Dynasty Rankings (5 Viewers)

[Coeur de Lion]

Not sure why people love to bash Bryant so much - probably unrealistic expectations.

A.) He's actually ahead of the curve statistically for a late 1st rounder at WR with 32 games under his belt - career averages 4.4 - 58 - .5 per game, despite having to compete with both Witten and Austin for targets.

B.) He came into the NFL as a 21 year old - some immaturity and inconsistent play is par for the course IMO.

Clearly a top talent. Good passing offense. I'd love to have him, but unfortunately his owners haven't been willing to sell in any of my leagues.

 

[Concept Coop]

A.) He's actually ahead of the curve statistically for a late 1st rounder at WR with 32 games under his belt - career averages 4.4 - 58 - .5 per game, despite having to compete with both Witten and Austin for targets.

Thanks for this. Where did you get it?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

A.) He's actually ahead of the curve statistically for a late 1st rounder at WR with 32 games under his belt - career averages 4.4 - 58 - .5 per game, despite having to compete with both Witten and Austin for targets.

Thanks for this. Where did you get it?

www.pro-football-reference.com

 

[Concept Coop]

A.) He's actually ahead of the curve statistically for a late 1st rounder at WR with 32 games under his belt - career averages 4.4 - 58 - .5 per game, despite having to compete with both Witten and Austin for targets.

Thanks for this. Where did you get it?

www.pro-football-reference.com

That's awesome. Thanks, again.

 

[JFS171]

No intent to hijack away from the elite WRs conversation, but with the talk of DT and Manning's career arc, I'm curious how the wisdom of the thread values a guy like Manning?

Clearly in the second half last night, he looked as good as he's ever looked, and if he keeps playing to the level he has thus far this season, he's a clear asset (obviously). That being said (and somewhat related to the Luck vs Brees discussion), how do you value the remaining career of a 36-year old Manning vs. for example, an underperforming 30-year old Rivers (31 in December) or 32-year old Romo?

As a second part to the question, what younger, under-the-radar QBs are you guys targeting in your leagues if you own an aging QB? Assuming continued late-first rounders if that QB is consistently putting you in the playoffs, you're never going to get a shot at a Luck or RGIII type player barring a massive trade, so is trading for an up-and-comer may be the best way to go? If so, who are some of the guys you're targeting?

Dalton - biggest knock was arm strength, which has improved in the NFL (rare as that is); legit stud WR; not much of a run game to speak of; offense willing to let him throw. I think he's pretty interesting, honestly, but hasn't been as secure with the ball this year. That said, throwing for a lot of yards, and his 12 TDs are more than halfway to his total of 20 last year.

Ponder - knock was health, arm strength, etc; injured last year, but so far so good this year; Peterson around the next 5-6 years may limit his upside, but he too has that elite weapon in Harvin, and a solid underneath threat in Rudolph. I'd probably put him behind Dalton.

Locker - can put up points in spades, and has the arm strength and willingness to throw down the field; the legs obviously help the production and elevate the floor; hasn't been able to stay healthy thus far either, and has some throws that really make you scratch your head. He maay be cheaper due to the injury factor, but will the accuracy issues kill his career? Not sure where to value him...

Russell Wilson - short guy, loads of college production, adjusting to the NFL. I'd personally also question the supporting cast, but as ConceptCoop has stated, Tate is emerging. Lynch won't be around forever, and Wilson has the running ability as well, and his obvious propensity for late game heroics...

Others?

 

[EBF]

No intent to hijack away from the elite WRs conversation, but with the talk of DT and Manning's career arc, I'm curious how the wisdom of the thread values a guy like Manning?Clearly in the second half last night, he looked as good as he's ever looked, and if he keeps playing to the level he has thus far this season, he's a clear asset (obviously). That being said (and somewhat related to the Luck vs Brees discussion), how do you value the remaining career of a 36-year old Manning vs. for example, an underperforming 30-year old Rivers (31 in December) or 32-year old Romo?As a second part to the question, what younger, under-the-radar QBs are you guys targeting in your leagues if you own an aging QB? Assuming continued late-first rounders if that QB is consistently putting you in the playoffs, you're never going to get a shot at a Luck or RGIII type player barring a massive trade, so is trading for an up-and-comer may be the best way to go? If so, who are some of the guys you're targeting? Dalton - biggest knock was arm strength, which has improved in the NFL (rare as that is); legit stud WR; not much of a run game to speak of; offense willing to let him throw. I think he's pretty interesting, honestly, but hasn't been as secure with the ball this year. That said, throwing for a lot of yards, and his 12 TDs are more than halfway to his total of 20 last year.Ponder - knock was health, arm strength, etc; injured last year, but so far so good this year; Peterson around the next 5-6 years may limit his upside, but he too has that elite weapon in Harvin, and a solid underneath threat in Rudolph. I'd probably put him behind Dalton.Locker - can put up points in spades, and has the arm strength and willingness to throw down the field; the legs obviously help the production and elevate the floor; hasn't been able to stay healthy thus far either, and has some throws that really make you scratch your head. He maay be cheaper due to the injury factor, but will the accuracy issues kill his career? Not sure where to value him...Russell Wilson - short guy, loads of college production, adjusting to the NFL. I'd personally also question the supporting cast, but as ConceptCoop has stated, Tate is emerging. Lynch won't be around forever, and Wilson has the running ability as well, and his obvious propensity for late game heroics...Others?

I like Dalton and Wilson. Dalton is averaging 8.0 YPA at a 66% clip. If he can maintain those numbers and cut out some of the INTs, he will have a Pro Bowl career. I was not a fan of him as a draft prospect, but if he keeps playing like this then I will have to start considering him as a fringe elite QB. He is starting to look like the best trade target in terms of value per cost. I am not quite ready to pay a big price for him just yet though. Wilson is also doing pretty well, averaging 7.3 YPA and completing 63.5% of his tosses. Not bad at all for a rookie. I'm a bit sick that I overlooked him in my leagues, as he appears to be a legit starting caliber passer with upside to become more than that. I am a huge Andrew Luck fan and I think he will eventually live up to the hype, but the numbers don't lie. Right now Wilson is outplaying Luck (albeit on a much better team). Ponder has shown flashes, but his 6.8 YPA is a red flag for me. That's not very good, even for a second year player who only has a couple of good targets to work with. He is looking like a game manager and not a playmaker. Locker has put up decent stats over the last two years, but I have been a big time skeptic since his college days and I'm not going to change my mind until he really proves himself. Put simply, I think he's way too inconsistent with his accuracy and decision making to be trusted as an NFL or FF QB. He will have awesome games every now and then like he did a few weeks back, but he will also have some real nightmare outings. Too much of a Jekkyl and Hyde for me. I think his ceiling is Jake Plummer and I wouldn't pay the sticker price.Other names I would consider:Nick FolesRyan MallettBoth were very good college QBs and early draft picks. If either of them gets a starting chance, he could surprise. Foles appears to have an easier track to PT with Vick underwhelming and taking vicious hits every week. And for a deep sleeper, Kirk Cousins could be worth a stash. He is never going to start over RG3, but maybe 3 or 4 years from now he will be on a different team.

 

[Concept Coop]

I do value Peyton quite a bit. He is 36 and I only feel comfortable expecting him to finish this year, and complete next year. But I expect top 5-7 numbers during that span. QB is a position where the baseline is so easy to find, that older guys who offer solid VBD should have value. I would trade a late 1st rounder without much hesitation for him, in many situations.

As for younger guys:

I am avoiding, or moving Locker. Dalton is too expensive right now. I do like Ponder at his current price, and I still like Wilson. They would be my two targets, along with Tannehil, who has shown me something the last few weeks.

 

[renesauz]

No intent to hijack away from the elite WRs conversation, but with the talk of DT and Manning's career arc, I'm curious how the wisdom of the thread values a guy like Manning?Clearly in the second half last night, he looked as good as he's ever looked, and if he keeps playing to the level he has thus far this season, he's a clear asset (obviously). That being said (and somewhat related to the Luck vs Brees discussion), how do you value the remaining career of a 36-year old Manning vs. for example, an underperforming 30-year old Rivers (31 in December) or 32-year old Romo?As a second part to the question, what younger, under-the-radar QBs are you guys targeting in your leagues if you own an aging QB? Assuming continued late-first rounders if that QB is consistently putting you in the playoffs, you're never going to get a shot at a Luck or RGIII type player barring a massive trade, so is trading for an up-and-comer may be the best way to go? If so, who are some of the guys you're targeting? Dalton - biggest knock was arm strength, which has improved in the NFL (rare as that is); legit stud WR; not much of a run game to speak of; offense willing to let him throw. I think he's pretty interesting, honestly, but hasn't been as secure with the ball this year. That said, throwing for a lot of yards, and his 12 TDs are more than halfway to his total of 20 last year.Ponder - knock was health, arm strength, etc; injured last year, but so far so good this year; Peterson around the next 5-6 years may limit his upside, but he too has that elite weapon in Harvin, and a solid underneath threat in Rudolph. I'd probably put him behind Dalton.Locker - can put up points in spades, and has the arm strength and willingness to throw down the field; the legs obviously help the production and elevate the floor; hasn't been able to stay healthy thus far either, and has some throws that really make you scratch your head. He maay be cheaper due to the injury factor, but will the accuracy issues kill his career? Not sure where to value him...Russell Wilson - short guy, loads of college production, adjusting to the NFL. I'd personally also question the supporting cast, but as ConceptCoop has stated, Tate is emerging. Lynch won't be around forever, and Wilson has the running ability as well, and his obvious propensity for late game heroics...Others?

Generally speaking, it's TOO EASY to get a viable QB in most leagues. Outside of the top 5 or 6, the next 12 or 15 are almost interchangeable...relatively easy to aquire. IN every dynasty draft, there's at least one QB available in the late 1st or early 2nd that will get a chance to start early in his career (Tannehill, Weeden). On waivers or available for a late pick, there's usually one or two guys stuck behind a starter who might well get a legit shot someday (Kapernick, Foles). Than there are QBs like Alex Smith and Kevin Kolb...everyone hates them but they're currently ranked 16 and 17 in many leagues and are relatively easy to aquire. Guys like this are solid backups, and are still young enough that they might improve.Now...look at the current top 7 or 8 QB's. How many were top dynasty picks? Ryan wasn't a top 5 dynasty pick. Neither was Rodgers. Brady was a waiver wire add. Brees? Dalton? I took Newton with the 12th pick in one draft. Luck and Griffin only went as high as they did BECAUSE of Newton's rookie production.Two QB leagues are a different beast, but in most leagues I'd try to grab an Alex Smith or Matt Schaub type as a backup, then plan on spending a late 1st or a second on a guy like Tannehill who can sit on the bench and hopefully be the long term replacement once the ageing star QB retires. Trade Manning as soon as you have that replacement....if you were lucky enough to add Ryan a couple years ago, or got lucky on Newton last year. The bottom line is that if you have an aged QB, you have to spend a pick on QB...take a shot just like the real teams do. Manning still has value to a competing team...late first/early 2nd.

 

[squistion]

Locker has put up decent stats over the last two years, but I have been a big time skeptic since his college days and I'm not going to change my mind until he really proves himself. Put simply, I think he's way too inconsistent with his accuracy and decision making to be trusted as an NFL or FF QB. He will have awesome games every now and then like he did a few weeks back, but he will also have some real nightmare outings. Too much of a Jekkyl and Hyde for me. I think his ceiling is Jake Plummer and I wouldn't pay the sticker price.

No matter what he does or how well he performs, Locker will never prove himself to you. Not when the below was your starting point. And don't say that was just hyperbole because you said essentially the same thing in about 10 other threads guaranteeing failure (but I don't feel like spending the time looking them up).

EBF, on 28 April 2011 - 09:26 PM, said:

Shocking reaches in this draft. Then again, this talent pool is shallow.

I'd say it's about 95% that Locker will be a huge flop. Disastrous pick this high.

Similar to DMC, who you constantly dissed from when he was a rookie and then when he had his breakthrough year, you reluctantly acknowledged, "Well, I guess he is better than I thought." But as soon as he hit another bump in the road, you were back to where you were before:

Who would want to buy McFadden? :X

 

[Banger]

What are the thoughts on MJD as a dynasty player at this point? I'm thinking of buying him but wanted to get some opinions. I'm not a huge fan of buying RBs later in their career but I'm going for it this year and his schedule looks really juicy going down the stretch. Also, like to hear what guys think will happen contract wise and long term for him.

Thanks...great thread and I frequently lurk but rarely post.

 

[EBF]

Locker has put up decent stats over the last two years, but I have been a big time skeptic since his college days and I'm not going to change my mind until he really proves himself. Put simply, I think he's way too inconsistent with his accuracy and decision making to be trusted as an NFL or FF QB. He will have awesome games every now and then like he did a few weeks back, but he will also have some real nightmare outings. Too much of a Jekkyl and Hyde for me. I think his ceiling is Jake Plummer and I wouldn't pay the sticker price.

No matter what he does or how well he performs, Locker will never prove himself to you. Not when the below was your starting point. And don't say that was just hyperbole because you said essentially the same thing in about 10 other threads guaranteeing failure (but I don't feel like spending the time looking them up).

EBF, on 28 April 2011 - 09:26 PM, said:

Shocking reaches in this draft. Then again, this talent pool is shallow.

I'd say it's about 95% that Locker will be a huge flop. Disastrous pick this high.

Similar to DMC, who you constantly dissed from when he was a rookie and then when he had his breakthrough year, you reluctantly acknowledged, "Well, I guess he is better than I thought." But as soon as he hit another bump in the road, you were back to where you were before:

Who would want to buy McFadden? :X

I change my mind on players all the time. There are lots of guys like Frank Gore, Brandon Marshall, Greg Jennings, and LeSean McCoy that I avoided in rookie drafts only to change my mind and trade for or draft a year or two later. The difference is that the two guys you mentioned haven't given me ample reason for doing so. I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles. With one 1000+ yard rushing season in the first five years of his career, it is tough for me to feel bad about that call even if some people still cling to the idea that he's elite.

As for Locker, he's hardly thrown any passes. 172 career attempts. In that time he has shown flashes of brilliance, but also signs of his old accuracy woes. If he could stay healthy and string together numerous good performances, I would have reason to change my mind. But right now he is still largely an unknown at the pro level, so I'll go by what I knew of him in college, where he was a workout warrior type with spotty production on game day.

 

[Concept Coop]

What are the thoughts on MJD as a dynasty player at this point? I'm thinking of buying him but wanted to get some opinions. I'm not a huge fan of buying RBs later in their career but I'm going for it this year and his schedule looks really juicy going down the stretch. Also, like to hear what guys think will happen contract wise and long term for him. Thanks...great thread and I frequently lurk but rarely post.

He is a guy I am avoiding. I think he is the best RB in the NFL right now, but I worry about his knees, and milage. I am not moving him if I can't get fair value, but I would be looking and keeping an eye open at potential deals. That said, if you are going for it all this year, you have to decide what that is worth do you. I can't really blame anyone for giving up some value in a vacuum, to win now.

 

[Banger]

What are the thoughts on MJD as a dynasty player at this point? I'm thinking of buying him but wanted to get some opinions. I'm not a huge fan of buying RBs later in their career but I'm going for it this year and his schedule looks really juicy going down the stretch. Also, like to hear what guys think will happen contract wise and long term for him. Thanks...great thread and I frequently lurk but rarely post.

He is a guy I am avoiding. I think he is the best RB in the NFL right now, but I worry about his knees, and milage. I am not moving him if I can't get fair value, but I would be looking and keeping an eye open at potential deals. That said, if you are going for it all this year, you have to decide what that is worth do you. I can't really blame anyone for giving up some value in a vacuum, to win now.

I kind of feel the same but I'm looking to give up Leshoure and a 1st and 3rd round draft picks. So giving up potential for present/short term value. I generally tend to hold onto my 1sts but I have AJ Green, T-Rich and some other good young players so my thought is to get 2 real good years out of him. His YTD performance has been ok but with the bye week, some tough matchups and other not great performances (outside of Indy) his value is pretty low. With Oak, GB, Det, Indy, Houston (banged up), Tenn, Buff, and NYJ...that's a pretty nice schedule for the stretch run.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Any strong opinions on Josh Gordon in Cleveland?

The long TDs aren't something you can count on every week, but how do you like his dynasty prospects. I've read that he's pretty raw.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Locker has put up decent stats over the last two years, but I have been a big time skeptic since his college days and I'm not going to change my mind until he really proves himself. Put simply, I think he's way too inconsistent with his accuracy and decision making to be trusted as an NFL or FF QB. He will have awesome games every now and then like he did a few weeks back, but he will also have some real nightmare outings. Too much of a Jekkyl and Hyde for me. I think his ceiling is Jake Plummer and I wouldn't pay the sticker price.

No matter what he does or how well he performs, Locker will never prove himself to you. Not when the below was your starting point. And don't say that was just hyperbole because you said essentially the same thing in about 10 other threads guaranteeing failure (but I don't feel like spending the time looking them up).

EBF, on 28 April 2011 - 09:26 PM, said:

Shocking reaches in this draft. Then again, this talent pool is shallow.

I'd say it's about 95% that Locker will be a huge flop. Disastrous pick this high.

Similar to DMC, who you constantly dissed from when he was a rookie and then when he had his breakthrough year, you reluctantly acknowledged, "Well, I guess he is better than I thought." But as soon as he hit another bump in the road, you were back to where you were before:

Who would want to buy McFadden? :X

I change my mind on players all the time. There are lots of guys like Frank Gore, Brandon Marshall, Greg Jennings, and LeSean McCoy that I avoided in rookie drafts only to change my mind and trade for or draft a year or two later. The difference is that the two guys you mentioned haven't given me ample reason for doing so. I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles. With one 1000+ yard rushing season in the first five years of his career, it is tough for me to feel bad about that call even if some people still cling to the idea that he's elite.

As for Locker, he's hardly thrown any passes. 172 career attempts. In that time he has shown flashes of brilliance, but also signs of his old accuracy woes. If he could stay healthy and string together numerous good performances, I would have reason to change my mind. But right now he is still largely an unknown at the pro level, so I'll go by what I knew of him in college, where he was a workout warrior type with spotty production on game day.

Stuff like this makes it pretty hard to take you seriously sometimes. There are legitimate knocks on DMC, but his running ability isn't close to being one of them.

 

[JFS171]

There were reports around the supplemental draft that had Gordon played a full year for Utah and gone into the 2013 draft, he'd have been a first rounder. I think one even said he'd be a top 10 pick.

I say that to lead into the following: How would you be valuing Josh Gordon if he had Michael Floyd's draft pedigree?

This is largely what I expected with the guy, after being away from organized football for so long. I think he's got tons of talent, and I could easily see him building his role in that offense the rest of the way. I'd buy him now if someone thinks they're selling low. I think he's got a big, big future.

 

[jdoggydogg]

There were reports around the supplemental draft that had Gordon played a full year for Utah and gone into the 2013 draft, he'd have been a first rounder. I think one even said he'd be a top 10 pick.I say that to lead into the following: How would you be valuing Josh Gordon if he had Michael Floyd's draft pedigree? This is largely what I expected with the guy, after being away from organized football for so long. I think he's got tons of talent, and I could easily see him building his role in that offense the rest of the way. I'd buy him now if someone thinks they're selling low. I think he's got a big, big future.

Is he too inexperienced to be a consistent WR in 2012?

 

[EBF]

Stuff like this makes it pretty hard to take you seriously sometimes. There are legitimate knocks on DMC, but his running ability isn't close to being one of them.

I've been hearing how wrong I am about McFadden's talent for five years, four of which have seen him be a huge disappointment for one reason or another. The guy has electric straight line speed, but is not a great overall running back. When the scheme is perfectly tailored to his strengths he can be an effective player for the brief time that he actually stays healthy, but he is not a great overall running back. Of the 32 RBs in the NFL who have at least 50 carries this season, he ranks 30th in YPC, behind such whipping boys as Shonn Greene, Cedric Benson, Doug Martin, Chris Johnson, and the Law Firm. He is also ranked as one of the worst running backs in the league on the Football Outsiders DVOA scale, if that holds any weight with you. He simply not a great back, no matter how many people keep insisting otherwise.

 

[Concept Coop]

Buy Demarco Murray today, if you can.

Getting rolled up on and landed on awkwardly has nothing to do with anything in his past, his running style, or his body type. That stuff happens. Cash in on the "damaged goods" stigma.

 

[Donsmith753]

While we're talking young QBs, Tannehill is the guy I like. He's far riskier than some others but who wants a perennial top 12 guy at QB.

He's playing with nothing at receiver and not looking horrible. I'd be trying to trade for him if I needed a QB.

 

[JFS171]

I think his 2012 could look a lot like Torrey Smith's by the time it's all said and done. That being said, I would be shocked if he was *consistent* the rest of the way. I think there will be some huge games, and much like Smith, I could easily see Gordon build on his role the rest of the year and especially into years 2 and 3.

To me, I think it's a great sign to see this level production from him now considering his time away from football. He's just getting his legs back under him, and there's opportunity in Cleveland for WRs (obviously).

Could he be consistent the rest of the way? Sure, but I think it'd require a lot more opportunity for that to happen, but he's on a team where opportunity could continue to come his way.

Just my $0.02...

 

[jdoggydogg]

I think his 2012 could look a lot like Torrey Smith's by the time it's all said and done. That being said, I would be shocked if he was *consistent* the rest of the way. I think there will be some huge games, and much like Smith, I could easily see Gordon build on his role the rest of the year and especially into years 2 and 3. To me, I think it's a great sign to see this level production from him now considering his time away from football. He's just getting his legs back under him, and there's opportunity in Cleveland for WRs (obviously). Could he be consistent the rest of the way? Sure, but I think it'd require a lot more opportunity for that to happen, but he's on a team where opportunity could continue to come his way.Just my $0.02...

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Locker has put up decent stats over the last two years, but I have been a big time skeptic since his college days and I'm not going to change my mind until he really proves himself. Put simply, I think he's way too inconsistent with his accuracy and decision making to be trusted as an NFL or FF QB. He will have awesome games every now and then like he did a few weeks back, but he will also have some real nightmare outings. Too much of a Jekkyl and Hyde for me. I think his ceiling is Jake Plummer and I wouldn't pay the sticker price.

No matter what he does or how well he performs, Locker will never prove himself to you. Not when the below was your starting point. And don't say that was just hyperbole because you said essentially the same thing in about 10 other threads guaranteeing failure (but I don't feel like spending the time looking them up).

EBF, on 28 April 2011 - 09:26 PM, said:

Shocking reaches in this draft. Then again, this talent pool is shallow.

I'd say it's about 95% that Locker will be a huge flop. Disastrous pick this high.

Similar to DMC, who you constantly dissed from when he was a rookie and then when he had his breakthrough year, you reluctantly acknowledged, "Well, I guess he is better than I thought." But as soon as he hit another bump in the road, you were back to where you were before:

Who would want to buy McFadden? :X

I change my mind on players all the time. There are lots of guys like Frank Gore, Brandon Marshall, Greg Jennings, and LeSean McCoy that I avoided in rookie drafts only to change my mind and trade for or draft a year or two later. The difference is that the two guys you mentioned haven't given me ample reason for doing so. I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles. With one 1000+ yard rushing season in the first five years of his career, it is tough for me to feel bad about that call even if some people still cling to the idea that he's elite.

As for Locker, he's hardly thrown any passes. 172 career attempts. In that time he has shown flashes of brilliance, but also signs of his old accuracy woes. If he could stay healthy and string together numerous good performances, I would have reason to change my mind. But right now he is still largely an unknown at the pro level, so I'll go by what I knew of him in college, where he was a workout warrior type with spotty production on game day.

Stuff like this makes it pretty hard to take you seriously sometimes. There are legitimate knocks on DMC, but his running ability isn't close to being one of them.

Seems like an odd thing to say about someone who's averaged under 2.7 yards per carry in 4 of 5 weeks this season.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Stuff like this makes it pretty hard to take you seriously sometimes. There are legitimate knocks on DMC, but his running ability isn't close to being one of them.

I've been hearing how wrong I am about McFadden's talent for five years, four of which have seen him be a huge disappointment for one reason or another. The guy has electric straight line speed, but is not a great overall running back. When the scheme is perfectly tailored to his strengths he can be an effective player for the brief time that he actually stays healthy, but he is not a great overall running back. Of the 32 RBs in the NFL who have at least 50 carries this season, he ranks 30th in YPC, behind such whipping boys as Shonn Greene, Cedric Benson, Doug Martin, Chris Johnson, and the Law Firm. He is also ranked as one of the worst running backs in the league on the Football Outsiders DVOA scale, if that holds any weight with you. He simply not a great back, no matter how many people keep insisting otherwise.

He's off to a slow start this year, but I'm not sure why five games totally negates 2010 - 2011 in your eyes, other than confirmation bias.2010-11 -- 20 games - 336 carries for 1771 (5.3) - 66 receptions for 661 (10) - 15 TDs -- This on a crappy team, too. He's clearly elite when he's on the field.Congrats on having an effective crystal ball for injuries, I guess?

 

[JFS171]

Buy Demarco Murray today, if you can.Getting rolled up on and landed on awkwardly has nothing to do with anything in his past, his running style, or his body type. That stuff happens. Cash in on the "damaged goods" stigma.

Interesting point. I know at one point this offseason, Rotoworld had an article discussing the "injury prone" label and it's validity. They took a random number generator and assumed a handful of injuries per season to RBs (I don't recall the specifics of the test). Essentially it was suggesting injuries were random, and could hit the same player multiple times due to that random nature, which would perhaps make one player look "injury prone" without him actually having any greater propensity for future injury than anyone else.That was an argument for buying low on Ryan Mathews, and may also now be applicable to Murray. Where I struggle is that it sure *seems* like some guys are injury prone, even if the statistics don't support that.

 

[Concept Coop]

Buy Demarco Murray today, if you can.Getting rolled up on and landed on awkwardly has nothing to do with anything in his past, his running style, or his body type. That stuff happens. Cash in on the "damaged goods" stigma.

Interesting point. I know at one point this offseason, Rotoworld had an article discussing the "injury prone" label and it's validity. They took a random number generator and assumed a handful of injuries per season to RBs (I don't recall the specifics of the test). Essentially it was suggesting injuries were random, and could hit the same player multiple times due to that random nature, which would perhaps make one player look "injury prone" without him actually having any greater propensity for future injury than anyone else.That was an argument for buying low on Ryan Mathews, and may also now be applicable to Murray. Where I struggle is that it sure *seems* like some guys are injury prone, even if the statistics don't support that.

He got the label, but he missed 4 games at OU, out of 55. Didn't miss any as a Senior, despite 350+ touches, and only missed 1 over his final 2 seasons. Adrian Peterson missed more as a Junior alone.I get the tag, and some guys do get injured more often. But we need to look a bit deeper. The popular opinion is injury prone, but is he really? How many RBs didn't miss a game last year? RBs get hurt, and Murray's injuries aren't related or reoccurring. We aren't talking about knee issues, or continued pulls or tweaks. He was hit on both plays, and hit (or landed on) akwardly.

 

[squistion]

I change my mind on players all the time. There are lots of guys like Frank Gore, Brandon Marshall, Greg Jennings, and LeSean McCoy that I avoided in rookie drafts only to change my mind and trade for or draft a year or two later.

Agreed, but never on a player that you beforehand predicted failure for in the NFL. You said Gore, Marshall, Jennings and McCoy were not your cup of tea for various reasons and you thought they were overrated and/or wouldn't have drafted them at their ADP, but with none of those players did you do your Miss Cleo impression and predict that they would be a bust like you did with DMC and Locker (or on a non-rookie note, Forte being the most overrated dynasty FF player after his 1st season).I remember your comments on Gore specifically because I had just taken him 1.08 in the rookie draft. You thought he was overrated (draft pedigree and combine numbers) and said that at the point in the first round Mark Clayton and Big Mike Williams were better choices. You didn't however take it a step further and predict Gore would be a complete failure in the NFL.

It is obviously an ego thing with you when you draw a line in the sand and predict a player can not succeed in the NFL - with those players you seem incapable of ever admitting you were wrong (as opposed to the Gores and Marshalls where you are able to cheerfully acknowledge your error).

 

[EBF]

Nah, I was really down on Gore and Marshall. Gore because of his injury history and horrendous workouts. Marshall because he just looked slow to me. I think my exact words were that he "looks like he's running in molasses." When it became clear that I was dead wrong on both accounts, I quickly did a 180. Happens all the time. Torrey Smith is another recent example. Didn't like him last year. Like him now and have tried to trade for him in a few leagues.

I'm plenty flexible in my opinions. Forte's YPC has increased significantly since the days when I was ripping on him, which is why I've had almost nothing bad to say about him for the last 1-2 years. The difference with McFadden and Locker is that they haven't really done anything to prove me wrong. McFadden was billed as the next Peterson by some and has only managed 1 good season in 5 years. If anything, he has justified my skepticism.

As for Locker, the jury is still out. If a couple years pass and he's completing 60% of his passes at 8.0 YPA then I'll be the first one in line to admit how wrong I was. But after watching him struggle for years in college, I find that outcome unlikely. Hence my current stance.

My general approach is to develop a strong opinion of a player early and then stick to that opinion until given clear evidence that it's wrong. I've always been this way and I don't see my strategy changing much. People often confuse it for stubbornness or an unwillingness to admit that you're wrong, but it's more about strength of conviction than anything. If I think a player is crap, it's gonna take more than a few good games to convince me otherwise. If I think a player's great, it's gonna take more than a season or two of struggling to change my mind. It's pretty much that simple. Sometimes the change happens faster based on what I'm seeing. Sometimes it takes a while.

 

[SSOG]

Nah, I was really down on Gore and Marshall. Gore because of his injury history and horrendous workouts. Marshall because he just looked slow to me. I think my exact words were that he "looks like he's running in molasses." When it became clear that I was dead wrong on both accounts, I quickly did a 180. Happens all the time. Torrey Smith is another recent example. Didn't like him last year. Like him now and have tried to trade for him in a few leagues. I'm plenty flexible in my opinions. Forte's YPC has increased significantly since the days when I was ripping on him, which is why I've had almost nothing bad to say about him for the last 1-2 years. The difference with McFadden and Locker is that they haven't really done anything to prove me wrong. McFadden was billed as the next Peterson by some and has only managed 1 good season in 5 years. If anything, he has justified my skepticism.As for Locker, the jury is still out. If a couple years pass and he's completing 60% of his passes at 8.0 YPA then I'll be the first one in line to admit how wrong I was. But after watching him struggle for years in college, I find that outcome unlikely. Hence my current stance. My general approach is to develop a strong opinion of a player early and then stick to that opinion until given clear evidence that it's wrong. I've always been this way and I don't see my strategy changing much. People often confuse it for stubbornness or an unwillingness to admit that you're wrong, but it's more about strength of conviction than anything. If I think a player is crap, it's gonna take more than a few good games to convince me otherwise. If I think a player's great, it's gonna take more than a season or two of struggling to change my mind. It's pretty much that simple. Sometimes the change happens faster based on what I'm seeing. Sometimes it takes a while.

EBF, you know I love you, man, but you really have no credibility on McFadden at this point. Witness:RB1- 50 games played, 37 starts, 2898 rushing at 4.5 per, 1330 receiving at 9.7 per, 22 TDs, 554 fantasy points (11.08 per game)RB2- 53 games played, 46 starts, 3441 rushing at 4.1 per, 643 receiving at 8.9 per, 31 TDs, 595 fantasy points (11.22 per game)The first guy is McFadden, who you are lower on than anyone else is. The second is Mendenhall, who you are higher on than anyone else is. The numbers make it abundantly clear that both backs are nearly identical in terms of production and durability, while McFadden blows Mendenhall away in terms of efficiency, and yet one guy hasn't shown you anything while another guy has shown enough to convince you he's one of the best backs in the league. You're probably the only person on the planet not related to Mendenhall who thinks he's a better back than McFadden.

 

[EBF]

You're probably the only person on the planet not related to Mendenhall who thinks he's a better back than McFadden.

It's lonely at the top. McFadden is not a good football player. All speed. No moves. Bad body type. No durability. Big bust given what he was hyped to be. It has been funny bashing Chicken Legs all these years and having people insist that I'm wrong about him while he torpedoes their FF teams season after season. Guy is a total fraud. If other people don't see it, that's fine. I've been lucky enough to duck that albatross in all my dynasty leagues and I'm better off for it. Mendy has had his share of injuries as well. Even with that being the case, he still has more career rushing yards. I would expect the gap to keep growing.

 

[renesauz]

You're probably the only person on the planet not related to Mendenhall who thinks he's a better back than McFadden.

It's lonely at the top. McFadden is not a good football player. All speed. No moves. Bad body type. No durability. Big bust given what he was hyped to be. It has been funny bashing Chicken Legs all these years and having people insist that I'm wrong about him while he torpedoes their FF teams season after season. Guy is a total fraud. If other people don't see it, that's fine. I've been lucky enough to duck that albatross in all my dynasty leagues and I'm better off for it. Mendy has had his share of injuries as well. Even with that being the case, he still has more career rushing yards. I would expect the gap to keep growing.

See....I bought into this at first, but then I watched him running over players and running very effectively in between tackles. I understand durability concerns, but the idea that a healthy McFadden isn't among the most dangerous and dynamic RBs in the league is simply a ridiculous bias at this point.I've never fully bought into knocking RBs severely for injury concerns, but I can see knocking him down a few pegs for that. But he's FAR from "suck"

 

[EBF]

He's not even a top 5 RB from his draft class, let alone in the NFL. The fact that people keep making excuses for the guy and finding reasons to take him with top 15 picks year after year is actually hilarious.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

See....I bought into this at first, but then I watched him running over players and running very effectively in between tackles. I understand durability concerns, but the idea that a healthy McFadden isn't among the most dangerous and dynamic RBs in the league is simply a ridiculous bias at this point.

The problem is that McFadden's a slightish speed guy. He shouldn't be in the running over people business. But when he can't run past them he isn't great at making them miss. As far as I can tell I use BMI very differently than EBF but build does matter and McFadden is shaped funny for a RB by 2012 standards. I do think it contributes to his injuries.

 

[SSOG]

You're probably the only person on the planet not related to Mendenhall who thinks he's a better back than McFadden.

It's lonely at the top. McFadden is not a good football player. All speed. No moves. Bad body type. No durability. Big bust given what he was hyped to be. It has been funny bashing Chicken Legs all these years and having people insist that I'm wrong about him while he torpedoes their FF teams season after season. Guy is a total fraud. If other people don't see it, that's fine. I've been lucky enough to duck that albatross in all my dynasty leagues and I'm better off for it. Mendy has had his share of injuries as well. Even with that being the case, he still has more career rushing yards. I would expect the gap to keep growing.

Yes, Mendy has more rushing yards. And McFadden has more receiving yards. Those count, too, right? McFadden has twice as many receptions, which count extra in ppr leagues. McFadden has produced nearly identical totals to Mendy on a worse team with less of a commitment to the running game. He's done it far more efficiently. Mendy has put up the kind of ypc totals that you were busy excoriating Forte for (rightly so, in my opinion). McFadden has put up a ypc more in line with Stewart, MJD, and Peterson. And yet, despite your love of efficiency metrics, you are completely blind to what is glaringly obvious to everyone else on the planet. As I said, you just have no credibility on this subject.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

He's not even a top 5 RB from his draft class, let alone in the NFL. The fact that people keep making excuses for the guy and finding reasons to take him with top 15 picks year after year is actually hilarious.

Obviously this is at least half schtick at this point, but you are still completely ignoring the 120+ YFS and .75 TDs he averaged per start the past two years. And he's not exactly playing in Houston or Baltimore.

 

[EBF]

You're probably the only person on the planet not related to Mendenhall who thinks he's a better back than McFadden.

It's lonely at the top. McFadden is not a good football player. All speed. No moves. Bad body type. No durability. Big bust given what he was hyped to be. It has been funny bashing Chicken Legs all these years and having people insist that I'm wrong about him while he torpedoes their FF teams season after season. Guy is a total fraud. If other people don't see it, that's fine. I've been lucky enough to duck that albatross in all my dynasty leagues and I'm better off for it. Mendy has had his share of injuries as well. Even with that being the case, he still has more career rushing yards. I would expect the gap to keep growing.

Yes, Mendy has more rushing yards. And McFadden has more receiving yards. Those count, too, right? McFadden has twice as many receptions, which count extra in ppr leagues. McFadden has produced nearly identical totals to Mendy on a worse team with less of a commitment to the running game. He's done it far more efficiently. Mendy has put up the kind of ypc totals that you were busy excoriating Forte for (rightly so, in my opinion). McFadden has put up a ypc more in line with Stewart, MJD, and Peterson. And yet, despite your love of efficiency metrics, you are completely blind to what is glaringly obvious to everyone else on the planet. As I said, you just have no credibility on this subject.

That sounds nice in theory, but a high YPC isn't that significant if you can't stay on the field. That might sound ironic as a defense of Mendenhall, but even with all his injury troubles he's still logged more work than McFadden. I actually think the ability to handle a high volume of touches is a talent, and it's one that McFadden lacks. A lot of people are hypnotized by big plays and tend to associate talent only with explosive backs like CJ Spiller, McFadden, and Jamaal Charles. I understand that line of thinking, but I've always had an appreciation for players who can grind out yards as well. That's why I'm generally more forgiving of players like Cedric Benson and Shonn Greene than most. The things they do well are not as apparent and not as widely appreciated as flashy big plays. The same more or less applies to Mendenhall. He's a great back and will continue to churn out 1000+ yard seasons as long as his body allows. McFadden has elite straight line speed, but that's about where it starts and ends with him. He can't run through trash or create yards on his own. He has no natural lower body leg drive and relies completely on lowering his shoulder to generate power (the opposite of a truly powerful back such as MJD or Turner). He has just a tiny bit of elusiveness, but is not a hard cutter like Ray Rice or Trent Richardson. He's really not that good of a running back, and his immense struggles this year are strong proof. When the scheme isn't tailored perfectly to the few things he does well, he gets exposed as the one-dimensional runner that he is. I would have to sit down and write a list, but if I were an NFL GM there are probably at least 15 or 20 RBs that I would rather start my franchise with. Maybe more. In McFadden's draft class alone you have...Chris Johnson - 5946 rushing yardsRay Rice - 4859 rushing yardsMatt Forte - 4503 rushing yardsJamaal Charles - 3618 rushing yardsJonathan Stewart - 3607 rushing yardsRashard Mendenhall - 3441 rushing yardsDarren McFadden - 2898 rushing yardsFelix Jones - 2431 rushing yardsIn terms of production, he is actually closer to Felix Jones than he is to the true stars from his draft class. Even if you add receiving yards into the equation, he falls outside the top 5. The fact that Mendenhall with two season-ending injuries and Stewart mired in never-ending RBBC have both had more productive careers kind of says it all. McFadden is basically the Roy Williams of running backs. He was a high draft pick and he's had just enough production to keep his fanboys optimistic. He resembles an elite player in certain respects, but is missing several key traits that probably aren't apparent to you if you don't have a nuanced understanding of what's required from a player at his position. Like Williams, I expect him to be a chronic disappointment. It's been the case so far and I don't see any obvious reasons for a reversal.

 

[SSOG]

Defending inefficient backs with the "talent" for staying healthy is ironic given your stance on Forte. It's doubly ironic given that you're mounting it as a defense of Mendenhall, who has played a whopping 3 more games than McFadden.

Who cares if McFadden is only an uberstud in very specific schemes? Is the same not true of Welker?

 

[EBF]

Defending inefficient backs with the "talent" for staying healthy is ironic given your stance on Forte. It's doubly ironic given that you're mounting it as a defense of Mendenhall, who has played a whopping 3 more games than McFadden.

You mean my 4 year old stance on Forte? I have never believed that Matt is an awesome RB, but his YPC has jumped up since the days when I was calling him out and he has proven his ability to hold down a starting job and remain relatively healthy. Mendenhall got hurt as a rookie and then put together almost 800 carries in a row over three seasons before suffering the ACL injury. He averaged 1000+ rushing yards and ~10 rushing TDs over that span, which compares favorably to any stretch of McFadden's career. If he's truly back to 100% then I like his chances of putting up a couple more good seasons before fading off into the night.

Who cares if McFadden is only an uberstud in very specific schemes? Is the same not true of Welker?

1. Welker is not injured all the time.2. Welker currently plays in a system that suits his strengths. McFadden doesn't. The comparison might hold some weight if McFadden was getting it done every year, but he doesn't belong in the conversation with Welker. Welker is working on his 6th consecutive elite FF season. McFadden has 1 in 5 years. Just a wee bit of a difference there. I'll stand by my Roy Williams comparison. All sizzle. No steak. Major flaws that are overlooked because of his draft slot and reputation. People clinging to the dream years after it's apparent that he's not what he was advertised to be. You can bend over backwards trying to convince yourself that he's a star. He isn't and he never will be. One good season after five years in the league. Not even among the top 5 backs in his draft class in terms of career total yardage. Less productive to date than Jonathan Stewart, who (ironically) is widely accepted to be a perennial tease and disappointment by the same people who keep drinking the DMC Kool-Aid every year.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but thought this conversation could use some more useful numbers:

Games	Yds/GRice		 67	 109C Johnson	 69	 108Forte		 64	 103Charles		 55	 87McFadden	 50	 85Mendenhall	 53	 77K Smith		 46	 73Stewart		 65	 67F Jones		 53	 63Hillis		 55	 56BJGE		 59	 47Tolbert		 64	 40Forsett		 69	 31Choice		 66	 29

That's the RBs from the 2008 class who are playing in 2012 (missing Slaton, Hightower, Torain).

 

[Herm23]

I have vacillated on the topic of McFadden more than I ever like to do with any player. Much like EBF, my general preference in fantasy football is to develop a very strong stance on a player and then stay true to that stance as long as possible until enough such evidence supports itself that I am forced to change my opinion. While this may cause me to miss out on a player from time to time, I tend to trust in my ability to identify talent and have found myself to be right more than often and have either gotten players at insane discounts (Arian Foster and Victor Cruz WAY before people really knew who they were as 2 recent examples) and stay away from and/or trade away people that I believe to be overrated. I'm FAR from the best at this and most people in this thread are probably better than I at identifying true talent, but I have managed to hold my own in any league that I have been in.

As it pertains to McFadden, my initial read was that he was going to be HEAVILY overrated coming into the NFL for a variety of reasons. He then proceeded to confirm that belief for 2 full seasons, looking thoroughly mediocre and unimpressive as a runner. I'm not even counting injuries into that equation, as I generally ignore injuries unless they are the nagging "toughness" variety. What I mean by that is I feel Beanie Wells missing considerable time with injuries that other players likely could either tough out and play through or recover faster from. I feel McFadden has suffered more "fluke" injuries, such as the Lisfranc injury last year, which causes me to dismiss it as a negative against him. However, that doesn't change the fact that he looked COMPLETELY pedestrian as a runner during his entire 1st and 2nd season. I'm not just saying he didn't live up to his draft position, I'm saying that he literally looked like his running ability and style were best suited for change of pace and/or backup duty in the NFL. Outside of 1 game during his rookie season, he at no point looked like he belonged as the lead back in a backfield.

Oakland then underwent an overhaul, bringing in new coaches and a new offensive system. Low and behold, McFadden suddenly began looking like a star and was lighting up both fantasy scoreboards and efficiency metrics. I will admit that my belief that he was a mediocre player began to waiver over the previous 2 seasons, as it was hard to argue that he suddenly looked explosive, electric, and like one of the best running backs in the league. Unfortunately, it did not generate wins, thus enter Dennis Allen as the new Raiders head coach this season, bringing with him yet another new offense. Suddenly McFadden goes back to looking the like the slow, unsure, tentative, and frankly non-explosive player that he showed himself to be during his first 2 seasons. What this has caused me to realize is that McFadden is a player who, through 5 seasons, has struggled fairly obviously when the running system isn't beneficial to him and his specific skill sets and has thrived when the system has benefited him.

If we change Darren McFadden's name to Arian Foster, people would be bailing left and right and crying from the mountain tops that he was a system back and it was only a matter of time before the system changed for the worse and he would lose considerable value. I am not sure why the phenomenon of McFadden causes people to continue to miss this fact, but it is blatantly obvious to me at this point. I won't go so far as EBF did and call him a mediocre player anymore, as he has at least shown over the last 2 seasons that there is talent there. However, he has proven to me that unless the system is suited to him, he has no business being discussed among the best and/or most talented backs in the league. Even Arian Foster, the poster boy for system backs for most people, has managed to continue to produce at a VERY high rate despite the system seemingly regressing around him (this Texan's team is not the same dominant running team that it was even last year).

All of that being said, that does not make McFadden useless, not valuable, mediocre, not starter worthy, or anything like that. All it says is that he should not be held in the same regard as the running backs in the league who CAN continue to thrive regardless of the situation and system around them. We have 5 years of evidence now that McFadden is not capable of doing that, I'm not sure what else people are waiting for to come to the same conclusion.

Now that I have stuck my neck out on the topic, I'm sure I will proceed to watch McFadden go on a tear and average 110 yards a game for the rest of the season, seeing as the season is still quite young and we are all mostly still just projecting/guessing at this point. McFadden owners are all welcome in advance.

 

[SSOG]

You can bend over backwards trying to convince yourself that he's a star. He isn't and he never will be. One good season after five years in the league. Not even among the top 5 backs in his draft class in terms of career total yardage. Less productive to date than Jonathan Stewart, who (ironically) is widely accepted to be a perennial tease and disappointment by the same people who keep drinking the DMC Kool-Aid every year.

Who is bending over backwards? I'm not the guy saying that ypc is a great indicator, except when a back I don't like has a great ypc, or a back I do like has a poor ypc. I'm not the guy making the "health is a skill" argument to justify putting one RB over another RB who has played a whopping 3 fewer games over the course of his career. I'm not the one who is conveniently forgetting that receiving yards exist whenever it is convenient to the narrative I'm trying to tell (especially after spending so many years talking about nothing but receptions and receiving yards to back up my support of Reggie Bush). Look, sometimes you take a moderate stance about a player, and then you're happy to admit that stance was wrong. Other times you take a heavy stance on a player, and you defend that stance to the death. Such was the case with Reggie Bush, who you continually lauded for his huge numbers of garbage receptions (making him PPR viable), while killing Forte over vastly superior efficiency metrics. Such is the case for McFadden, who has caused you to forget that PPR even exists as a scoring option. Such is the case with Mendenhall, a mediocre talent if ever there was one who consistently puts up blah rate stats. Such is the case with Crabtree, who you traded Calvin Freaking Johnson for. You never talk about AJ Green anymore, but for all I know, you're still not sold on him and think Blackmon will be a better pro. Look, sometimes someone takes a hard stance and is wrong. I thought for sure Devin Hester would be a 800-1000 yard receiver by now. I thought Marshall would have played his way out of the league, and Evans would be a perennial pro bowler. I thought Ocho would discover the fountain of youth and hold off Nicks in scoring for several more years. I was spectacularly wrong on all counts. Wesseling was all aboard on Knowshon Moreno for years after it was apparent he didn't have the goods. At some point, you just have to admit it and move on. You still want to tell me McFadden is a bad RB who just happens to possess elite straight line speed? Guess what: I've seen Felix Jones play. I've seen Tatum Bell play. I've seen Michael Bennett play. I've seen Darren McFadden play. I know the difference.

 

[EBF]

You can bend over backwards trying to convince yourself that he's a star. He isn't and he never will be. One good season after five years in the league. Not even among the top 5 backs in his draft class in terms of career total yardage. Less productive to date than Jonathan Stewart, who (ironically) is widely accepted to be a perennial tease and disappointment by the same people who keep drinking the DMC Kool-Aid every year.

Who is bending over backwards? I'm not the guy saying that ypc is a great indicator, except when a back I don't like has a great ypc, or a back I do like has a poor ypc. I'm not the guy making the "health is a skill" argument to justify putting one RB over another RB who has played a whopping 3 fewer games over the course of his career. I'm not the one who is conveniently forgetting that receiving yards exist whenever it is convenient to the narrative I'm trying to tell (especially after spending so many years talking about nothing but receptions and receiving yards to back up my support of Reggie Bush). Look, sometimes you take a moderate stance about a player, and then you're happy to admit that stance was wrong. Other times you take a heavy stance on a player, and you defend that stance to the death. Such was the case with Reggie Bush, who you continually lauded for his huge numbers of garbage receptions (making him PPR viable), while killing Forte over vastly superior efficiency metrics. Such is the case for McFadden, who has caused you to forget that PPR even exists as a scoring option. Such is the case with Mendenhall, a mediocre talent if ever there was one who consistently puts up blah rate stats. Such is the case with Crabtree, who you traded Calvin Freaking Johnson for. You never talk about AJ Green anymore, but for all I know, you're still not sold on him and think Blackmon will be a better pro. Look, sometimes someone takes a hard stance and is wrong. I thought for sure Devin Hester would be a 800-1000 yard receiver by now. I thought Marshall would have played his way out of the league, and Evans would be a perennial pro bowler. I thought Ocho would discover the fountain of youth and hold off Nicks in scoring for several more years. I was spectacularly wrong on all counts. Wesseling was all aboard on Knowshon Moreno for years after it was apparent he didn't have the goods. At some point, you just have to admit it and move on. You still want to tell me McFadden is a bad RB who just happens to possess elite straight line speed? Guess what: I've seen Felix Jones play. I've seen Tatum Bell play. I've seen Michael Bennett play. I've seen Darren McFadden play. I know the difference.

When McFadden was entering the league I said he was overrated and that he would not live up to his billing as the next Peterson. Through five years he has exactly one 1000+ yard rushing season and has been a major disappointment more often than not. I've been wrong about plenty of guys, but my read was dead on here. Sorry if you don't see it that way. If you think McFadden is a better football player than guys like Mendenhall and Stewart then I think you don't know what you're looking at/talking about. They are both better overall running backs, have had better careers to date, and will continue to outplay him. It's clear that DMC is one of those players like Roy Williams who people will insist is an elite talent long after the fact that he's been exposed as an average player with glaring flaws that prevent him from fulfilling his seemingly immense potential. You can keep pimping this turd as a top 10 dynasty RB and insisting that I have no credibility on the subject, but each passing season makes DMC look more and more like exactly what the player I said he would be.

 

[Tau837]

I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles.

I respect your opinion, and there are valid reasons to not hold a high opinion of McFadden. But the bolded is not one of them.Per PFF over the past 3 years:

2010: 42 broken or avoided tackles in 269 touches

2011: 14 broken or avoided tackles in 132 touches

2012: 12 broken or avoided tackles in 105 touches

That's 68 broken or avoided tackles over 506 touches - 1 per 7.4 touches.

How about if you name 5 RBs you feel are good at evading or breaking tackles, and let's compare their rates to McFadden's? (Ideally RBs who get a workload reasonably close to McFadden's (i.e., not role players with significantly smaller workloads.)

Note: I suspect you will find McFadden has a similar or better rate than most, but PFF doesn't have an easy way (that I know of) to easily pull totals from across multiple years, or I would just post where McFadden ranks.

ETA: Let's look at Mendenhall, since it came up in a later post that you like him.

Per PFF over the past 3 years:

2010: 48 broken or avoided tackles in 347 touches

2011: 37 broken or avoided tackles in 246 touches

2012: 5 broken or avoided tackles in 23 touches

That's 90 broken or avoided tackles over 616 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches. Over the course of 300 touches, Mendenhall will break or avoid 3.6 more tackles.

Do you think those numbers justify your stated view here on McFadden?

 

[Biabreakable]

No intent to hijack away from the elite WRs conversation, but with the talk of DT and Manning's career arc, I'm curious how the wisdom of the thread values a guy like Manning?Clearly in the second half last night, he looked as good as he's ever looked, and if he keeps playing to the level he has thus far this season, he's a clear asset (obviously). That being said (and somewhat related to the Luck vs Brees discussion), how do you value the remaining career of a 36-year old Manning vs. for example, an underperforming 30-year old Rivers (31 in December) or 32-year old Romo?As a second part to the question, what younger, under-the-radar QBs are you guys targeting in your leagues if you own an aging QB? Assuming continued late-first rounders if that QB is consistently putting you in the playoffs, you're never going to get a shot at a Luck or RGIII type player barring a massive trade, so is trading for an up-and-comer may be the best way to go? If so, who are some of the guys you're targeting? Dalton - biggest knock was arm strength, which has improved in the NFL (rare as that is); legit stud WR; not much of a run game to speak of; offense willing to let him throw. I think he's pretty interesting, honestly, but hasn't been as secure with the ball this year. That said, throwing for a lot of yards, and his 12 TDs are more than halfway to his total of 20 last year.Ponder - knock was health, arm strength, etc; injured last year, but so far so good this year; Peterson around the next 5-6 years may limit his upside, but he too has that elite weapon in Harvin, and a solid underneath threat in Rudolph. I'd probably put him behind Dalton.Locker - can put up points in spades, and has the arm strength and willingness to throw down the field; the legs obviously help the production and elevate the floor; hasn't been able to stay healthy thus far either, and has some throws that really make you scratch your head. He maay be cheaper due to the injury factor, but will the accuracy issues kill his career? Not sure where to value him...Russell Wilson - short guy, loads of college production, adjusting to the NFL. I'd personally also question the supporting cast, but as ConceptCoop has stated, Tate is emerging. Lynch won't be around forever, and Wilson has the running ability as well, and his obvious propensity for late game heroics...Others?

Hi there. Welcome to a really good thread. I just wanted to explain to you that you cannot hijack this thread. All dynasty topics are welcome here. Even trade/roster/draft type topics that normally belong in the AC forum. All topics are welcome in this thread.2nd I think you have asked a very good and critical question in dynasty. How does one project for an aging player who is pivotal to the teams success and personnel management decision. In this case the example is 36 year old Peyton Manning.The 1st thing I tend to look at is who are the coaches? What is their plan? How secure are their jobs? If I see a coaching situation that is tenuous, then I have less confidence in projecting that team beyond the current season. As a coaching change often means a change in philosophy and subsequently personnel. Now there are some cases where the coaching change has not caused a lot of personnel turnover and change in play style, but that is usually only with teams that have become pretty good prior to the coaching change. Coaches usually get fired because their teams are bad to very bad.After looking at the coaches I look into supporting cast of personnel. The offensive line players, skill players and defense. I think about how the coaching philosophy will use those players on the roster and then look at how those players have performed in recent past. Knowing contract situations can be very helpful to this evaluation as well, especially if you think the coaching staff might be getting the hook in the near future. Some of those players were part of the current coaching staffs plans but might not be retained if a new coaching staff does not have the same plans for them.The QB is such an important player to the offense. Game planning a lot of the time will revolve around what the QB does well as much as if not more than what the other personnel may be good at. Some times this leads to square pegs in round holes for a season, but generally the team will be built around what the QB is best at and paired with what the coaching staffs philosophy is.Now more specifically about Peyton Manning who is 36 years old and head coach John Fox hired by Elway to run the Broncos.John Fox comes from the Bill Parcells coaching tree. That means a strong commitment to the running game and playing defense. This is how they believe the game of football is won, despite how the league is trending more towards wide open passing attacks each season in recent history. On a personal note I agree with John Fox and every other coach who believes that good defense and ball control is a winning formula. It has been proven over time, although there have been exceptions to this, particularly in recent history. But it does not matter what I or any coach believes so much as how that belief gets translated into the teams performance.Now pairing Peyton Manning with John Fox is a great match because Fox couldn't coach up a QB to save his job in Carolina. I do not think he has gained any ability to do so since then either. Fox wants a QB who is a game manager, not much more. Of course in Manning he has a lot more than that. He can basically turn the offense over to Manning and the OC and focus his attention to the defense. That is what we have seen happen and what I expect to see for the remainder of Mannings career with the Broncos.Currently Manning is 36 years old and great QBs like him have been known to extend their careers into their early 40's. Peyton could be the next QB to do so. Right now Manning seems to be playing at the same high level that he always has. His numbers are certainly on pace for him to match previous performance with the Colts. I could see Manning maintaining this pace over the next few seasons as well, but at some point within the next 3 seasons the wheels are going to fall off. Brett Favre is a recent example who at the age of 40 had perhaps his best season statistically as a pro but then the following year, for a combination of reasons was not capable of repeating that performance at age 41. I only point this out to say that when Manning does fall off the fall may be sudden and ungraceful, which will impact the skill players for that season in a negative way because you cannot bench Peyton Manning. With John Fox as the coach I do not have confidence in the back up QBs development and there may be a coaching change that will happen subsequent to Manning falling off. So I see 2 years of 2 negative impact coming from the year Peyton does not play up to his standards and the year following that of a QB not capable of picking up where Peyton left off.At this point I am only comfortable with projecting Manning to have a similarly successful 2013 as to what he is having currently. I could see Manning keeping up until possibly 2015-16 even but at 38 years old in 2014 I am going to be very wary of the end being closer for him and will want a back up plan in place in case this happens sooner than later.There are still a lot of other details to consider concerning this situation that I would be interested in others thoughts on. I for the most part agree that Peyton is worth a 1st round pick in trade value right now for a team that is contending for a title. Manning can help such a team. But a team that is rebuilding with a 1-2 year outlook before expectations of competing for a title does not have much use for Manning, even if Manning does extend his career a year or 2 beyond that. Similarly I think one needs to consider the impact this may have on other Denver skill position players in a couple seasons. Rising stars such as Thomas may have some off years during that transitional period.This is the way I try to look at each player. Dalton for example is in a good situation with the Bengals who have a long history of being a passing team. That has been their team philosophy for as long as I have been paying attention to football. Most of the time the Bengals are a bad team and this leads to the philosophy of being able to catch up with the passing game. The Bengals often have good draft position that allows them to acquire the skill players they need to execute this and they have them again right now in Dalton, Green as well as some quality role players.Every team is different. But this is how I try to evaluate each team. Look at potential risks/pitfalls. The teams scouting department and how secure the front office is with the coaching staff. The coaching philosophy and how good/bad they are at it. The personnel and their contract situations and where I see the team end of season, where I see the team looking to improve next and what they will keep doing.

 

[EBF]

How about if you name 5 RBs you feel are good at evading or breaking tackles, and let's compare their rates to McFadden's? (Ideally RBs who get a workload reasonably close to McFadden's (i.e., not role players with significantly smaller workloads.)

Here are ten of the most obvious guys that I'd rate above McFadden as NFL talents. MJDRicePetersonMcCoyLynchS JacksonGoreMathewsDeAngeloTurner

That's 90 broken or avoided tackles over 616 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches. Over the course of 300 touches, Mendenhall will break or avoid 3.6 more tackles.Do you think those numbers justify your stated view here on McFadden?

I don't think tackles broken or avoided is the sole criterion by which to judge a RB and have never suggested as much. I don't think I signed up for a Mendenhall vs. McFadden debate. However, I do think Rashard is the better overall RB and certainly a much better value when you consider his price of acquisition in FF leagues this past season compared to McFadden. I doubt many of the folks who spent top 15 picks on DMC are feeling very good about their "stud" RB right now.

 

[Tau837]

How about if you name 5 RBs you feel are good at evading or breaking tackles, and let's compare their rates to McFadden's? (Ideally RBs who get a workload reasonably close to McFadden's (i.e., not role players with significantly smaller workloads.)

Here are ten of the most obvious guys that I'd rate above McFadden as NFL talents.

MJD

Rice

Peterson

McCoy

Lynch

S Jackson

Gore

Mathews

DeAngelo

Turner

That's 90 broken or avoided tackles over 616 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches. Over the course of 300 touches, Mendenhall will break or avoid 3.6 more tackles.

Do you think those numbers justify your stated view here on McFadden?

I don't think tackles broken or avoided is the sole criterion by which to judge a RB and have never suggested as much. I don't think I signed up for a Mendenhall vs. McFadden debate. However, I do think Rashard is the better overall RB and certainly a much better value when you consider his price of acquisition in FF leagues this past season compared to McFadden. I doubt many of the folks who spent top 15 picks on DMC are feeling very good about their "stud" RB right now.

I was addressing a specific statement you made:

I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles.

I stated that I think there may be other valid reasons not to like McFadden but that this point - which you characterized as having been your original belief that you feel has proven out. Later, you stated you liked Mendenhall, so I simply used him as a point of comparison.Are you now backing off your statement about McFadden's ability to evade or break tackles?

 

[SSOG]

When McFadden was entering the league I said he was overrated and that he would not live up to his billing as the next Peterson. Through five years he has exactly one 1000+ yard rushing season and has been a major disappointment more often than not. I've been wrong about plenty of guys, but my read was dead on here. Sorry if you don't see it that way.

Mendenhall has exactly two 1000 yard rushing seasons. Stewart has exactly one. So... You think McFadden is going to be terrible, he averages 11.08 points per game, and this is proof that you were right. You think Mendenhall is going to be great, he averages 11.22 points per make, and this is proof that you were right. You think that Stewart is going to be a stud, he averages 9.45 points per game, and this is proof that you were right. You think Mendenhall is going to be durable, he plays 53 games in 5 years, and this is proof that you were right. You think McFadden is going to be injury prone, he plays 50 games in 5 years, and this is proof that you were right. No wonder your read is dead on- the data apparently means whatever you want it to mean. When you like a guy who is a good receiver, those receiving numbers are your trump card. When you don't like a guy who is a good receiver, you pretend those receiving yards don't exist. You keep insisting that Mendenhall has had a better career than McFadden, but McFadden has put up 200 more yards in 3 fewer games at a half a yard more per carry for a worse team. Mendenhall's team is likely to let him walk at the end of the year. What are the chances Oakland lets McFadden walk?

 

[EBF]

How about if you name 5 RBs you feel are good at evading or breaking tackles, and let's compare their rates to McFadden's? (Ideally RBs who get a workload reasonably close to McFadden's (i.e., not role players with significantly smaller workloads.)

Here are ten of the most obvious guys that I'd rate above McFadden as NFL talents.

MJD

Rice

Peterson

McCoy

Lynch

S Jackson

Gore

Mathews

DeAngelo

Turner

That's 90 broken or avoided tackles over 616 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches. Over the course of 300 touches, Mendenhall will break or avoid 3.6 more tackles.

Do you think those numbers justify your stated view here on McFadden?

I don't think tackles broken or avoided is the sole criterion by which to judge a RB and have never suggested as much. I don't think I signed up for a Mendenhall vs. McFadden debate. However, I do think Rashard is the better overall RB and certainly a much better value when you consider his price of acquisition in FF leagues this past season compared to McFadden. I doubt many of the folks who spent top 15 picks on DMC are feeling very good about their "stud" RB right now.

I was addressing a specific statement you made:

I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles.

I stated that I think there may be other valid reasons not to like McFadden but that this point - which you characterized as having been your original belief that you feel has proven out. Later, you stated you liked Mendenhall, so I simply used him as a point of comparison.Are you now backing off your statement about McFadden's ability to evade or break tackles?

I'm probably walking into this one when you come up with some stats that make him look like a great tackle breaker, but no. I have seen him play enough to know what his game is about. When there's a big crease, he's deadly. But he can't cut on a dime or create on his own when his blocking breaks down. Hence his struggles this year. He is simply not an elusive or creative back until he hits the second level. Even then, he is not adept at making hard cuts across his body at full speed, which is one of the hallmark traits of a truly great RB. He can generate power when he lowers his shoulder, but he does not have natural leg drive of a player like MJD or Turner. His game has a ton of holes in it.

That's not really his entire problem though. He is a somewhat dangerous runner despite his weaknesses because of his one strength. His vertical speed us elite. However, this is mooted by the fact that his frame can't endure workhorse touches over an extended period of time. His top-heavy physique, propensity to seek contact, and inability to make quick cuts to avoid big hits makes him one of the least durable starting RBs in the NFL.

Combine his incomplete skill set with his lack of durability and you get the career he's had to date, which is flashes of brilliance tarnished by injury problems and inconsistency. Essentially the exact things I predicted when he was coming into the league.

 

[Biabreakable]

Tick was asking me awhile back my opinion on Mendenhall. I think he has been in a great situation although the Steelers have really lacked talent at offensive line during his tenure there. I do not really consider Mendenhall a special RB despite being drafted somewhat high. I only watched a little bit on him in college but he just did not seem that much better than other RB the Steelers have had before him. His value to me was more about situation than talent. Even then he seemed to have more percieved value than real value, as I saw the Steelers becoming more of a passing team built around Big Ben.

The Raiders have been woefully mismanaged for such a long time. Perhaps that is changing now that Count Chocula (RIP) is gone, but I question any decision made while Al was still in charge. McFadden seems like just his kind of player. Potential to be truly great but with such a circus around his development well good luck with that.

McFadden has undeniable talent however if he could stay healthy and the scheme built around him I would say he has a higher upside than Mendenhall does at this point of their careers.

Chris Johnson had an undeniably great 2,000 yard season but beyond that year has thus far been a glorified Trung Canidate.

 

[LOCO]

Thoughts on Peterson? Is it time to sell?