Dynasty Rankings (1 Viewer)

[thriftyrocker]

Starks is the only one with a chance long term. However, I would give him very little chance of winning the job this year. Jackson is nothing special (neither was Grant) but can contribute on all 3 downs. He is competent and that's about all GB needs for this year. Starks didn't practice at all during the offseason. The last time he played in an actual game was 2008. He's going to be rusty. He's not going to be pro ready. No team is going to throw him in there, especially if they're a playoff team like the Pack.It is more likely Dimitri Nance (recently signed off Falcons practice squad) pushes Jackson short term. But he seems even more "just a guy" than Jackson. They've got another guy on their practice squad too who might get a chance - James Johnson.I would definitely add Jackson before Starks unless you are super loaded at RB and will never play Jackson.

Why is Starks the only one with a chance long-term?

Brandon Jackson has already proven himself mediocre. Starks hasn't.

Green Bay believes in Jackson enough that they've been carrying him for 4 years now. They believe in him enough that they entered this season with only 2 RBs on their active roster. They believe in him enough that two of the backs they cut (Desean Wynn and Kregg Lumpkin) both wound up signed to another team's 53-man roster. Brandon Jackson is a 24 year old former 2nd round pick that the coaching staff has shown strong support of all offseason (from entering the season with only him as RB depth to saying in the preseason that they'd be perfectly comfortable with him as a 3-down RB).I think Brandon Jackson could easily be the guy in Green Bay over the next 4 years. He could just as easily not be, but it's far too soon to be writing him off beyond this season.

I think the most likely scenario is the starting RB for the 2011 Packers is not currently on their roster. I definitely would not add Jackson thinking he's a long term solution. He has short term value, and that means something, but don't fool yourself thinking a guy with a 3.0 YPC last year is going to look a lot better this year.Jackson earns his place on the roster by being solid in the pass game and not hurting the team when he is in there. These are pretty important things to a pass first, pass second team like the Pack.You bring up good points about Wynn and Lumpkin being cut. Packers would love to have both of them back right now. Instead Ahman Green is getting all tingly inside.

 

[SSOG]

Vick's 30- he's not old.

With most of his value coming as a runner and not as a passer, his "30" is older than most other QB's "30".

Steve Young rushed for 450 at age 37 (the second highest total of his career). Unlike RBs, who decline because they're subjected to so many hits over their career, a running QB can keep rushing at a high level. Vick's game is predicated mostly on speed, so I'd expect him to age more like a WR... and plenty of WRs have proven that they're still blazing at 35.

 

[SSOG]

Brandon Jackson has already proven himself mediocre. Starks hasn't.I think the most likely scenario is the starting RB for the 2011 Packers is not currently on their roster. I definitely would not add Jackson thinking he's a long term solution. He has short term value, and that means something, but don't fool yourself thinking a guy with a 3.0 YPC last year is going to look a lot better this year.Jackson earns his place on the roster by being solid in the pass game and not hurting the team when he is in there. These are pretty important things to a pass first, pass second team like the Pack.You bring up good points about Wynn and Lumpkin being cut. Packers would love to have both of them back right now. Instead Ahman Green is getting all tingly inside.

Jackson's 3.0 ypc average was over a whopping 37 carries. That's not meaningful data. For his career, he averages 4.4 ypc (over 157 carries).Jackson has proven himself mediocre enough for the Pack to feel fully comfortable entrusting their entire RB position to him. Is he a world-beater? No. Neither was Ryan Grant. Is it possible that the 2011 leading rusher isn't on the roster? Yes. The same is true for Arian Foster, Matt Forte, and several other replaceable talents ranked ahead of him. I'm not saying that Jackson is a lock to be the starter in 2011, I'm saying it's ludicrous to count him out before he gets so much as a single start.Would the Packers rather have Wynn and Lumpkin back? Of course they would- they need an RB2. They don't need them back to spell Jackson, though. If they weren't comfortable with giving Jackson the load if it came to that, they would have carried more than 2 RBs.I guess a better question is this... in my current rankings, what RBs do I have ranked behind Jackson that you would take over Jackson?

 

[thriftyrocker]

Jackson has proven himself mediocre enough for the Pack to feel fully comfortable entrusting their entire RB position to him.

They are comfortable with him starting. In the same way Indy is more comfortable starting Addai than Donald Brown. There are a few dozen better RBs in the world.They also kept 3 FBs. It's pretty clear they gambled and lost here.

I guess a better question is this... in my current rankings, what RBs do I have ranked behind Jackson that you would take over Jackson?

I'm not disagreeing with your ranking. He's going to get a lot of receptions. He's going to get some TDs. He's a RB2 for this year. I just don't like his long term value.I would not swap Addai for him. Choice, Lynch, and M. Bush could easily be more valuable than him this time next year, but its close now. I think he's about right as far as # but is one tier too high.

 

[SSOG]

I also want to point out that this Jackson love, for me at least, isn't unprecedented. The groundwork has been laid for a long time, now. I was saying last preseason that I thought Jackson had "the best chance of any back on Green Bay's roster of being the starting RB 3 years from now." A lot of people naturally disagreed with me. Obviously where we are right now is colored by where we're coming from. For someone like me who always thought Jackson was underrated, we view this as a chance for him to prove it. For someone else who always thought Jackson was a bum, then this is nothing more than a dumb luck opportunity which will quickly give way to reality again.

Prior to the season, Jackson was one of my top 2 free agent targets (the other was Max Hall). Now that Grant has gone down, I'm understandably excited to see what he can do. I'm not thinking Brandon Jackson is going to go all Arian Foster on the rest of the league, but I think Jackson has a very good chance to be the next Ryan Grant. It's not a lock, but I think anyone automatically assuming that Jackson has no value beyond this season is missing the boat.

 

[EBF]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

 

[Go deep]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

Neither has Ryan Grant.

 

[BeTheMatch]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

Neither has Ryan Grant.

It's unbelievable to me that people keep saying this.

 

[gianmarco]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

Neither has Ryan Grant.

It's unbelievable to me that people keep saying this.

 

[Go deep]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

Neither has Ryan Grant.

It's unbelievable to me that people keep saying this.

He had a couple good years in a great situation. He is Dominick Davis, Mike Anderson, etc, and now his starting days are over.

 

[BeTheMatch]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

Neither has Ryan Grant.

It's unbelievable to me that people keep saying this.

He had a couple good years in a great situation. He is Dominick Davis, Mike Anderson, etc, and now his starting days are over.

Unless they're not

 

[dickey moe]

I have the opportunity to pick him up in a redraft league. What worries me is that he has never looked anything other than mediocre.

Neither has Ryan Grant.

It's unbelievable to me that people keep saying this.

He's been a good, serviceable RB the last few seasons, but has never shown anything really special from a FF standpoint. Definitely not enough to justify his ADP this season, IMO.

 

[thriftyrocker]

He's been a good, serviceable RB the last few seasons, but has never shown anything really special from a FF standpoint. Definitely not enough to justify his ADP this season, IMO.

Now it's turning into revisionist history.

He was very good from a FF standpoint. He was pretty special because he was free on waivers and gave you 2.5 years of low RB1 numbers. That is more than what Pierre Thomas, Ahmad Bradshaw, and other waiver-to-starter RBs will probably get you. That is more than Darren McFadden, Knowshon Moreno, and other surefire rookie #1 picks will probably get you. Someone who grabbed Grant in 2007 felt pretty awesome about it even when the joyride ended last weekend.

If you drafted him high in a 2010 startup and are now disappointed, then you're a fool.

He was not special from an NFL standpoint. He was a solid back. He never fumbled. He got decent but not great YPC. He benefited a lot from his situation. He got a huge contract, and whether he deserved it or not, he sort of earned it while he played. At least through 2009. We'll see if a similarly non-elite talent back in BJax does any better.

 

[Born to Run]

I own Hester in a couple leagues and would gladly trade him for Johnny Knox. After watching the Bears in week one I think Knox is clearly the WR most likely to become a reliable FF starter this season. Even Devin Aromashodu looks like he'll be a bigger factor in Chicago's offense than Hester (although he might not keep getting so many looks if he doesn't start catching some of them). Also, Brandon Tate looked pretty nifty on that KR TD. He's a great throw-in candidate if his owner is a non-believer.

Tate is a guy that could really turn into something next year if Moss leaves.

Full disclosure... I really, really, really like Brandon Tate. He's one of the few guys whose rankings don't really reflect how I feel about him in my leagues. For 99.9% of the guys, if someone offers me a higher rated player for a lower rated player, I'm taking that deal (provided it makes sense with how my roster is currently constructed), but Tate is a guy who I would not trade for several guys ahead of him. It's not a rational decision, it's just that I'm really, really excited to see what he does next year and I would hate to get off the Tate train now that we're just one or two stops away from the destination. This is one of those situations where I'd sacrifice "value" for the pleasure of watching him develop on my bench.It also doesn't hurt that my league rewards return yardage (not heavily, but enough that heavy returners get the equivalent of 300 more yards worth of points), and Tate is a monster returner.

I don't follow the pats closely, but I thought Edelman was suppose to fill that role. It is just a matter of getting healthy and getting some playing time with Brady. Edelman is stashed on my dynasty roster because he has the higher upside, Tate not so much.

 

[thriftyrocker]

I don't follow the pats closely, but I thought Edelman was suppose to fill that role. It is just a matter of getting healthy and getting some playing time with Brady. Edelman is stashed on my dynasty roster because he has the higher upside, Tate not so much.

Nah, Tate nailed down the 3rd WR role in camp. You can see in the Rotoworld old news ESPN's Mike Reiss saying he won it in early August. He's also a better fit for outside WR than Edelman, although Edelman has good enough speed he could maybe fit that role eventually if they were desperate.Edelman got some hype earlier in the summer cause people assumed Welker would miss a few games to half the year, and that Edelman would have near term value. With Welker playing and looking well enough to fill his role, Edelman won't be useful anytime soon. He may be droppable in some shallow leagues if you want to gamble on Welker's knee staying stable.

Tate's value hinges on Moss a lot. No guarantee Moss leaves.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Vick's 30- he's not old.

With most of his value coming as a runner and not as a passer, his "30" is older than most other QB's "30".

Steve Young rushed for 450 at age 37 (the second highest total of his career). Unlike RBs, who decline because they're subjected to so many hits over their career, a running QB can keep rushing at a high level. Vick's game is predicated mostly on speed, so I'd expect him to age more like a WR... and plenty of WRs have proven that they're still blazing at 35.

Steve Young was also able to pass - his fantasy value was enhanced by his running abilities. Vick's fantasy value is almost exclusively derived from his running abilities. A 450 yard seadon at age 37 isn't going to do much for your team if it isn't enhanced by some passing. I do realize that Vick's one of (if not the) best running QB of all time, but scrambling QBs like McNair and McNabb showed that they needed to re-invent themselves into pocket passers as they aged and lost some of their dynamic rushing ability. It will happen to Vick sooner that you think imo. I'm not saying he's a bad stop gap solution if you need a QB, I just don't think he's going to be the Mike Vick pre-prison years at age 33, and without the serious rushing stats he'd be a pretty mediocre fantasy QB at best.

 

[SSOG]

I don't follow the pats closely, but I thought Edelman was suppose to fill that role. It is just a matter of getting healthy and getting some playing time with Brady. Edelman is stashed on my dynasty roster because he has the higher upside, Tate not so much.

Nah, Tate nailed down the 3rd WR role in camp. You can see in the Rotoworld old news ESPN's Mike Reiss saying he won it in early August. He's also a better fit for outside WR than Edelman, although Edelman has good enough speed he could maybe fit that role eventually if they were desperate.Edelman got some hype earlier in the summer cause people assumed Welker would miss a few games to half the year, and that Edelman would have near term value. With Welker playing and looking well enough to fill his role, Edelman won't be useful anytime soon. He may be droppable in some shallow leagues if you want to gamble on Welker's knee staying stable.

Tate's value hinges on Moss a lot. No guarantee Moss leaves.

To dramatically simplify the equation, Edelman is more of a "Wes Welker type" while Tate is more of a "Randy Moss type". Which, of course, is a ridiculous simplification, because there's only one Randy Moss and there's only one Wes Welker and odds are neither young Pats receiver is even a reasonable facsimile thereof. But in terms of their role with the team, that's more or less how they fit.

Even ignoring semantics of how they're used, to me it just comes down to talent. A lot of people got really excited about Edelman because Welker got hurt last year and Edelman immediately stepped in and caught an absurd number of balls (8 catches for 98 yards, to be exact). What people missed, in my mind, is that while he played the "Welker role", he didn't do it with anywhere near Welker's level of efficiency. Personally, I just don't believe in Edelman's talent, long-term. I don't care what role he fills, ultimately if he's not that good, he's not going to stick around, and I've never seen anything from Edelman to convince me he's that good. I think Brandon Tate could definitely be good enough to stick around, and I'm encouraged by the fact that he secured the #3 job pretty easily. I think he could very easily be next year's Mike Wallace- a guy who performs well in a limited role and then finds himself thrust into the perfect opportunity.

As I said, it also doesn't hurt that most of my leagues have small but noticeable rewards for return prowess. In the most extreme of such leagues, he finished last week as WR4 behind only Ocho, Nicks, and Austin, thanks to that kickoff return TD.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I don't follow the pats closely, but I thought Edelman was suppose to fill that role. It is just a matter of getting healthy and getting some playing time with Brady. Edelman is stashed on my dynasty roster because he has the higher upside, Tate not so much.

Nah, Tate nailed down the 3rd WR role in camp. You can see in the Rotoworld old news ESPN's Mike Reiss saying he won it in early August. He's also a better fit for outside WR than Edelman, although Edelman has good enough speed he could maybe fit that role eventually if they were desperate.Edelman got some hype earlier in the summer cause people assumed Welker would miss a few games to half the year, and that Edelman would have near term value. With Welker playing and looking well enough to fill his role, Edelman won't be useful anytime soon. He may be droppable in some shallow leagues if you want to gamble on Welker's knee staying stable.

Tate's value hinges on Moss a lot. No guarantee Moss leaves.

To dramatically simplify the equation, Edelman is more of a "Wes Welker type" while Tate is more of a "Randy Moss type". Which, of course, is a ridiculous simplification, because there's only one Randy Moss and there's only one Wes Welker and odds are neither young Pats receiver is even a reasonable facsimile thereof. But in terms of their role with the team, that's more or less how they fit.

Even ignoring semantics of how they're used, to me it just comes down to talent. A lot of people got really excited about Edelman because Welker got hurt last year and Edelman immediately stepped in and caught an absurd number of balls (8 catches for 98 yards, to be exact). What people missed, in my mind, is that while he played the "Welker role", he didn't do it with anywhere near Welker's level of efficiency. Personally, I just don't believe in Edelman's talent, long-term. I don't care what role he fills, ultimately if he's not that good, he's not going to stick around, and I've never seen anything from Edelman to convince me he's that good. I think Brandon Tate could definitely be good enough to stick around, and I'm encouraged by the fact that he secured the #3 job pretty easily. I think he could very easily be next year's Mike Wallace- a guy who performs well in a limited role and then finds himself thrust into the perfect opportunity.

As I said, it also doesn't hurt that most of my leagues have small but noticeable rewards for return prowess. In the most extreme of such leagues, he finished last week as WR4 behind only Ocho, Nicks, and Austin, thanks to that kickoff return TD.

I think you're selling Edelman way short here. Reminds of everyone selling Austin Collie short all season last year and into this offseason.

 

[SSOG]

I think you're selling Edelman way short here. Reminds of everyone selling Austin Collie short all season last year and into this offseason.

Maybe, but I watched his 8 reception game last season, and while everyone was busy saying "he looks just like Wes Welker!" I was busy thinking "he looks like 70% of Wes Welker". And I'm not sure 70% of Wes Welker is good enough to be fantasy relevant. I'm also sure that there's some confirmation bias at work here, but when Brandon Tate is essentially locking up the #3 job before preseason even kicks off, that just reaffirms to me that he's the stronger talent.

 

[shader]

I own Hester in a couple leagues and would gladly trade him for Johnny Knox. After watching the Bears in week one I think Knox is clearly the WR most likely to become a reliable FF starter this season. Even Devin Aromashodu looks like he'll be a bigger factor in Chicago's offense than Hester (although he might not keep getting so many looks if he doesn't start catching some of them). Also, Brandon Tate looked pretty nifty on that KR TD. He's a great throw-in candidate if his owner is a non-believer.

Tate is a guy that could really turn into something next year if Moss leaves.

Full disclosure... I really, really, really like Brandon Tate. He's one of the few guys whose rankings don't really reflect how I feel about him in my leagues. For 99.9% of the guys, if someone offers me a higher rated player for a lower rated player, I'm taking that deal (provided it makes sense with how my roster is currently constructed), but Tate is a guy who I would not trade for several guys ahead of him. It's not a rational decision, it's just that I'm really, really excited to see what he does next year and I would hate to get off the Tate train now that we're just one or two stops away from the destination. This is one of those situations where I'd sacrifice "value" for the pleasure of watching him develop on my bench.It also doesn't hurt that my league rewards return yardage (not heavily, but enough that heavy returners get the equivalent of 300 more yards worth of points), and Tate is a monster returner.

I don't follow the pats closely, but I thought Edelman was suppose to fill that role. It is just a matter of getting healthy and getting some playing time with Brady. Edelman is stashed on my dynasty roster because he has the higher upside, Tate not so much.

They were both drafted in the 2009 draft. Edelman was drafted in the 7th and Tate in the 3rd. Edelman has done nothing to make anyone think he has more upside to my knowledge. Tate is clearly much more gifted than Edelman ever dreamed of being, imo.I think the thought process around the league, is that anyone can step into the "Wes Welker role". The real truth, is that most people in the "Wes Welker" role, are probably irrelevant, from a fantasy standpoint, ESPECIALLY in non-ppr leagues.Welker is the gold standard, and the most TD's he's ever had is 8. He exploded with 1300 yards last year, and still only had 4 td's.And he's the best slot receiver in the game, by a mile.I myself have fallen victim to it, comparing guys like Harry Douglas to Welker.In reality, there are very few slot receivers that continue to put up Welker-like stats year in and year out.Welker is an EXCEPTIONAL talent in the middle of the field, and can't just be replaced by the next random smallish (most of the time white) guy that gets drafted in the late rounds.The point? 70-80% of Wes Welker isn't really that great, except in ppr leagues, where it becomes solid, but unspectacular.

 

[Restricted]

I own Hester in a couple leagues and would gladly trade him for Johnny Knox. After watching the Bears in week one I think Knox is clearly the WR most likely to become a reliable FF starter this season. Even Devin Aromashodu looks like he'll be a bigger factor in Chicago's offense than Hester (although he might not keep getting so many looks if he doesn't start catching some of them). Also, Brandon Tate looked pretty nifty on that KR TD. He's a great throw-in candidate if his owner is a non-believer.

Tate is a guy that could really turn into something next year if Moss leaves.

Full disclosure... I really, really, really like Brandon Tate. He's one of the few guys whose rankings don't really reflect how I feel about him in my leagues. For 99.9% of the guys, if someone offers me a higher rated player for a lower rated player, I'm taking that deal (provided it makes sense with how my roster is currently constructed), but Tate is a guy who I would not trade for several guys ahead of him. It's not a rational decision, it's just that I'm really, really excited to see what he does next year and I would hate to get off the Tate train now that we're just one or two stops away from the destination. This is one of those situations where I'd sacrifice "value" for the pleasure of watching him develop on my bench.It also doesn't hurt that my league rewards return yardage (not heavily, but enough that heavy returners get the equivalent of 300 more yards worth of points), and Tate is a monster returner.

I don't follow the pats closely, but I thought Edelman was suppose to fill that role. It is just a matter of getting healthy and getting some playing time with Brady. Edelman is stashed on my dynasty roster because he has the higher upside, Tate not so much.

They were both drafted in the 2009 draft. Edelman was drafted in the 7th and Tate in the 3rd. Edelman has done nothing to make anyone think he has more upside to my knowledge. Tate is clearly much more gifted than Edelman ever dreamed of being.

Where does Taylor Price fit in here?

 

[shader]

Where does Taylor Price fit in here?

I'd assume that Price was drafted because the Patriots hoard draft picks, and stockpile receivers. Clearly the Pats are trying to prepare for life after Moss (though it wouldn't surprise me if Moss gets re-signed and finished his career in NE). I read that Price started out looking good, but that he's clearly behind Moss, Welker, Tate and Edelman. So he's a stash in really deep leagues, but don't expect a thing in 2010. There was even specualtion that he might not make the 53-man roster, but he's still alive for the time being.

 

[lynx4ben]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:

Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent Robinson

Team B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

 

[SSOG]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

I like that trade for whoever is getting Roddy, but I don't think it's particularly unbalanced one way or another.

 

[thriftyrocker]

They were both drafted in the 2009 draft. Edelman was drafted in the 7th and Tate in the 3rd. Edelman has done nothing to make anyone think he has more upside to my knowledge. Tate is clearly much more gifted than Edelman ever dreamed of being, imo.

I think that's too simplistic. Edelman didn't have a position. He wasn't going to play QB for anyone. If you read his scouting reports they question whether he'll be able to be a return guy and talk about him as a situational RB. Cribbs wasn't drafted. Who is more gifted - Cribbs or Tate? I don't want to argue semantics over "gifted" but they are both great athletes. Obviously Cribbs got a huge downgrade from scouts because he had no hope of playing QB.Edelman is similar. But he has actually looked very natural as a WR. Maybe work to do on running routes, but you can't ask more for a player in his position last year.

I think the thought process around the league, is that anyone can step into the "Wes Welker role". The real truth, is that most people in the "Wes Welker" role, are probably irrelevant, from a fantasy standpoint, ESPECIALLY in non-ppr leagues.Welker is the gold standard, and the most TD's he's ever had is 8. He exploded with 1300 yards last year, and still only had 4 td's.....The point? 70-80% of Wes Welker isn't really that great, except in ppr leagues, where it becomes solid, but unspectacular.

I think we saw 70-80% of Wes Welker last week. And his name was Wes Welker. And he did pretty great.TDs are flukely. I think his drought last year has no real explanation other than luck. Just like you can't explain Greg Jennings' total last year.Part of the magic here is Moss. Things change a lot when Moss is gone. Sure, if Moss stays and Welker aggravates his injury, there's a perfect storm for Edelman. If Moss is gone, it's pretty much NO with less upside. Edelman playing the part of Lance Moore.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

This occurred in my dynastyCrabtreeMax HallforCarson Palmer2011 1st (likely top3)

 

[Go deep]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

Team A robbed team B.Sproles and Robinson are a push.Give Roddy an edge over Crabtree, but Bradshaw is a top 15-18 dynasty RB, which makes up the difference and then some.....and then some more.

 

[SSOG]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

Team A robbed team B.Sproles and Robinson are a push.Give Roddy an edge over Crabtree, but Bradshaw is a top 15-18 dynasty RB, which makes up the difference and then some.....and then some more.

WR10 + RB27 + WR60 for WR5 + WR57 by my rankings. I'd favor the WR5 side of the trade based on how huge the gap is between tier 2 and tier 3 at WR. I can understand how someone would feel otherwise, but I think calling either side of that trade "robbery" is just sensationalism.

 

[thehornet]

Vick's 30- he's not old.

With most of his value coming as a runner and not as a passer, his "30" is older than most other QB's "30".

stop. running more doesnt make you "older". this is crazy.

 

[Go deep]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

Team A robbed team B.Sproles and Robinson are a push.Give Roddy an edge over Crabtree, but Bradshaw is a top 15-18 dynasty RB, which makes up the difference and then some.....and then some more.

WR10 + RB27 + WR60 for WR5 + WR57 by my rankings. I'd favor the WR5 side of the trade based on how huge the gap is between tier 2 and tier 3 at WR. I can understand how someone would feel otherwise, but I think calling either side of that trade "robbery" is just sensationalism.

Its robbery if you have Bradshaw higher than a top 27 RB. Even if i did have Bradshaw at 27, i would still much rather have WR10 and RB27 than WR5. I dont think using their rankings is a fair way to evaluate a trade anyhow.According to my dynasty scores/calculator the Crabtree/Bradshaw side wins this trade 86 - 63.

 

[Go deep]

Vick's 30- he's not old.

With most of his value coming as a runner and not as a passer, his "30" is older than most other QB's "30".

stop. running more doesnt make you "older". this is crazy.

No, but getting hit makes your body wear down. The more you run, the more you get hit, the more your body wears down. There is a reason Rb's dont make it past the age of 30. Or do you just think RB's have really bad luck?

 

[GreatLakesMike]

SSOG, with your affection for punt returners, I'm just curious if you have any thoughts on Michael Spurlock - WR for Tampa Bay. I've been charting the PR/KRs for each team and his name stood out as a guy who does both, and has plenty of opportunity. However, he's already 27 years old and appears to be somewhat of a journeyman. He's 5'11" - 214.

Career stats:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=4145

Rotoworld news page:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=4145

 

[thehornet]

Vick's 30- he's not old.

With most of his value coming as a runner and not as a passer, his "30" is older than most other QB's "30".

stop. running more doesnt make you "older". this is crazy.

No, but getting hit makes your body wear down. The more you run, the more you get hit, the more your body wears down. There is a reason Rb's dont make it past the age of 30. Or do you just think RB's have really bad luck?

i think Vick is in better shape than almost every single QB in the league. Thats what I think. You are getting off track with the running back thing. vick avoids contact, rb's can't most the time.

 

[Go deep]

Vick's 30- he's not old.

With most of his value coming as a runner and not as a passer, his "30" is older than most other QB's "30".

stop. running more doesnt make you "older". this is crazy.

No, but getting hit makes your body wear down. The more you run, the more you get hit, the more your body wears down. There is a reason Rb's dont make it past the age of 30. Or do you just think RB's have really bad luck?

i think Vick is in better shape than almost every single QB in the league. Thats what I think. You are getting off track with the running back thing. vick avoids contact, rb's can't most the time.

I do agree even though he runs alot, he does not take the abuse a RB does. I think he can be effective past 30, but i expect his running skills to diminish slightly each year starting this year though. I am sure of one thing, he will never be a good throwing QB. So he only hs value as long as he is running for 50+ yards a game.

 

[SSOG]

Its robbery if you have Bradshaw higher than a top 27 RB. Even if i did have Bradshaw at 27, i would still much rather have WR10 and RB27 than WR5. I dont think using their rankings is a fair way to evaluate a trade anyhow.

According to my dynasty scores/calculator the Crabtree/Bradshaw side wins this trade 86 - 63.

Using my rankings isn't a fair way to evaluate a trade, but using your rankings is just fine and dandy? Huh? I was just demonstrating how a reasonable mind might disagree with you. In some instances I might prefer WR10/RB27 to WR5, but I think right now the gap between the top 5 (Fitz, Johnson, Johnson, Austin, White) and the rest of the pack is pretty huge.According to my dynasty scores/calculator, the Roddy side wins this thread 44.73935 to 37.12402.

No, but getting hit makes your body wear down. The more you run, the more you get hit, the more your body wears down. There is a reason Rb's dont make it past the age of 30. Or do you just think RB's have really bad luck?

Michael Vick has 38 rushes/sacks in the last 3 and a half years combined. If hits wear a body down, then Vick must be a very, very "young 30".

SSOG, with your affection for punt returners, I'm just curious if you have any thoughts on Michael Spurlock - WR for Tampa Bay. I've been charting the PR/KRs for each team and his name stood out as a guy who does both, and has plenty of opportunity. However, he's already 27 years old and appears to be somewhat of a journeyman. He's 5'11" - 214.

Career stats:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=4145

Rotoworld news page:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=4145

The theory isn't that punt returners make great WRs, it's that many of the skills necessary to excel as a punt returner are also useful as a WR. Plenty of great punt returners are absolute nobodies as WRs (remember Dante Hall?). I'm not picking guys up just because they're returners, I'm picking guys up because I think they're quality receivers and I think that their punt return skills will help them out.As for Spurlock... not a fan at all. His entire career to this point screams "nobody". He played 1 game for Arizona in 2006, 7 games for Tampa in 2007, was out of football entirely in 2008, and played 6 games for Tampa and San Francisco in 2009 (he wasn't traded, he was cut and signed). He's never had a start. He has 6 career receptions counting the 2 he got this week. Everything about him screams out that he's just one of those guys that keeps getting signed and cut as teams have a need for him, sort of like a Charlie Adams or a Todd Devoe. He'll need a lot more than 2 grabs and a TD to convince me he has any long-term potential at all.

The guy ahead of him, though, I think is an interesting name to keep an eye on. Sammie Stroughter. If things break well for him, I could see him being someone who at least merits a roster spot in most dynasty leagues somewhere down the line. Not really high hopes or anything, but at least someone worth owning.

I am sure of one thing, he will never be a good throwing QB. So he only hs value as long as he is running for 50+ yards a game.

Pop quiz: who has two thumbs and averages as many YPA and AYPA as Eli Manning, but with a better career TD:INT ratio?Answer: This guy!

 

[GreatLakesMike]

Btw, I've acquired DHB as a throw-in, and a guy dropped him flat out in another league today... cost me nothing. I've never seen a consensus 1st round draft pick dumped so soon in any of my leagues.

 

[GreatLakesMike]

The theory isn't that punt returners make great WRs, it's that many of the skills necessary to excel as a punt returner are also useful as a WR. Plenty of great punt returners are absolute nobodies as WRs (remember Dante Hall?). I'm not picking guys up just because they're returners, I'm picking guys up because I think they're quality receivers and I think that their punt return skills will help them out.

As for Spurlock... not a fan at all. His entire career to this point screams "nobody". He played 1 game for Arizona in 2006, 7 games for Tampa in 2007, was out of football entirely in 2008, and played 6 games for Tampa and San Francisco in 2009 (he wasn't traded, he was cut and signed). He's never had a start. He has 6 career receptions counting the 2 he got this week. Everything about him screams out that he's just one of those guys that keeps getting signed and cut as teams have a need for him, sort of like a Charlie Adams or a Todd Devoe. He'll need a lot more than 2 grabs and a TD to convince me he has any long-term potential at all.

The guy ahead of him, though, I think is an interesting name to keep an eye on. Sammie Stroughter. If things break well for him, I could see him being someone who at least merits a roster spot in most dynasty leagues somewhere down the line. Not really high hopes or anything, but at least someone worth owning.

Thanks and thanks.

 

[Go deep]

Its robbery if you have Bradshaw higher than a top 27 RB. Even if i did have Bradshaw at 27, i would still much rather have WR10 and RB27 than WR5. I dont think using their rankings is a fair way to evaluate a trade anyhow.

According to my dynasty scores/calculator the Crabtree/Bradshaw side wins this trade 86 - 63.

Using my rankings isn't a fair way to evaluate a trade, but using your rankings is just fine and dandy? Huh? I was just demonstrating how a reasonable mind might disagree with you. In some instances I might prefer WR10/RB27 to WR5, but I think right now the gap between the top 5 (Fitz, Johnson, Johnson, Austin, White) and the rest of the pack is pretty huge.According to my dynasty scores/calculator, the Roddy side wins this thread 44.73935 to 37.12402.

No, but getting hit makes your body wear down. The more you run, the more you get hit, the more your body wears down. There is a reason Rb's dont make it past the age of 30. Or do you just think RB's have really bad luck?

Michael Vick has 38 rushes/sacks in the last 3 and a half years combined. If hits wear a body down, then Vick must be a very, very "young 30".

SSOG, with your affection for punt returners, I'm just curious if you have any thoughts on Michael Spurlock - WR for Tampa Bay. I've been charting the PR/KRs for each team and his name stood out as a guy who does both, and has plenty of opportunity. However, he's already 27 years old and appears to be somewhat of a journeyman. He's 5'11" - 214.

Career stats:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=4145

Rotoworld news page:

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpag...NFL&id=4145

The theory isn't that punt returners make great WRs, it's that many of the skills necessary to excel as a punt returner are also useful as a WR. Plenty of great punt returners are absolute nobodies as WRs (remember Dante Hall?). I'm not picking guys up just because they're returners, I'm picking guys up because I think they're quality receivers and I think that their punt return skills will help them out.As for Spurlock... not a fan at all. His entire career to this point screams "nobody". He played 1 game for Arizona in 2006, 7 games for Tampa in 2007, was out of football entirely in 2008, and played 6 games for Tampa and San Francisco in 2009 (he wasn't traded, he was cut and signed). He's never had a start. He has 6 career receptions counting the 2 he got this week. Everything about him screams out that he's just one of those guys that keeps getting signed and cut as teams have a need for him, sort of like a Charlie Adams or a Todd Devoe. He'll need a lot more than 2 grabs and a TD to convince me he has any long-term potential at all.

The guy ahead of him, though, I think is an interesting name to keep an eye on. Sammie Stroughter. If things break well for him, I could see him being someone who at least merits a roster spot in most dynasty leagues somewhere down the line. Not really high hopes or anything, but at least someone worth owning.

I am sure of one thing, he will never be a good throwing QB. So he only hs value as long as he is running for 50+ yards a game.

Pop quiz: who has two thumbs and averages as many YPA and AYPA as Eli Manning, but with a better career TD:INT ratio?Answer: This guy!

Your an angry man. Settle down a bit and reread what i wrote. Using rankings(yours, mine, anyone elses)isnt a good way to evaluate a trade. Comparing WR5 to WR10 doesnt always tell the whole story. WR5-10 could all be WR's in the same tier, making WR5 and WR 10 equally valuable. Or there could be a big drop after WR9, making WR 10 much less valuable than WR 5.

I used my dynasty SCORES, not RANKINGS because it gives a better idea of a players value. Those scores put through the calculator gave the Crabtree/Bradshaw an 86 -63 score advantage. Of course that is just my opinion, if you feel different thats fine, it doesnt really matter to me. If we all felt the same about things, fantasy football wouldnt be much fun.

 

[Go deep]

Michael Vick has 38 rushes/sacks in the last 3 and a half years combined. If hits wear a body down, then Vick must be a very, very "young 30".

I agree, i just dont get your point.

Pop quiz: who has two thumbs and averages as many YPA and AYPA as Eli Manning, but with a better career TD:INT ratio?

Answer: This guy!

Again, whats your point?

 

[SSOG]

Your an angry man. Settle down a bit and reread what i wrote. Using rankings(yours, mine, anyone elses)isnt a good way to evaluate a trade. Comparing WR5 to WR10 doesnt always tell the whole story. WR5-10 could all be WR's in the same tier, making WR5 and WR 10 equally valuable. Or there could be a big drop after WR9, making WR 10 much less valuable than WR 5.I used my dynasty SCORES, not RANKINGS because it gives a better idea of a players value. Those scores put through the calculator gave the Crabtree/Bradshaw an 86 -63 score advantage. Of course that is just my opinion, if you feel different thats fine, it doesnt really matter to me. If we all felt the same about things, fantasy football wouldnt be much fun.

Angry? Not really. At the end of the day, you're absolutely right. You feel one way, I feel another. The fact that two intelligent and informed dynasty owners could differ suggests to me that it's silly to call either side of the trade "robbery".

 

[SSOG]

Michael Vick has 38 rushes/sacks in the last 3 and a half years combined. If hits wear a body down, then Vick must be a very, very "young 30".

I agree, i just dont get your point.

Pop quiz: who has two thumbs and averages as many YPA and AYPA as Eli Manning, but with a better career TD:INT ratio?

Answer: This guy!

Again, whats your point?

The first point was that it's silly to suggest that Vick is "old". The second point is that Vick is an underrated passer and it's silly to suggest that he could never be an effective passer. I'm sure plenty of people would have once said Randall Cunningham could never develop into an adequate passer, too... right up until he dropped a 3700/34 on them.

 

[Go deep]

Your an angry man. Settle down a bit and reread what i wrote. Using rankings(yours, mine, anyone elses)isnt a good way to evaluate a trade. Comparing WR5 to WR10 doesnt always tell the whole story. WR5-10 could all be WR's in the same tier, making WR5 and WR 10 equally valuable. Or there could be a big drop after WR9, making WR 10 much less valuable than WR 5.I used my dynasty SCORES, not RANKINGS because it gives a better idea of a players value. Those scores put through the calculator gave the Crabtree/Bradshaw an 86 -63 score advantage. Of course that is just my opinion, if you feel different thats fine, it doesnt really matter to me. If we all felt the same about things, fantasy football wouldnt be much fun.

Angry? Not really. At the end of the day, you're absolutely right. You feel one way, I feel another. The fact that two intelligent and informed dynasty owners could differ suggests to me that it's silly to call either side of the trade "robbery".

Its obviously just my opinion that one team robbed the other. That doesnt make it true, i was just giving my thoughts on the trade.

 

[thatguy]

Look, if you asked me "who is more talented, Stewart or Foster?", I'd say Stewart. If you asked me who would have a better career, I'd say Stewart.

But if you asked me who is more valuable RIGHT NOW, I'd say Foster. Now maybe that's a fundamental error with the way I'm approaching dynasty leagues. But assuming he stays healthy, Foster will be more valuable in week 9, when a team is trying to load up for the playoffs, than in week 2, where most teams are still holding out hope for this year.

Unless Foster gets injured, I can't imagine a scenario where Foster's trade value would FALL during the season. Everyone knows he won't get 200 yards a game. But if he continues to hover around 80-90 yards per game, his value will do nothing but continue to rise, as Miles Austin's did.

You yourself said that you'd rather have Foster in a re-draft league. As such, I would think that if you owned Foster in a dynasty, that you'd try and get a little more use out of him before dumping him for a guy mired in a deep RBBC on a bad team.

How many LeShon Johnson owners were telling themselves the same thing after he had 21/214/2 in week 4 of 1996? Arizona made him the unquestioned starter after that game but he only topped 50 rushing yards 3 more times all season, and he eventually lost the starting job to Leland McElroy.How many Duce Staley owners were telling themselves the same thing after he had 26/201/1 in week 1 of 2000? Staley had 53 carries for 143 yards (2.70 ypc) over the next 4 weeks.

And why are we ignoring the possibility of a Foster injury? If you really think that Stewart is a more valuable asset than Foster, you shouldn't refrain from trading him thinking "unless Foster gets injured, I can always make this trade later, instead", because if Foster DOES get injured, you miss the boat entirely.

I will agree with EBF that it's not like a string of top-10 seasons and elite dynasty value are Foster's birthright at this point.

Dude, you just named two guys out of a whole bunch on your list. Are you really trying to say that's the norm? Come on, you're better than that. As far as injury concerns go, we have no reason to believe Foster is any more injury prone than the average NFL RB, so it's not something we can consider. You should know that, too. And since you're so fond of calling "staying healthy" an actual skill, do you want to argue that Stewart is more skillful than Foster in that department? Because that's an argument I don't see you winning.And, no I'm not saying that anyone should trade Stewart for Foster, or that a Foster owner should turn down an offer of Stewart. But I am just sayin'...

 

[SSOG]

Dude, you just named two guys out of a whole bunch on your list. Are you really trying to say that's the norm? Come on, you're better than that. As far as injury concerns go, we have no reason to believe Foster is any more injury prone than the average NFL RB, so it's not something we can consider. You should know that, too. And since you're so fond of calling "staying healthy" an actual skill, do you want to argue that Stewart is more skillful than Foster in that department? Because that's an argument I don't see you winning.And, no I'm not saying that anyone should trade Stewart for Foster, or that a Foster owner should turn down an offer of Stewart. But I am just sayin'...

I never said it was the norm. The OP said it was "unimaginable". I said it's not so unimaginable after all. I've seen plenty of owners get burned because they waited to trade someone whose value they were absolutely sure wasn't going to drop. Sometimes, you're better off not trying to be a hero and milk every single last drop of value out of an exchange. If you think Stewart is much better than Foster, and you have a chance to make that trade, I say you should make that trade rather than waiting around and hoping it's still waiting for you when you've finally gotten enough use out of Foster first. There are no guarantees in fantasy football.

 

[thatguy]

Dude, you just named two guys out of a whole bunch on your list. Are you really trying to say that's the norm? Come on, you're better than that. As far as injury concerns go, we have no reason to believe Foster is any more injury prone than the average NFL RB, so it's not something we can consider. You should know that, too. And since you're so fond of calling "staying healthy" an actual skill, do you want to argue that Stewart is more skillful than Foster in that department? Because that's an argument I don't see you winning.And, no I'm not saying that anyone should trade Stewart for Foster, or that a Foster owner should turn down an offer of Stewart. But I am just sayin'...

I never said it was the norm. The OP said it was "unimaginable". I said it's not so unimaginable after all. I've seen plenty of owners get burned because they waited to trade someone whose value they were absolutely sure wasn't going to drop. Sometimes, you're better off not trying to be a hero and milk every single last drop of value out of an exchange. If you think Stewart is much better than Foster, and you have a chance to make that trade, I say you should make that trade rather than waiting around and hoping it's still waiting for you when you've finally gotten enough use out of Foster first. There are no guarantees in fantasy football.

Yeah, I phrased that poorly--didn't mean to suggest that you implied it was the norm. But it seemed you were suggesting it was somewhat common, and I believe your list proves otherwise. Sure, it happens. But I think what we have to go by, more than any list or data, is our eyes. If we believe that Foster looks the part of a stud RB, then we hold onto him. If we don't, we trade him. Me, I think he looks pretty damn good. He certainly doesn't have the all world skills of a guy like Stewart, but he's no scrub. I personally would trade him for Stewart in my dynasty league, but I have that luxury as my RB depth is very good. If I had to depend on Foster every week, I don't think I could make the trade, as I am in win now mode.

 

[Hellfire Snail]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

Team A robbed team B.Sproles and Robinson are a push.Give Roddy an edge over Crabtree, but Bradshaw is a top 15-18 dynasty RB, which makes up the difference and then some.....and then some more.

WR10 + RB27 + WR60 for WR5 + WR57 by my rankings. I'd favor the WR5 side of the trade based on how huge the gap is between tier 2 and tier 3 at WR. I can understand how someone would feel otherwise, but I think calling either side of that trade "robbery" is just sensationalism.

Its robbery if you have Bradshaw higher than a top 27 RB. Even if i did have Bradshaw at 27, i would still much rather have WR10 and RB27 than WR5. I dont think using their rankings is a fair way to evaluate a trade anyhow.According to my dynasty scores/calculator the Crabtree/Bradshaw side wins this trade 86 - 63.

Bradshaw is a tricky commodity. Wide range of viewpoints on him that can all be supported. Young, talented, plays for a decent team, but he splits carries, might not rack up a lot of scores, hasn't carried the load yet. Pretty big trade involving him in my dynasty league this morning:Team A trades: Jay Cutler, Ahmad Bradshaw, Greg JenningsTeam B trades: Ray Rice, Tashard ChoiceTeam A with enough depth to cover the loss of Cutler/Jennings, Team B needed to fill a lot of holes. Like any trade involving Bradshaw, though, the winner of the deal will be determined by how he pans out this year.

 

[thriftyrocker]

The first point was that it's silly to suggest that Vick is "old". The second point is that Vick is an underrated passer and it's silly to suggest that he could never be an effective passer. I'm sure plenty of people would have once said Randall Cunningham could never develop into an adequate passer, too... right up until he dropped a 3700/34 on them.

In his glory years with the Eagles, Randall was throwing for yards and TDs. Had a 3800 yard season. Had a 30 TD season. He wasn't accurate but he was moving the ball through the air. Compared to Vick who has never broken 3000 yards and highest TD season is 20 in an era which is more pass friendly. The theory "Randall could be a good QB after he lost a legs" therefore "Vick could be a QB after he lost his legs" isn't really that sound.

 

[Go deep]

Crabtree trade after week 1's fiasco:Team A receives: Crabtree + Ahmad Bradshaw + Laurent RobinsonTeam B receives: Roddy White + Sproles

Team A robbed team B.Sproles and Robinson are a push.Give Roddy an edge over Crabtree, but Bradshaw is a top 15-18 dynasty RB, which makes up the difference and then some.....and then some more.

WR10 + RB27 + WR60 for WR5 + WR57 by my rankings. I'd favor the WR5 side of the trade based on how huge the gap is between tier 2 and tier 3 at WR. I can understand how someone would feel otherwise, but I think calling either side of that trade "robbery" is just sensationalism.

Its robbery if you have Bradshaw higher than a top 27 RB. Even if i did have Bradshaw at 27, i would still much rather have WR10 and RB27 than WR5. I dont think using their rankings is a fair way to evaluate a trade anyhow.According to my dynasty scores/calculator the Crabtree/Bradshaw side wins this trade 86 - 63.

Bradshaw is a tricky commodity. Wide range of viewpoints on him that can all be supported. Young, talented, plays for a decent team, but he splits carries, might not rack up a lot of scores, hasn't carried the load yet. Pretty big trade involving him in my dynasty league this morning:Team A trades: Jay Cutler, Ahmad Bradshaw, Greg JenningsTeam B trades: Ray Rice, Tashard ChoiceTeam A with enough depth to cover the loss of Cutler/Jennings, Team B needed to fill a lot of holes. Like any trade involving Bradshaw, though, the winner of the deal will be determined by how he pans out this year.

Yipes, this one might be more lopsided than the other one. Of course i feel that way because i really like Bradshaw. I also dont like Rice as much as most.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Michael Vick has 38 rushes/sacks in the last 3 and a half years combined. If hits wear a body down, then Vick must be a very, very "young 30".

I agree, i just dont get your point.

Pop quiz: who has two thumbs and averages as many YPA and AYPA as Eli Manning, but with a better career TD:INT ratio?

Answer: This guy!

Again, whats your point?

The first point was that it's silly to suggest that Vick is "old". The second point is that Vick is an underrated passer and it's silly to suggest that he could never be an effective passer. I'm sure plenty of people would have once said Randall Cunningham could never develop into an adequate passer, too... right up until he dropped a 3700/34 on them.

Vick has an incredible arm, and he's a phenomenal athlete. But he doesn't appear to be able to read defenses properly - or even throw much of a touch pass. Could he learn to be a complete quarterback? Of course. Do I think he will? No.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Bradshaw is a tricky commodity. Wide range of viewpoints on him that can all be supported. Young, talented, plays for a decent team, but he splits carries, might not rack up a lot of scores, hasn't carried the load yet.

Let's compare him to other guys in the same or higher tiers.* Felix Jones - same quote applies: "Young, talented, plays for a decent team, but he splits carries, might not rack up a lot of scores, hasn't carried the load yet."* CJ Spiller - same quote applies, except team is poor* Shonn Greene - same quote applies, but should get lots of RZ* LeSean McCoy - same quote applies, but talent is more in question, and offense limits the carries he'll get* Darren McFadden - same quote applies, but team is poor and talent is in more questionGiven his role is richer, Jacobs is proving he's not the same guy, DJ Ware seems unlikely to challenge anyone, the comparison to other young guys seems like it could quickly swing in his favor.He is deceptively young too. He's only 1.4 years older than Spiller even though he's been around forever, and Spiller was a top 10 pick rookie.