This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
No. I think 2009 will go down as his career-high for fumbles. I like that the Vikings are going to explore mechanical solutions this offseason, so there's reason to believe he can at least improve in that area. I just don't see it as something that will affect his fantasy value enough to hold it against him.
I don't like it, to be honest. I suppose it makes sense if you think Gore will produce the same as Peterson on average for the rest of his career (a bad assumption- Gore has averaged 14.94 ppg since earning the starting job, while Peterson's WORST season is 15.56 ppg, and his career average is 16.91). Still, Peterson is 2 years younger (and has less injury history), which means Peterson will get you 2 extra years of elite production compared to Gore. Is the 1.01 pick worth two seasons of uberstud production? Maybe. Is it worth 2 seasons of uberstud production *AND* 2-3 years where you get an extra 2 ppg from your #1 RB? I certainly don't think so.The only way I'd like that trade is if there was a guy at 1.01 that I really, really loved (not just compared to the player that season, but compared to all NFL players coming into the league). From what I've seen of the college players so far, if there is such a talent (and I'm not sure there is), it's Dez Bryant, not C.J. Spiller.I'm a Gore owner with the #4 rookie draft pick this year, and I think there's a very good chance that I wind up with C.J. Spiller with that selection. I would gladly trade both of those players for Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson, Maurice Jones-Drew, or Ray Rice. Gore's probably the #5 back in my rankings, but the gap between #5 and #4 is just that big.HAM said:
Peterson's 24. Players don't "lose a step" at 24. Doesn't happen. A far more likely explanation for his drop in ypc is injury, supporting cast, or just plain old random chance.
i really dont feel the need to get into a discussion on where or not ap lost 'a half of step'.. i have nothing to back that up other than my own eyes. he had many 4-5 yard carries that he'd normally pop into a 15-20 yard run. again, i dont have the numbers but i am assuming that a decent percentage of his touchdowns came from inside the 7 yard line. will farve be back? if not, will they make the move for donovan? who will consistantly bring that team into the redzone? (besides ap himself)in my leagues scoring system, gore was only 24 points behing peterson in the regular season.. and thats with gore missing 2 full games and 1 carry in a 3rd game. scoring system is 1pt every 20 yrds rush/rec 3 point bonus at 100yds, 6 for a td and minus 3 for fumbles.i can understand the dez bryant over spiller but i just do not want to go that route. i can also see the argument side of ryan matthews depending on where he ends up.. best/dwyer never even crossed my mind. but imo spiller is the man that i've fallen for and have that gut instinct that hes going to be a quality tier two back with the ability to maybe even crack top 6 by next seasons end. its very tough to make a move for a guy after he blows up. thanks for the quality input!
I'm not questioning whether he looked slow this season (his career low ypc suggests he did), I'm just saying that when a 24-year old RB looks slower than he used to, the reason is never "because he lost a step". "Losing a step" implies a deterioration of physical skills with age, and there's no way that father time is already catching up to a guy at age 24.HAM said:
understood. Thanks ssog, I do believe that there might have been a minor injury then that might have impacted him through the season. And like one mentioned before, offseason will heal him.
Technically speaking, "losing a step" is merely a statement that he is not as fast as he was previously. The statement by itself makes no implication on the cause or whether or not it's reversible.Just saying
Nah. The implication is that it's lost and not reversible.Technically speaking, "losing a step" is merely a statement that he is not as fast as he was previously. The statement by itself makes no implication on the cause or whether or not it's reversible.Just saying
I'm assuming the lack of response means the bolded is probably true.As for this whole Adrian Peterson debate, I think he's more valuable than Gore plus the 1.1 pick, however if you really like somebody in this draft class I guess its not a terrible deal. Personally I think this is a weak draft class, there will be some very good players in it, but no sure things.
Yup. IMO, that's the difference between the phrase "Peterson was a step slow" and "Peterson lost a step". The first implies the possibility of getting that step back, while the second implies no such possibility. We aren't talking about whether Peterson simply "misplaced a step", we're talking about whether he's flat-out LOST one. And he certainly hasn't. I don't mean to sound like an ostrich or anything, but Peterson's fine.Nah. The implication is that it's lost and not reversible.Technically speaking, "losing a step" is merely a statement that he is not as fast as he was previously. The statement by itself makes no implication on the cause or whether or not it's reversible.Just saying
so, do you think that ADP was a step slower than norm ( norm for him ) for the majority of the year? I feel like I have a good eye for these types of things and if I'm way off base I should get my eyes checked out! Even with his half of step that was misplaced (I took out the lost), he's steps ahead of 95% of active running backs I am still a huge ap fan and would love to see him drop a 1800yd 20td season next yearYup. IMO, that's the difference between the phrase "Peterson was a step slow" and "Peterson lost a step". The first implies the possibility of getting that step back, while the second implies no such possibility. We aren't talking about whether Peterson simply "misplaced a step", we're talking about whether he's flat-out LOST one. And he certainly hasn't. I don't mean to sound like an ostrich or anything, but Peterson's fine.Nah. The implication is that it's lost and not reversible.Technically speaking, "losing a step" is merely a statement that he is not as fast as he was previously. The statement by itself makes no implication on the cause or whether or not it's reversible.Just saying
It might be a decent time to sell on Wayne, provided you get quality in return. He's the same age as Steve Smith, but while Smiff's age is always factored into any value discussions, I don't think Wayne's is.I tend to be pretty easy-going about older WRs, but at the same time, over the years, I've recognized that my attitude leaves me in the minority in a big way. Last offseason, I owned Randy Moss and I was looking into what his market value was, and I was shocked to discover that some people didn't even value Moss has highly as a high first round pick. Yeah, he was 32, but it was Randy Moss! Judging from what the Moss owners have been saying in this thread recently, now that he's 33 he's pretty much impossible to move. You wouldn't think you'd ever mention a first-ballot HoFer coming off of a second place fantasy finish and "impossible to move" in the same sentence, but people are so paranoid about older players that that's the way it is. And in a year or two, that's how it will be for Reggie Wayne.
atsSelfOnBack: smiley...
You were also giving flak because Wayne had reached the 1200 and 10 plateaus so few times. He reaches those levels despite the slow 2nd half, and today you count that as a negative :HeadScratch:. Also, he reached 100 receptions for the 2nd time in 3 years.If you read back to the VJax vs. Reggie Wayne discussions from early November (starting off with post #5000), you'll see that I was raising "exit value" concerns over Reggie Wayne even before his production started tapering off. I also took a lot of flak for calling Wayne a "1200/10 guy" when he was in the middle of his hot streak, so I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that Reggie Wayne finished the season with... 1264 yards and 10 scores. Turns out, Wayne is who we thought he was. Now where's that darn
On the other side, what did we learn about VJAX after his hot streak ended? Gates got hot later in the year, and his production fell off. Didn't break 1200 yards. Didn't break 10 TDs. Didn't break 70 receptions (let alone reach a level that would add PPR value). His final stats don't look much better than 2008 when he wasn't considered a #1 WR. Plus we learned - while not a full on knucklehead - he's got some issues that might limit his potential.Wayne's got extra issues too. His playoff performance was bad. We can blame that on Revis and tweaking the knee, but those are the last thoughts we have of him for 6 or 7 more months - running the wrong route then dropping the ball on 4th down. Garcon improved a lot; not to the point where owners will think about torch passing, but enough that you can start to prepare for that.
I'm not counting Wayne's 1200/10 totals as a negative. There's nothing wrong with being a 1200/10 guy. About half of my dynasty top 10 are guys who I consider 1200/10 guys (Wayne, White, Colston, Desean, Sidney, etc). I'm not using the "1200/10" phrase as a term of derision, I'm simply using it to clearly demonstrate the difference between the guys who will reliably finish in the WR6-12 range and the guys who are uberstuds in a tier of their own (guys like Andre Johnson, who is a 1500/10 guy, or Fitzgerald, who's a 1400/12 guy). That's the difference between an aging asset like Wayne and an aging asset like Moss- they're both looking at a countdown on their career, but Moss always has the threat of throwing out an otherworldly season while he goes down (like his 1500/20 at 30 or his 1200/13 at 32). I would love to have a WR corps full of 1200/10 guys, but there's a big difference between the 1200/10 tier and the uberstuds (just like there's a big gap between Ray Rice at #4 and Frank Gore at #5 in the RB rankings).As for VJax... remember that he missed a game with injury. In terms of PPG, Wayne and VJax finished 8th and 9th. Pro-rate VJax's stats and he had 1250/10. Not only is his production better than Colston's, but I'd argue that VJax's talent level is also higher, and his situation is better, to boot. As I said from the very beginning, I wasn't ranking VJax at #4 because of his production to date, I was ranking him that high based on his unbelievable talent and incredibly diverse skillset. As I've said all along, he's Desean Jackson between the 20s and Larry Fitzgerald in the money zone.
If that were true, don't you think he would've had a great season by now?He has been in the league for five seasons and his career highs are 68 catches, 1157 yards, and 9 TDs.Jackson is a good player, but the push to anoint him a superstar seems premature.
I respect what SSOG has to say but also not really seeing V. Jax as high as he has him. I had a team with a slew of #2 WR types and needed a true #1. Was trying to decide between V Jax and Roddy, felt Roddy was the better target and moved Harvin & Garcon to acquire Roddy, don't think I would of done the same for V Jax. .
Keep in mind I am thinking PPR and you are thinking No-PPR. The difference between Wayne and VJax in 2009 is pretty significant even if you pro-rate to inflate VJax and ignore that Wayne played through injury during more or less the entire 2nd half of the year. Even in nonPPR Wayne still had a marginally better year any way you slice it so your bet that VJax will have a better year 2 of the next 3 years is almost lost.
My point in bringing up Colston and saying "even Jennings" is that they are a tier lower in F&L's rankings. They probably go a couple rounds later in fantasy startup drafts. They're probably much cheaper to trade for. But if you look at the production so far, they are as good or better. And if you look at the situation, it is as good or better. And if you look at the upside, it is not much different.I completely agree with you that VJax is more talented than Jennings and Colston. But all 3 are core players and I think the cost/value ratio for the other two are much better if you're buying. If your trading partner is treating VJax like a top 5 WR, I would buy someone else.Really don't think VJax's situation is better than Colston. Both are guaranteed high 60s in receptions and about 10 TDs. If either is going to break 85, it is Colston. He's done it before. I say this as someone who owns VJax in more leagues than he owns Colston (2:0).
Wouldn't have done it. ADP is close to untouchable in dynasty unless you're getting studs with expected long careers (like Calvin, Fitz, Rodgers, Rivers) or much more talent. Who knows how many years left Gore has. And I think the 1.1 rookie pick is always over-valued. Spiller could be McFadden.ok, I see here that I targeted this at F&L but I would also like to here some thoughts on this. I've been apart of these 'new' forums since day one as you can see from my profile. I've been away for some time but always kept my subscription. I post in the assistant coach but haven't really gotten any feedback, positive or negative. There's some very strong posters in this thread and I'm hoping you can help out. Thanks guys!dear f&lalright i posted this is in assistant coach, but would really like to see what you think after the recent depth vs stud talk..*12 team dynasty - standard yardage league - 1pt 20yds rush/rec 3 bonus at 100 - 6pts rush/rec td - 1pt 50yds passing 3 bonus at 300 - 4 passing td -neg 3 fumblue neg 2 int*i just traded away adrian peterson for frank gore and rookie pick 1.01 which i will be using on clifford junior.my team before the draft looks like this.rivers, v.youngf.gore, donald.brown, w.mcgahee, s.slatonl.fitzgerald, mark.clayton, d.heywardbeyj.witteneach team has up to 10 keepers and theres some good value wrs i could snag at pick 6 of the regular draft so im really not too worried about my depth there.i look at spiller and see an upside that could have him a tier 2 running back by years end depending on where he ends up. i love the way frank gore works and still has 4 years of pissed off running. i felt that the value was there to pull the trigger. just about everyone in my league thinks i drink to much and damaged my brain cells, im hoping to prove them wrong.
Desean Jackson had 63/1167/9 this season, while VJax had 68/1157/9... in one fewer game. He's certainly had a good enough season to warrant the Desean comparison, at the very least. The Fitzgerald comparison is based on his career rate stats in the red zone, which really are above reproach. Obviously I'm talking about VJax's potential rather than his production (if he was actually producing like Larsean FitzJackson then people wouldn't need me posting about VJax), but there's still plenty of production there.VJax was a small school WR widely viewed as a prospect coming into the league. He essentially sat his entire rookie season learning the position (only 3 receptions), but still managed a top 12 finish in his 4th year and a top 10 finish in his 5th year. You seem to imply that that's an awful long time for an elite player to break out, but look at the elite WRs right around him. Andre Johnson, who came from the biggest talent factory in college football and started from day 1, didn't finish higher than 18th until his SIXTH SEASON (although, in fairness, he was the top WR in the league in PPG in his 5th season). Miles Austin had 18 career receptions through 3 years before breaking out in his 4th year. Reggie Wayne was also a 1st round pick from The U, and he played with the best QB in the league to boot, and he didn't manage to "break out" until his 4th year, just like Jackson. Lots of studs took the long way around before finally earning stud status.
Is VJax's cost "top 5" right now? I sure as heck didn't think so, or else people wouldn't be looking at me crosswise every time I mentioned that I have VJax at #4 in my rankings.You know the real irony of the situation? Early in the season, when I traded for VJax in the first place, I was actually looking at the Jacksons, Colstons, Jenningses, and Whites of the world trying to add a WR in that range. You know why I traded for VJax? Because he was the guy with the best cost/value ratio (well, and because I've never liked Jennings).Anyway, my dynasty rankings are based on how good I think someone is and how I think they'll produce... not how cost effective they are. As a result, the fact that Colston or Jennings are cheaper means absolutely nothing. You agree that VJax is more talented than Colston or Jennings, so of course VJax should be rated above Colston or Jennings, regardless of what his current market price is (and, personally, I suspect his price is as low as it's ever going to be).Oh, and as for the bet... I'm calling this season a tie. It was essentially a wash in PPG, with VJax actually holding a slight edge in PPG from the date of my post while Wayne held the edge in total points. Seems like a "6 of one, half dozen of the other" situation to me. And remember, too, that in dynasty, ties go to the younger player.
Gore is 2 years older than Peterson, so I'd start there. I'd bank on Peterson playing 2 years longer than Gore.
I hear people make similar arguments all the time. Who says that if you trade FOR pick 1.1 you have to KEEP pick 1.1? As long as you trade it away again before it loses value (or even better, if you acquire it before it rises in value as the draft approaches and people get excited) it can be a great piece of a trade.Wouldn't have done it. ADP is close to untouchable in dynasty unless you're getting studs with expected long careers (like Calvin, Fitz, Rodgers, Rivers) or much more talent. Who knows how many years left Gore has. And I think the 1.1 rookie pick is always over-valued. Spiller could be McFadden.ok, I see here that I targeted this at F&L but I would also like to here some thoughts on this. I've been apart of these 'new' forums since day one as you can see from my profile. I've been away for some time but always kept my subscription. I post in the assistant coach but haven't really gotten any feedback, positive or negative. There's some very strong posters in this thread and I'm hoping you can help out. Thanks guys!dear f&l
alright i posted this is in assistant coach, but would really like to see what you think after the recent depth vs stud talk..
*12 team dynasty - standard yardage league - 1pt 20yds rush/rec 3 bonus at 100 - 6pts rush/rec td - 1pt 50yds passing 3 bonus at 300 - 4 passing td -neg 3 fumblue neg 2 int*
i just traded away adrian peterson for frank gore and rookie pick 1.01 which i will be using on clifford junior.
my team before the draft looks like this:
p.rivers, v.young
f.gore, donald.brown, w.mcgahee, s.slaton
l.fitzgerald, mark.clayton, d.heywardbey
j.witten
each team has up to 10 keepers and theres some good value wrs i could snag at pick 6 of the regular draft so im really not too worried about my depth there.
i look at spiller and see an upside that could have him a tier 2 running back by years end depending on where he ends up. i love the way frank gore works and still has 4 years of pissed off running. i felt that the value was there to pull the trigger. just about everyone in my league thinks i drink to much and damaged my brain cells, im hoping to prove them wrong.
Your comparison seems appropriate then, but not as glowing. Most owners would want him to be a little Reggie Wayne between the 20s, and he might never be that. There are a couple drives a year where he seems like he can, but not consistently and Gates is a better option in that role. If he does become more of a chain mover, he will be worth top 5 money.SSOG said:
Well, F&L ranks him there, and those are gold standard rankings. I have seen him lower in other rankings, for sure. The two leagues I'm in where I don't have him, I know the other owner will charge that much.
Well, my "bet" (and reasoning to put Wayne above him at that time) was Wayne would outscore him for 09 and the next 2 years. I still think he will.Oh, and as for the bet... I'm calling this season a tie. It was essentially a wash in PPG, with VJax actually holding a slight edge in PPG from the date of my post while Wayne held the edge in total points. Seems like a "6 of one, half dozen of the other" situation to me. And remember, too, that in dynasty, ties go to the younger player.
You don't have to, but I don't like making trades on the assumption that I'll be able to trade the pieces I received for something I value more.Good example: I trade for McFadden even though I hated his prospects. I assumed that his name value would allow me to get something better in return. Instead, I struggled to find a trade partner. I lucked into moving him as part of a deadline deal. I wanted to get rid of him because I'd rather have his salary cap space.Michael Fox said:I hear people make similar arguments all the time. Who says that if you trade FOR pick 1.1 you have to KEEP pick 1.1? As long as you trade it away again before it loses value (or even better, if you acquire it before it rises in value as the draft approaches and people get excited) it can be a great piece of a trade.gheemony said:Wouldn't have done it. ADP is close to untouchable in dynasty unless you're getting studs with expected long careers (like Calvin, Fitz, Rodgers, Rivers) or much more talent. Who knows how many years left Gore has. And I think the 1.1 rookie pick is always over-valued. Spiller could be McFadden.ok, I see here that I targeted this at F&L but I would also like to here some thoughts on this. I've been apart of these 'new' forums since day one as you can see from my profile. I've been away for some time but always kept my subscription. I post in the assistant coach but haven't really gotten any feedback, positive or negative. There's some very strong posters in this thread and I'm hoping you can help out. Thanks guys!dear f&l
alright i posted this is in assistant coach, but would really like to see what you think after the recent depth vs stud talk..
*12 team dynasty - standard yardage league - 1pt 20yds rush/rec 3 bonus at 100 - 6pts rush/rec td - 1pt 50yds passing 3 bonus at 300 - 4 passing td -neg 3 fumblue neg 2 int*
i just traded away adrian peterson for frank gore and rookie pick 1.01 which i will be using on clifford junior.
my team before the draft looks like this:
p.rivers, v.young
f.gore, donald.brown, w.mcgahee, s.slaton
l.fitzgerald, mark.clayton, d.heywardbey
j.witten
each team has up to 10 keepers and theres some good value wrs i could snag at pick 6 of the regular draft so im really not too worried about my depth there.
i look at spiller and see an upside that could have him a tier 2 running back by years end depending on where he ends up. i love the way frank gore works and still has 4 years of pissed off running. i felt that the value was there to pull the trigger. just about everyone in my league thinks i drink to much and damaged my brain cells, im hoping to prove them wrong.
He might be underrated. Decent combination of weight/speed. Good production. Won the starting job on a team laden with talent. He's the type of guy who could be productive on a team with a talent void at the RB position, but is probably not special enough to be a desirable starting candidate in the NFL. A probable 3rd-4th round draft pick in April. My main knock against him is that he's a straight-line runner with pretty poor change of direction/hip swivel.
Market value and Real value are two different things. I am one of those who thinks his Real value is significantly less. Eventually a player has to perform to maintain Market value.Couldn't find it, but I could swear it was here that more than a few disagreed with F&L’s #3 ranking of Calvin over the likes of Roddy White. Its early, but in the first two PPR dynasty startups I have seen thus far, Calvin has gone WR1 (top 5 overall) in each of the drafts (yes, over Fitz and Andre). Roddy has gone 14th overall in each. F&L, in terms of value, could it be that you UNDERvalued Calvin?
Huh. I would argue that good fantasy GMs make trades like that all the time, provided that they get good "value" in the initial trade.When did you trade for McFadden? I mean, if you're talking about McFadden his rookie year, he still retained a TON of value at the end of that season. If you traded for him this past season, well, by then he was fool's gold.
I do evaluate trades on the merits of when the trade is made. And the value at that time. Pick 1.1 has a lot of value right now. Period.Maybe we're saying similar things but just disagree on the value of pick 1.1 currently. Regardless, interesting discussion.I think you have to evaluate the trade on its merits as it exists when it's made, not on what it could be turned into. If we were to do that in this case, I wouldn't trust an owner that traded away ADP to turn 1.1 into something better.
Well, in my PPR league in 09 Lynch was 45th RB, LT was 24th, Sproles was 25th, and Freddy Jackson 13th.So, what to make of that?I don't think you can conclude that Lynch's poor performance was just a product of being in Buffalo because Jackson performed much better in the same offense with the same OL. So the question is: if he goes to SD how much better is he compared to Sproles and LT?Can we assume that he is better than LT (09 version) and/or Sproles? I doubt it. I would expect him to get a split in carries similar to what LT got and likely to produce close to what LT produced.So 20-25 RB is what I would project for Lynch.Couch Potato said:
As a fan of an opposing SEC team, I have never, ever been impressed with Scott. When playing against LSU I was always happy to see Scott in the game as I was much more afraid of every one of LSU's other running backs.I never saw that burst or shiftiness you're talking about. To me he's always looked like a plodder with average power. When Hester was in the game he was MUCH more powerful. When Vincent was in the game he was MUCH more explosive (and still had some decent power of his own).thevidon said:
I watched the coverage of his carries in this game against S. Carolina:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm5uMJoKwQM...6A&index=16
I'm with you. At 5'11" and 235 with a good college resume the guy is a battering ram provided he doesn't slug it up at the combine and run horribly (like 4.62+). I think he's better than Rudi Johnson and Travis Henry, and comparable to Lamont Jordan (who was fantastic when he got his chance until the injuries hit; if he hadn't been stuck behind Martin for so long people would think differently about him).If he runs decent enough in Indy I think he'll be taken in the mid-2nd to mid-3rd as the 6th or 7th back off the board.thevidon said:
The reason most of his carries are of the 4-6 yard variety, he has no burst and he doesn't get outside is that he's a moderately talented big back. Asking Scott to have 'burst' is like expecting Jahvid Best to be a lead-blocking, short-yardage stud.He's not a great player or anything, but based on the past success of guys like him I expect there's a solid role for Scott in the NFL - including at least a few years as a productive starter.
Since when? DeSean is easily a much tougher cover than V-Jax between the 20s, and light years ahead in explosiveness. And yes they are clearly different players, but as far as playing in open space there isn't another WR on the level of DeSean as far as putting fear into defenses (sans R.Moss 22-31 yrs old and Calvin). The other part about the Fitz in the red zone comp is a little more debatable, but I still would favor Fitz in that regard as well due to his production.
Whether he got traded or not, I'd already rank Lynch in the 15-20 range. He's a 24 year old 1st round RB with a pair of top 12 fantasy finishes in his first 3 seasons, which means I'd be hard pressed to put him behind, say, Cedric Benson (a nearly 28 year old former first round RB with one good season in his entire career).Now, because of the knuckleheadedness, I've dropped him to the 20-25 range... and a trade to San Diego isn't going to change that in the slightest.Couch Potato said:
Really? I would think that a trade to SD but put him in top 10 range. As you said, he's already had 2 top 12 finishes. I'm giving him a mulligan for last season. He can catch the ball and I would think that in a Norv Turner offense, look out. You've seen it time and time before what a fresh start gives some players.
I guess there's the Norv Turner factor, but personally, I already view him as a young, above-average talent with a high risk of implosion. If he goes to SD, then he'd be a young, above-average talent with a high risk of implosion in a pretty good situation. How high could I possibly jump him because of the situation upgrade? I can't see any reason why I'd rate a non-elite talent with serious knucklehead potential above ADP/MJD/Johnson/Rice/Gore/SJax/JStew/DWill- the talent gap is just too large, and those 8 guys don't have major red flags that Lynch does. I couldn't rate him above Charles, who has already produced at Lynch's upside and who is every bit as young, but who again doesn't have the red flags. I could see putting him in with the Mendenhall/Moreno/Wells/Forte cluster of young RBs who are slightly above-average NFL talents but not elite... but even if I did, he'd be at the bottom of said cluster because of those major red flags. And then you have the Turners, Bensons, Grants, and Browns of the world lurking, to say nothing of the fact that I haven't even mentioned the rookies yet.If Lynch went to San Diego, I might bump him up 5 spots from the 20-25 range to the 15-20 range, but I think a huge change would be too reactionary and not really warranted.
Wait, a guy who has a career high of 9 TDs is like Larry Fitzgerald in the redzone?And that's on a team who's QB has thrown 62 passing TDs in the last two years, no less.
Agreed. I would probalby field offers and if someone wants to pay top 10 RB, I'd deal but I could really see him explode. He's still very young and runs with power and can catcht the ball. He's a risk sure, but I could see him right after ADP/MJD/Johnson/Rice in the right situation.
I agree, I think he's right on par with Knowshon Moreno. They will always have their believers due to where they were drafted but I don't see anything special about either one. I'm going to be anxiously looking for a trading window this season to move Moreno, just as I would be if I were a Lynch owner and he were moved to a team in which he appears to be the clear #1. Someone in your league will think they'yre buying a solid RB1, they're not
I tend to agree. I somewhat reluctantly had Moreno ranked as the top RB in the 2009 draft and picked him in several rookie drafts where I needed instant impact from the RB position. I thought his play was pretty disappointing this season. He doesn't run with any power or speed and was basically outplayed by Correll Buckhalter. There's always the chance that he'll take a big step forward and become a solid pro runner, but right now he looks like the definition of mediocre. I have already cut bait in 2/3 leagues where I owned him, getting the 1.04 rookie in one league and LeSean McCoy in another. I think both Lynch and Moreno are both adequate, but they're lacking that special something to be top shelf featured backs.
