This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Do you have an example of a person's hatred of losing, or their handling of it, lowering their fantasy output? It really sounds like you don't value him because you don't like him as a person.
Ryan Leaf.
Not at all. Leaf showed up out of shape to interviews with teams. He bailed on his meeting with the Colts, who had the #1 pick.Newton went to the combine, when most high end QBs wouldn't, simply to compete. One example of how they are different.
Hear hear. Often annoyed by over analysis and the propensity for conservatism (not politically) in the NFL. Must point out that Eli has oft been criticized for poor body language and yet look who holds the record for 4th quarter come backs... Looks deceive.All we can do is speculate. Don't see any grave character concerns with Cam so these things can be correctable. Also like to point to a strong tendency for the sports media to be somewhat ignorant of natural growth processes. Young athletes simply get better with experience. This would continue indefinitely were it not for the physical toll and brief windows we see in pro sports. This is doubly true with football. Maybe that's why we see such an air of impatience.
People that can't overcome failure are not successful at their craft, I don't care what profession you're in. From a dynasty perspective I would think it'd be relevant, if he doesn't rise up amidst the losing and get this team some W's he won't be a starter for long. Kinda like how Vick is on his last hurrah in Philly. Vick will get another go of it from a desperate organization next year if Philly ultimately fails, but only as a potential one-and-done. Absolutely worst case is Cam gets 2013 in Carolina then 2014 somewhere else, more than likely he'll get to 2014 in Carolina though - finish out his rookie contract, unless he goes Ryan Leaf on everyone anyway. Again, worst case, and when we're looking at the top of the QB's this stuff matters in dynasty. Re-draft it's less important, but my strategy had QB as a value play later so I loaded up on WR's and especially RB's early. If Cam had been there after Harvin and Julio were gone I'd have considered taking the plunge, certainly not before then though - and even after their prices corrected from early to late August Percy was often still there close to pick 40. Did Cam ever make it out of the top 20?
Someone used the example "running through a wall", said a leader can inspire his teammated to do even that. In Eli's case, they would do it because Eli wins football games. You don't have to yell or console, or really act a certain towards other grown men to earn their trust. Do you job and do it well - that's enough.
This is his first taste of failure, becuase he is talented and a hard worker - we'll see how he responds.
Seriously, can you bring up anyone other than him and Cam? I want to be active in this thread, but you and I continue to go back and forth about the same stuff involving both of these guys.ETA - Ridley too
"Early 30's" includes 5 years from now though...plenty of time for Weeden to improve and peak, and many of the best QB's are still very valuable into their mid 30s.I see a guy with the physical tools and the leadership qualities, a guy with poise putting up QB2 numbers as a rookie on a terrible team...but I also see a lot of good looking young talent on that team...they WILL be much better in a year or two, especially on offense.
Yeah...I thought Pead would be better than this, and never took Richardson seriously :(
I know we're not comparing Cam to Vick, but Vick 2011 and Cam 2011 are pretty similar minus the rushing TDs.60.0% 253yds/gm 1.3patd/gm 44rush/gm 1.2 to/gm59.8% 254yds/gm 1.4patd/gm 45rush/gm 1.4 to/gmBoth have great arms and mobility, good enough accuracy, and mediocre to bad OC.I don't really think Vick is a headcase and think he'll probably post better numbers in Buffalo next year if he can stay healthy.
He fumbled on Sunday in the fourth quarter. Not a big deal at all. But if he does it again this week, Id be on the lookout for Shenanigans.
Eighth in DVOA seems efficient enough, to me. For that matter, Stafford is 10th this year after finishing last year... 10th. And Ryan was 7th last year. These guys aren't mirages, or inefficient. They aren't Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers, but they're good enough to put up high quality fantasy seasons. Cutler and Palmer are red herrings. Cutler got traded to one of the worst offenses in the league. His leading receivers were Johnny Knox and Devin Hester, and his line was the worst in pass protection in the league. Palmer was great until his knee got shredded, and hasn't been the same player since. If Stafford or Ryan fall prey to a career-wrecking injury or value-killing trade, we can trot out the Cutler and Palmer comps.
Yup. Seriously considered putting him higher, still. He's just so far ahead of where I thought he'd be right now. He might be the second best looking QB in this class so far.
"Early 30s" was something of a hedge. Typically, the professions peaking in the early 30s are strictly mental. Baseball hitters, the profession I would consider most analogous, pretty much universally peak around 28. Plenty of QBs get downgraded for age. Check Tony Romo, who'd be a top 10 guy if he were 26. Or Peyton Manning, who'd be a slam dunk #1 overall. Or Matt Hasselbeck, who'd easily earn a spot in my top 24 if age weren't a factor. The simple fact is that we always downgrade QBs for age, it's just that some of them (Brees) are so transcendent they dominate even after the downgrade. I've seen Drew Brees, though, and Weeden is no Drew Brees."Early 30's" includes 5 years from now though...plenty of time for Weeden to improve and peak, and many of the best QB's are still very valuable into their mid 30s.
I see a guy with the physical tools and the leadership qualities, a guy with poise putting up QB2 numbers as a rookie on a terrible team...but I also see a lot of good looking young talent on that team...they WILL be much better in a year or two, especially on offense.
If you don't believe in his abilities or situation..I get that, I really do...there's plenty of room to disagree on a player like this in that regard. But I firmly believe that significant downgrading for age...for a QUARTERBACK....is a mistake....a mistake I'm more than happy to take advanatge of and add him to many of my dynasty rosters on the cheap.
It's too bad that there is no real precedant for a guy like this. And whether or not he does well or fails won't really prove either of our positions. This is part of what makes dynasty fantasy football so fun though!
ETA: All that said....I would only stick him in the 18-20 area in my own rankings...a good guy to have at QB3 especially if your current QB2 does not have future QB1 upside. I like him as a prospect but I don't see him as a lock for stardom by any means. And like you, I have Foles inside my top 30.
ok, so tannehill passes your eyeball test.but one of the things about quarterbacks is they have to have opportunities to put up big numbers - do you see miami developing into a pass-happy offense where he gets 40 attempts per game?Yup. Seriously considered putting him higher, still. He's just so far ahead of where I thought he'd be right now. He might be the second best looking QB in this class so far."Early 30s" was something of a hedge. Typically, the professions peaking in the early 30s are strictly mental. Baseball hitters, the profession I would consider most analogous, pretty much universally peak around 28. Plenty of QBs get downgraded for age. Check Tony Romo, who'd be a top 10 guy if he were 26. Or Peyton Manning, who'd be a slam dunk #1 overall. Or Matt Hasselbeck, who'd easily earn a spot in my top 24 if age weren't a factor. The simple fact is that we always downgrade QBs for age, it's just that some of them (Brees) are so transcendent they dominate even after the downgrade. I've seen Drew Brees, though, and Weeden is no Drew Brees."Early 30's" includes 5 years from now though...plenty of time for Weeden to improve and peak, and many of the best QB's are still very valuable into their mid 30s.
I see a guy with the physical tools and the leadership qualities, a guy with poise putting up QB2 numbers as a rookie on a terrible team...but I also see a lot of good looking young talent on that team...they WILL be much better in a year or two, especially on offense.
If you don't believe in his abilities or situation..I get that, I really do...there's plenty of room to disagree on a player like this in that regard. But I firmly believe that significant downgrading for age...for a QUARTERBACK....is a mistake....a mistake I'm more than happy to take advanatge of and add him to many of my dynasty rosters on the cheap.
It's too bad that there is no real precedant for a guy like this. And whether or not he does well or fails won't really prove either of our positions. This is part of what makes dynasty fantasy football so fun though!
ETA: All that said....I would only stick him in the 18-20 area in my own rankings...a good guy to have at QB3 especially if your current QB2 does not have future QB1 upside. I like him as a prospect but I don't see him as a lock for stardom by any means. And like you, I have Foles inside my top 30.
I think it's odd that you say you have him at 18-20, but call him a good qb3. I agree that he's a good qb3. That's why I rank him in the qb3 range. I think he's a terrible qb2, so I don't rank him in the qb2 range.
Cutler's YPA in Chicago has been about the same as it was in Denver. The difference is that he's no longer throwing the ball 600+ times per season. He wasn't a great QB in Denver. Even in his 4500+ yard season he averaged just 7.35 YPA, which incidentally is about what he has averaged over the last two years in Chicago.
It's a big myth that Palmer was a great QB in Cincy. He wasn't. Palmer never had a season above 8.0 YPA until after he ripped up his knee. He was never a great quarterback. He was a guy, like Cutler in Denver or Stafford last year, that people overrated because they didn't focus on the right stats. A slightly above average starting quarterback can look like a great quarterback to you if you just look at things like total yards, fantasy points, and passing TDs. The problem with those stats is that they don't necessarily reflect the quality of performance. To a large degree, they are measures of opportunity, not performance. TDs are flukey and fluctuate wildly. QBs like Brady and Manning have had +/- swings as big as 20 TDs from one season to the next. The same thing can happen on a smaller scale with lesser QBs like Stafford, Palmer, and Cutler. They can fluke their way to a season that's +10-15 TDs over their realistic expected yield, and people will suddenly start valuing them as if that's the norm. If the analysts had looked at YPA, they would have realized that those players were never playing at an elite level.
You may be right about Palmer (although he did have one very good year pre-injury), but the YPA analysis is a bit simplistic imo. By that argument, Peyton Manning and Joe Montana didn't have very many great years and Big Ben is a superior QB to both.
Glad we can close the book on this guy after 1 career rushing attempt. Brandon Bolden looked awesome too.
Backup QB, or fantasy QB2, is an odd position though. If you have a guy like Brady or Manning, who consistantly puts up good numbers and rarely miss a game, than a guy like Weeden is a perfect backup, since you ony need him for one game. If your QB is Michael Vick, then you need a different QB2, but Weeden is still a terrific stash. If your QB1 is a guy like Rivers, I'd want a safer QB2 that I can platoon in if things get hairy...but would still love to stash a guy like Weeden (or Tannehill, or maybe Foles).And I did NOT say you can't knock an old QB, but 28 is not old for a QB...we don't typically even start thinking about knocking QBs for their age in dynasty rankings until what...33, 34? (unless they've had some career altering injury that's robbed them of arm strength or something like that.)
Bolden might end up being pretty good. As far as Pead vs. Richardson goes, the problem is that it's not just one game of stats indicating that Richardson > Pead. This battle has been raging for months and Richardson has emerged as the clear victor for the time being. What people might not realize is that Richardson was actually injured early in training camp, so he missed quite a bit of practice time leading up to the preseason. Even with that being the case, he still passed Pead on the depth chart within just a couple weeks of returning to practice. He outplayed him in the preseason and has been clearly favored during the regular season. Now he's even cutting into the starter's workload. I think St. Louis realizes they have a decent player on their hands in Richardson. None of this means that Pead is garbage, but it does suggest that the coaching staff that sees these guys in practice everyday thinks Richardson is the better player right now. That's bad news for Pead. It's one thing to be stuck behind quality veterans on the depth chart (like what's happening with AJ Jenkins, Rueben Randle, and Michael Floyd). It's another thing entirely to be outclassed by a fellow rookie who's just as green as you are. It doesn't bode well for Pead's chances of being the starter in St. Louis someday. I agree that it's way too early to call Pead a failure, but at the same time his FF stock has taken a big hit and he hasn't done much to show that he was worth the pick the Rams spent on him. I would say he's nothing but a cheap stash/buy low bench guy now.
I don't see it that way. I see it as a coaching staff that's not playing guys before they're ready. Givens and Quick got or are getting the same kid gloves. In that context, it's not bad news. Richardson is good for the role he's been given. Screens and outside runs. Use his speed. His brother's the same way. The fact he is getting play now does not mean he's better than Pead or has higher upside. Pead is a similar player but I think he's less one-dimensional.Vereen was seemingly outclassed by Bolden until they finally let him have a few series. I'm not saying Bolden or Richardson are bad players, but we can't overhype the underdogs too much.
If Tannehill continues to develop, Miami will give him attempts. You get a thoroughbred, you let him run. And speaking of running... Tannehill has some wheels, too.
I like YPA, but it's not the be-all, end-all. You want to talk about efficiency, you've also got stats like DVOA and ANY/A. And QB rating is a ******* statistic that double-counts comp% and unfairly punishes QBs who play with elite goal line backs, but it can still add more information to the equation. Cutler was 7th in DVOA in 2008. Since then, he's ranked 30th, 30th, 21st, and 30th. Palmer ranked 3rd and 4th in 2005 and 2006- he was certainly elite.
As I mentioned, there's a really big difference between sitting behind a veteran and sitting behind another rookie.It's pretty common to see a team keep a rookie on the bench in favor of a less talented veteran with more experience who is less likely to make a major mistake. This happens all the time and it isn't cause for concern. We're seeing it with a lot of the rookie WRs this year. Quick and Givens sitting behind Amendola and Gibson is a perfect example. What's happening with Pead is different because the guy they are benching him for is not a trusty veteran with years of experience, but rather another rookie who's just as likely to make mistakes. Richardson is actually even more raw than Pead because he's jumping up from a lower level of NCAA competition and didn't play as much in college. If that wasn't enough, he was also a lower pick, meaning the team has more invested in Pead and thus should be inclined to favor him in the event that they judged the battle for playing time to be close. The fact that the coaches are putting Richardson out there is pretty significant in this context.
If Pead is less one-dimensional then why isn't he playing? I think the "Richardson can only run outside" groupthink that's been flying around for the past week is just Evan Silva's tweet getting way too much mileage. I read it too. One guy's opinion doesn't = gospel. Richardson has barely carried the ball inside. When I've seen him run between the tackles, he has shown surprisingly good vision, instincts, and agility. He definitely lacks weight to be a classic power runner, but then again, so does Pead. And since every indication since April is that the Rams coaches think Richardson is the better back, I'm inclined to agree. It is tricky to find the right middle ground between being too rigid and too reactive in your dynasty thinking. Draft position matters, but when two rookies compete for a job and one clearly outclasses the other, it starts to matter a little less. Clinging to the belief that Pead > Richardson just because he was drafted higher might be a mistake given the mounting evidence to the contrary. IMO what we're seeing is just a repeat of situations where a lower pick ends up being a better player than a higher pick at his same position. Mike Williams > Arrelious Benn. Anquan Boldin > Bryant Johnson. Mohamed Massaquoi > Brian Robiskie. Johnny Knox > Juaquin Iglesias. Pierre Thomas > Antonio Pittman. In every case the lower pick instantly surpassed the higher pick and never looked back. Once in a blue moon this happens and ends up being a mirage (like when Louis Murphy started out hotter than Darrius Heyward-Bey), but more often than not you are better off taking the results of a positional battle between rookies at face value. Boldin played ahead of Johnson because he was better. Knox played ahead of Iglesias because he was better. Thomas made the roster over Pittman because he was better. It's really not rocket science. I wouldn't bury Pead on the basis of his slow start alone, but I also wouldn't downplay the fact that Richardson is out there getting lots of reps ahead of him. It is hugely significant.
I don't really see how the Vereen/Bolden situation is parallel. If you are talented enough to make an NFL roster then you can probably do okay if you get 10-15 carries. The hard part is impressing the coaches enough to get the chances. That's something Daryl Richardson has done that Isaiah Pead hasn't.
"There's no hard and fast rules, but here's a hard and fast rule." Being in the same draft class is a red herring. We can agree it's tricky at least.
Not to pile on, but
Stafford and Ryan's sub-8 ypa values tell us they're not Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, or Aaron Rodgers. This is not particularly relevant, since no one has ever rated them as if they were. Once we get past the slam-dunk first-ballot HoFers, though, who has made a case, based on efficiency metrics, that they deserve to be ranked above Stafford and Ryan? Rivers, Romo, and Roeth? You putting any of those guys above Stafford or Ryan? Which of the guys you're putting above Stafford and Ryan have been more efficient? Luck's current ANY/A would rank as the worst of Ryan's career. If you want to rank Luck over Ryan, efficiency metrics are not the drum you should be banging here.
6'3" 2254.5 402nd Round* PedigreeMore than a year younger than Blackmon, Wright, and FloydAlready his team's WR1 with a strong-armed QB4th in the league in average yards at targetLooks alot like Torrey Smith after a heavy steak dinner. I'll be the sucker here and buy it.'JFS171 said:
I don't think YPA even tells us that. Manning himself only exceeded YPA of 8.0 twice as well. Before Mannning’s career year, he posted YPA of 6.5, 7.8, 7.7, 7.6, 7.1, 7.5. After then posting 9.2 and 8.3, Manning subsequently posted 7.9, 7.8, 7.2, 7.9 and 6.9. Mannings 9.2 YPA is as big of an outlier as his 49 TDs that same year. Similarly, in Tom Brady's first 6 years in the league (he posted an 8.3 in year 7 in his career year), he went 6.9, 6.3, 6.9, 7.8, 7.8, 6.8
Torrey's catch rate is much better. Haven't watched much of Gordon, but if he is only running a couple routes, with teams selling out to stop the run, I just think we should slow down a little bit. I do need to make it a point to watch him play more, however.
Look, Carolina's a mess. They signed two talented RBs to huge contracts, and yet they refuse to commit to the running game. They have a talented, special QB, and unlike the Redskins, the team is not putting their QB in a good spot to win games. We're supposed to believe that Cam has a bad attitude? Or he's weak? That team is a mess, and a better coach is going to make a lot of positive changes that will certainly help Cam's morale.'Concept Coop said:
I'm with you, 100%.
The coaching decisions in Carolina are really baffling. Give Stewart 20 carries a game and set up a legitimate play action passing game. Seems pretty simple
I love your posts and find myself agreeing with most of them, but I think you miss the boat on your Carson analysis. Carson had arguably his best season ever the year after his knee injury as he threw for over 4000 yards for the only time in his career and made the Pro Bowl. I really think Carson's demise was based on a lot of factors, some within his control and some not. But the knee injury is a red herring in my opinion.'SSOG said:Yup. Seriously considered putting him higher, still. He's just so far ahead of where I thought he'd be right now. He might be the second best looking QB in this class so far.'bweiser said:"Early 30s" was something of a hedge. Typically, the professions peaking in the early 30s are strictly mental. Baseball hitters, the profession I would consider most analogous, pretty much universally peak around 28. Plenty of QBs get downgraded for age. Check Tony Romo, who'd be a top 10 guy if he were 26. Or Peyton Manning, who'd be a slam dunk #1 overall. Or Matt Hasselbeck, who'd easily earn a spot in my top 24 if age weren't a factor. The simple fact is that we always downgrade QBs for age, it's just that some of them (Brees) are so transcendent they dominate even after the downgrade. I've seen Drew Brees, though, and Weeden is no Drew Brees.'renesauz said:"Early 30's" includes 5 years from now though...plenty of time for Weeden to improve and peak, and many of the best QB's are still very valuable into their mid 30s.
I see a guy with the physical tools and the leadership qualities, a guy with poise putting up QB2 numbers as a rookie on a terrible team...but I also see a lot of good looking young talent on that team...they WILL be much better in a year or two, especially on offense.
If you don't believe in his abilities or situation..I get that, I really do...there's plenty of room to disagree on a player like this in that regard. But I firmly believe that significant downgrading for age...for a QUARTERBACK....is a mistake....a mistake I'm more than happy to take advanatge of and add him to many of my dynasty rosters on the cheap.
It's too bad that there is no real precedant for a guy like this. And whether or not he does well or fails won't really prove either of our positions. This is part of what makes dynasty fantasy football so fun though!
ETA: All that said....I would only stick him in the 18-20 area in my own rankings...a good guy to have at QB3 especially if your current QB2 does not have future QB1 upside. I like him as a prospect but I don't see him as a lock for stardom by any means. And like you, I have Foles inside my top 30.
I think it's odd that you say you have him at 18-20, but call him a good qb3. I agree that he's a good qb3. That's why I rank him in the qb3 range. I think he's a terrible qb2, so I don't rank him in the qb2 range.
Timelines get fuzzy as they fade into the past, so I'll defer to your greater knowledge on the subject. In your opinion, what were the factors behind Palmer's (relatively precipitous) fall?
I don't think he's looked the same since he tore a tendon in his elbow (a few years after the knee injury) and elected to let it heal on its own instead of having surgery on it.
Thank you, I'd completely forgotten about that.
You can pretty much throw out a rookie QB's stats unless he really dominates. A lot of great passers came out of the gate slowly. Eli, Brees, and Brady being three big ones. Luck's current stats probably don't tell us much about the player he will be in 2-3 years.The reason for taking Luck over Ryan is because he's a far better player. It's the reason why he graded off the charts, was touted as the best QB prospect of the last decade, and was picked first in a stacked draft. The stats will come as he gains experience. People need to realize that he is playing on a terrible team and carrying the whole offense on his back because the team has NO running game whatsoever. In 2 or 3 years he will be miles ahead of guys like Ryan. If you can get that deal, jump on it.As for YPA, it's not perfect, but it's clearly the best single stat for assessing real life QB quality. And I tend to believe that good NFL QBs become good FF QBs. That's why I bought Ben in all my leagues when he was ranked as QB18 despite having an awesome rookie year. People look at the wrong stats.Regarding Peyton and Brady, bear in mind that the league has become more QB-friendly in the years since they came on the scene. Wouldn't be surprised if YPA numbers are up across the board, making it difficult to compare current stats to stats from 10 years ago.
6.8, 7.1, 6.8, 6.9, 6.9, 6.9, 7.0, 7.0, 7.2. That's the league-wide YPA from 2003 to 2011. Creeping up? Yes. Difficult to compare? No.YPA is a good stat, but if I can only have one stat, ANY/A is strictly better because it takes Y/A and adds more quality information. DVOA is better still because it's defense-adjusted. We're no longer in the dark age of football statistics where YPA is the best we have available to us.
