the ball around. As a #1 with a lesser QB, I could see a significant uptick in his targets even if his ypc and other metrics go down a bit.But I'm glad to see how many are cautious....it'll make him an easier target to land this offseason

 

[ctt8410]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

 

[thriftyrocker]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

It's free content if anyone was wondering.The only one I double taked on was Forte at 11. And calling Felix a "feature back".

 

[GreatLakesMike]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

It's free content if anyone was wondering.The only one I double taked on was Forte at 11. And calling Felix a "feature back".

To be fair:

Among feature backs, Felix remains one of the biggest injury risks..

Forte at 11 is fine with me. I actually like Forte over Mendy, and if it wasn't for McFadden's upside, I might move Forte ahead of him. Forte does nothing great, but everything well.

 

[duaneok66]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

It's free content if anyone was wondering.The only one I double taked on was Forte at 11. And calling Felix a "feature back".

Felix - "a feature back" . . .

now that's funny . . .

 

[Fear & Loathing]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

It's free content if anyone was wondering.The only one I double taked on was Forte at 11. And calling Felix a "feature back".

Felix - "a feature back" . . .

now that's funny . . .

He averaged 18 touches per game over the final six weeks, and that number would have been even higher had he not missed snaps in a couple of different games with nicks and scrapes -- which was pretty much the point of the comment.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

It's free content if anyone was wondering.The only one I double taked on was Forte at 11. And calling Felix a "feature back".

Felix - "a feature back" . . .

now that's funny . . .

He averaged 18 touches per game over the final six weeks, and that number would have been even higher had he not missed snaps in a couple of different games with nicks and scrapes -- which was pretty much the point of the comment.

He was the Cowboys featured back towards the end of the season - and its a pretty safe bet he will be next year as well. Sure the Cowboys run a form of RBBC but almost every team does now and there is usually a lead back (Or a back that is featured) in those senarios.Attacking semantics instead of discussing the players and debating the actual rankings, doesn't really do anyone any good.

 

[thriftyrocker]

He averaged 18 touches per game over the final six weeks, and that number would have been even higher had he not missed snaps in a couple of different games with nicks and scrapes -- which was pretty much the point of the comment.

You had a feeling McFadden would break through in 2010 and was a better back to own than Bush. It seems this situation is pretty similar. Assuming Barber is gone, a lot of people will hype Choice assuming Felix won't be able to handle the workload - both getting nicked (or worse injuries) and reduced YPC. Obviously Felix is more valuable than Choice but do you see this as a situation where Felix will take the job and run with it, or will Choice have at least flex value (more value than Bush did this year)?FWIW, they also averaged about 8 less pass attempts per game while Romo was out, and Choice averaged 15.3 touches per game the 3 games Barber was out. Obviously small sample size on Choice - even more inflated by the Indy game.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I think Jones will get about 18 touches a game next year with Choice being the change of pace guy with anywhere from 5-12 touches depending on the flow of the game. I don't think Barber will be back. Choice will be a high upside pick due to the injury history of Jones.

 

[Concept Coop]

F&L has updated his RB rankings at rotoworld.

It's free content if anyone was wondering.The only one I double taked on was Forte at 11. And calling Felix a "feature back".

Felix - "a feature back" . . .

now that's funny . . .

He averaged 18 touches per game over the final six weeks, and that number would have been even higher had he not missed snaps in a couple of different games with nicks and scrapes -- which was pretty much the point of the comment.