Dynasty Rankings (5 Viewers)

[Limp Dogg Bizkits]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

He has the best QB of that bunch (IMO). He was drafted higher than Jackson, Hackett, and Cotchery. As a rookie, he put up more yards than Hackett, Jones, or Jackson has ever had in a single season. As a rookie, he nearly matched the yardage totals of third year player Cotchery. He easily exceeded Cotchery's rookie and sophomore numbers. He had over 500 yards in his last eight games. And then there's just the gut call part of the equation. My gut says he's in a different tier from these other guys.

I agree with all of your points here. I think we're on the same page, so I'll revisit Holmes. I liked V-Jax's & Matt Jones' TD potential better, and while Holmes has breakaway speed, I don't see him being used much inside the 20. But now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure you're right that he should be ahead of Cotchery & Hackett.

The problem with this logic is that owners are reluctant to part with young players once the guy shows even a glimmer of potential. It's already too late to trade for the likes of Santonio Holmes and Greg Jennings if you hope to get them at a discount.

I disagree with this. I could've gotten Jennings at a discount a month ago coming off a disappointing close to the season and the Randy Moss rumors. I could still probably get him at a discount. Trade values ebb & flow throughout the year, so it's on you to stick to your opinions on a player when his value is down and swoop in for the steal. That's how I got Lee Evans early last season and Larry Fitzgerald after his rookie year.

I wouldn't dwell on the TDs. He's not a jump ball guy like Fitz, but he's still one of the best WRs in the game.

That's easy to say, but I need those TDs to win on a regular basis. I realize he's a tremendous WR, but I need him to get into the endzone in order to produce more fantasy points than Colston.

 

[greeklightnin]

I think Santonio Holmes has to be ranked ahead of V-Jax, Cotchery, Hackett, and M. Jones. I wouldn't even consider trading him for one of those four.

Good to hear from you. Re: Santonio Holmes vs. the Rest. Why?

Dwayne Bowe is just a little bit low. The rookie WRs are a little low in general, but it's always a crapshoot figuring out which ones will pan out.

Let someone else deal with rookie WRs. I'll trade for them later once I have a strong feel for which ones are going to be worth it.

IMO, Boldin is better than Colston, Walker, and Roy.

I wonder if Anquan has a paint allergy. He just won't get in the endzone. I thought his fall-off after Fitz' return late last season a bit disconcerting as well. Why won't you get in the friggin' endzone, Anquan?!

Hey F&L. Love your work. Just thought you should know Denny took Anquan out of many Redzone packages last year when Fitz was healthy. Of course that doesnt explain him playing poorly when Fitz was out 4-5 weeks. However I do believe 2006's four TDs are the aberration and he returns to the 8-9 range. I would tick him up a few spots higher but thats just me.Also, I remember you downgrading Reggie Wayne b/c you doubted his abilities in being a primary #1 WR in the future. Did something change your mind to move him a little higher. I always agreed with your original opinion that he would never put up those #' w/o Harrison there. I'd nudge him down 4-5 spots. Everything else looks great!

 

[lord_helmet]

I just don't see whats not to like about Housh, it might be nitpicking about a few spots in this or that direction but it was probably the comments on him that made me respond in the first place.

Ward is underrated every year - true, but isnt that true with Housh also ?

Velcro hands, best route running in the league and a Pro Bowl QB throwing him passes. I really don't understand why he would be ranked lower than Ward, he is just as hard of a worker and seems to have the same approach to the game as Ward too.

Offense - advantage Housh

QB - advantage Housh

Health - both are tough cookies, but advantage Ward by a hair, Housh has been struggling to stay on the field for a couple of seasons.

Coverage - advantage Housh, he will face less talented defenders on a weekly basis

Oz already addressed the route running question and the fact that Ward is the #1 WR while Housh #2. No way do I believe Housh is a better route runner than Ward. And nobody catches a higher percentage of passes year in and year out than Ward, so you can't say Housh's Velcro hands are better than Ward's. Coverage? Are you penalizing Steve Smith for coverage here too? By your logic Housh will face less defenders than any #1 WR, so he should be moved ahead of them? So you're saying for fantasy purposes it's better to be the #2 WR than the #1 WR in an offense? I don't get this one.

You mention that Housh is just as hard of a worker and has the same approach as Ward, which all sounds very nice. But you failed to mention that Ward has been a more productive WR. I mean, isn't that what we're after? Production? Housh has one career 1000 yard season and zero seasons with 10+ TDs. Ward has 4 seasons over 1000 (with another 2 at 975), and he's had double digit TDs 3 times in the last 5 years. By FBG scoring, Ward has 3 top 10 finishes in the last 5 years. Housh has zero, though he did come in at #11 last year.

I think you picked the wrong guy for comparison's sake. Considering the total package Hines Ward has been one of the best NFL WRs in the league for 5+ years, and no doubt he's been a much more productive fantasy WR than Housh.

Fair enough, but from a what have you done for me lately pov I would have to think that Housh > Ward (ff purposes). About the #2 vs #1 WR there are a couple of teams (Indy and Cincy) where there is some truth to this. These rankings are for the future, not the past right ?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I just don't see whats not to like about Housh, it might be nitpicking about a few spots in this or that direction but it was probably the comments on him that made me respond in the first place.

Ward is underrated every year - true, but isnt that true with Housh also ?

Velcro hands, best route running in the league and a Pro Bowl QB throwing him passes. I really don't understand why he would be ranked lower than Ward, he is just as hard of a worker and seems to have the same approach to the game as Ward too.

Offense - advantage Housh

QB - advantage Housh

Health - both are tough cookies, but advantage Ward by a hair, Housh has been struggling to stay on the field for a couple of seasons.

Coverage - advantage Housh, he will face less talented defenders on a weekly basis

Oz already addressed the route running question and the fact that Ward is the #1 WR while Housh #2. No way do I believe Housh is a better route runner than Ward. And nobody catches a higher percentage of passes year in and year out than Ward, so you can't say Housh's Velcro hands are better than Ward's. Coverage? Are you penalizing Steve Smith for coverage here too? By your logic Housh will face less defenders than any #1 WR, so he should be moved ahead of them? So you're saying for fantasy purposes it's better to be the #2 WR than the #1 WR in an offense? I don't get this one.

You mention that Housh is just as hard of a worker and has the same approach as Ward, which all sounds very nice. But you failed to mention that Ward has been a more productive WR. I mean, isn't that what we're after? Production? Housh has one career 1000 yard season and zero seasons with 10+ TDs. Ward has 4 seasons over 1000 (with another 2 at 975), and he's had double digit TDs 3 times in the last 5 years. By FBG scoring, Ward has 3 top 10 finishes in the last 5 years. Housh has zero, though he did come in at #11 last year.

I think you picked the wrong guy for comparison's sake. Considering the total package Hines Ward has been one of the best NFL WRs in the league for 5+ years, and no doubt he's been a much more productive fantasy WR than Housh.

Fair enough, but from a what have you done for me lately pov I would have to think that Housh > Ward (ff purposes). About the #2 vs #1 WR there are a couple of teams (Indy and Cincy) where there is some truth to this. These rankings are for the future, not the past right ?

Absolutely, the rankings are for the future. Since I see '06 as Housh's career year, I'm not going to rank him above a better player for the future.But it's certainly a worthwhile debate. Thanks, lord_helmet.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I think Santonio Holmes has to be ranked ahead of V-Jax, Cotchery, Hackett, and M. Jones. I wouldn't even consider trading him for one of those four.

Good to hear from you. Re: Santonio Holmes vs. the Rest. Why?

Dwayne Bowe is just a little bit low. The rookie WRs are a little low in general, but it's always a crapshoot figuring out which ones will pan out.

Let someone else deal with rookie WRs. I'll trade for them later once I have a strong feel for which ones are going to be worth it.

IMO, Boldin is better than Colston, Walker, and Roy.

I wonder if Anquan has a paint allergy. He just won't get in the endzone. I thought his fall-off after Fitz' return late last season a bit disconcerting as well. Why won't you get in the friggin' endzone, Anquan?!

Hey F&L. Love your work. Just thought you should know Denny took Anquan out of many Redzone packages last year when Fitz was healthy. Of course that doesnt explain him playing poorly when Fitz was out 4-5 weeks. However I do believe 2006's four TDs are the aberration and he returns to the 8-9 range. I would tick him up a few spots higher but thats just me.Also, I remember you downgrading Reggie Wayne b/c you doubted his abilities in being a primary #1 WR in the future. Did something change your mind to move him a little higher. I always agreed with your original opinion that he would never put up those #' w/o Harrison there. I'd nudge him down 4-5 spots. Everything else looks great!

Took him out on redzone packages? Maybe Denny knows something we don't. That doesn't sound good.If four TDs are an aberration, then why has Boldin averaged only five TDs per season over his four year career? It would be great if he averaged the 8-9 per year that most people assume he averages.Re: Reggie Wayne. I think he & Ronnie Brown have probably given me the most trouble in ranking them since I started this. Brown is a player where I implicitly believe in his talent, but he hasn't produced due to circumstances beyond his control (Ricky still hanging around his rookie year, the rest of the offense in a sinkhole last year, a few minor injuries, etc.). I do think Wayne is less talented than many of the guys I've ranked below him. I do think he has feasted on Marvin's coverage over the years. But how much do you factor in Peyton and the Colts offense being a well-oiled machine year in and year out? I think it's nice to know you're going to be able to bank on Wayne producing as long as the Colts' offense is smoking...and they're not slowing down anytime soon.

 

[lord_helmet]

I just don't see whats not to like about Housh, it might be nitpicking about a few spots in this or that direction but it was probably the comments on him that made me respond in the first place.

Ward is underrated every year - true, but isnt that true with Housh also ?

Velcro hands, best route running in the league and a Pro Bowl QB throwing him passes. I really don't understand why he would be ranked lower than Ward, he is just as hard of a worker and seems to have the same approach to the game as Ward too.

Offense - advantage Housh

QB - advantage Housh

Health - both are tough cookies, but advantage Ward by a hair, Housh has been struggling to stay on the field for a couple of seasons.

Coverage - advantage Housh, he will face less talented defenders on a weekly basis

Oz already addressed the route running question and the fact that Ward is the #1 WR while Housh #2. No way do I believe Housh is a better route runner than Ward. And nobody catches a higher percentage of passes year in and year out than Ward, so you can't say Housh's Velcro hands are better than Ward's. Coverage? Are you penalizing Steve Smith for coverage here too? By your logic Housh will face less defenders than any #1 WR, so he should be moved ahead of them? So you're saying for fantasy purposes it's better to be the #2 WR than the #1 WR in an offense? I don't get this one.

You mention that Housh is just as hard of a worker and has the same approach as Ward, which all sounds very nice. But you failed to mention that Ward has been a more productive WR. I mean, isn't that what we're after? Production? Housh has one career 1000 yard season and zero seasons with 10+ TDs. Ward has 4 seasons over 1000 (with another 2 at 975), and he's had double digit TDs 3 times in the last 5 years. By FBG scoring, Ward has 3 top 10 finishes in the last 5 years. Housh has zero, though he did come in at #11 last year.

I think you picked the wrong guy for comparison's sake. Considering the total package Hines Ward has been one of the best NFL WRs in the league for 5+ years, and no doubt he's been a much more productive fantasy WR than Housh.

Fair enough, but from a what have you done for me lately pov I would have to think that Housh > Ward (ff purposes). About the #2 vs #1 WR there are a couple of teams (Indy and Cincy) where there is some truth to this. These rankings are for the future, not the past right ?

Absolutely, the rankings are for the future. Since I see '06 as Housh's career year, I'm not going to rank him above a better player for the future.But it's certainly a worthwhile debate. Thanks, lord_helmet.

No thank you, I just wish my english was a little better sometimes (or maybe you all could learn Danish ?) when trying to make a point. But the point here is simple, I'm confident Palmer won't be throwing less and that Housh will be an important part of the offense. 06 career year ? possibly but I don't see why a repeat or even a year with new career highs is unrealistic.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

TIGHT ENDS

TIER ONE

[100] Antonio Gates SD 27.3 - Another no-brainer

[86] Vernon Davis SF 23.5 - Major upside, looked great down the stretch

[82] Todd Heap BAL 27.5 - Doesn't seem to be slowed much by constant nagging injuries

[77] Chris Cooley WAS 25.2 - Steady

[76] Jeremy Shockey NYG 27.1 - Up & down with Eli's roller coaster play & constant injuries

[74] Tony Gonzalez KC 31.5 - At almost 32, it may be time for you to consider move him in a trade. Could be top-notch for another year or two, but KC’s offense scares me a bit

[72] Ben Watson NE 26.7 - Vernon Davis like physical freak, dominant at times, needs consistency; there were times last year where he looked like he was ready to make the leap to elite TE, but there were also times where his hands & instincts just failed him.

[70] #Kellen Winslow II CLE 24.1 - Microfracture surgery ain’t no joke. What kind of player will he be after the surgery? How long will it take to get there? He’s aging quickly, and his future is very uncertain.

[68] Jason Witten DAL 25.4 - Must find the end zone more often

[66] Alge Crumpler ATL 29.7 - Keeps producing, coming on age 30

TIER TWO

[53] Heath Miller PIT 24.9 - Impressive rookie season, but disappointing production in '06; Could Spaeth steal some redzone work, or will bounce back to rookie form?

[46] L.J. Smith PHI 27.4 - Not overly exciting but produces most weeks; free agent after '07 season

[45] Owen Daniels HOU 24.8 - The Texans’ 2nd best receiving option

[43] #Tony Scheffler DEN 24.5 - Great rapport with Cutler, future is bright; will Graham acquisition hurt his production?

[39] Dallas Clark IND 28.2 - Dominates the playoffs then disappoints in the next regular season; Gonzalez could steal some looks from the Indy tight ends

[38] Marcedes Lewis JAX 23.3 - Favorite to start for the Jags as of early August

[34] Randy McMichael STL 28.2 - Yet another weapon for an impressive-looking Rams offense, but I doubt he'll see the ball as much as he did in MIA

TIER THREE

[25] Greg Olsen CHI 22.5

[23] Ben Troupe TEN 25.0

[21] Alex Smith TB 25.3 - Has yet to make the leap to dependable starter and now has to contend with another obstacle in Jerramy Stevens

[18] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

[16] Zach Miller OAK 21.7

[14] Desmond Clark CHI 30.4 - Career year, age 30 to start '07 + Olsen on board

TIER FOUR

[8] Eric Johnson NO 28.0 - Best-case scenario with explosive Saints’ offense

[8] Jeff King CAR 23.5 - New OC vows to get tight end more involved, and this is his man. King is a more talented pass catcher than commonly believed.

[6] David Martin MIA 28.5

[5] Jerramy Stevens TB 27.8 - Agent's nightmare

[5] Dave Thomas NE 24.2 - Looked good in a couple games late in the season, likely takes Graham's place

[5] Anthony Fasano DAL 23.5

[5] Joe Klopfenstein STL 23.8

TIER FIVE

[3] Bo Scaife TEN 26.6

[3] Visanthe Shiancoe MIN 27.3

[3] Leonard Pope ARI 24.0

[3] Chris Baker NYJ 27.8

[2] Marcus Pollard SEA 35.6

[1] Courtney Anderson MIA 26.8

[1] George Wrighster JAX 26.5

[1] Ben Utecht IND 26.2

 

[Chunky Soup]

How do you see Ben Watson's stats changing with Moss and other new WRs coming in?

 

[Chunky Soup]

And dude, why not leave it all on first page?

 

[Chunky Soup]

Wow, I bet you love how I keep bumpin your thread. Its ok because I bump plenty of things I .

Here's the question: [1] Visanthe Shiancoe MIN 27.3. Why is the starting TE on MIN lower than most others?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

And dude, why not leave it all on first page?

Because it won't all fit on the 1st post anymore. It's been kicking out info at the bottom of the page. There must be a limit on amount of characters per post.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I'll get to the Ben Watson question later, but the short answer is "I really have no idea."

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Here's the question: [1] Visanthe Shiancoe MIN 27.3. Why is the starting TE on MIN lower than most others?

Because he sucks?

 

[Limp Dogg Bizkits]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

KICKERS

TIER ONE

[25] Adam Vinatieri IND - As good as any kicker in the league, Colts always a great offense, dome stadium

[22] Nate Kaeding SD - Remembered by many for 2 key playoff misses but owns the highest career % on this list and operates in a great young offense

[21] Jeff Wilkins STL - Very reliable, explosive offense, dome stadium

[20] Shayne Graham CIN - Between 83-88% each of the past 4 seasons in a very good offense

TIER TWO

[16] Stephen Gostkowski NE - Showed a lot of improvement from beginning of season to the playoffs. Pats offense much more explosive this year.

[15] Mike Nugent NYJ - Took him a year of adjustment, but it's on now

[13] Neil Rackers ARI - Strong leg, but almost all of his misses were 50+ yards in '06

[12] David Akers PHI - Accuracy has slipped with nagging injuries, but I think he'll bounce back in '07

[11] Josh Scobee JAX - Hit on an impressive 14 of 18 from 40-49 last season; improvement every season

[11] Josh Brown SEA - Penchant for game winners, but just a notch below on accuracy & consistency

[10] Matt Stover BAL - There's not a more reliable FG kicker in the league

[10] Jason Elam DEN - Still reliable, though not quite as strong

[9] Jason Hanson DET - Plays indoors + Lions offense is going to put up a lot of points

[9] Robbie Gould CHI - Likely over his head last season and not a strong leg, but he's better than average

TIER THREE

[7] Olindo Mare NO - I would definitely gamble on his accuracy returning with an explosive offense in a dome...just make sure you back yourself up with someone reliable if Mare is your 1st kicker

[6] John Kasay CAR - Reliable kicker, but CAR's offense has taken a step back

[6] Ryan Longwell MIN - Not quite as accurate as he used to be; dome stadium but subpar offense

[6] Jeff Reed PIT - Heinz is where kickers go to die, but Reed has been pretty consistent throughout his career

[4] Rian Lindell BUF - Poster boy for the state of NFL kicking: it takes a couple of years of adjustment before reliability sets in; quietly an extremely reliable kicker the past 3 seasons

[4] Jay Feely MIA - Between 78-85% the past 3 seasons, but I'm leery of MIA's offensive production

TIER FOUR

[2] Joe Nedney SF - Count on average production

[2] Sebastian Janikowski OAK - The worst kicker in the NFL over the past 2 seasons, but I get the feeling he can turn it on at anytime

[2] Lawrence Tynes NYG - New favorite to kick for the Giants

[2] Justin Medlock KC - Tynes' exit clears the way for Medlock to take over

[2] Mason Crosby GB - Will get a chance to take Dave Rayner’s job.

[2] Rob Bironas TEN - Sitting in the high 70s on accuracy; inconsistent from 40-49 last year

[2] Phil Dawson CLE - Accurate kicker coming off a down year in a poor offense

[2] Nick Folk DAL - has emerged as the favorite for placekicking duties in Dallas

[2] Martin Gramatica DAL - Most potential for high-scoring offense in this group, but also far & away the most likely to implode

TIER FIVE

[1] Matt Bryant TB - Not the strongest leg, but he's been accurate lately; poor offense

[1] Shaun Suisham WAS - Acquitted himself fine with Redskins, but wasn't tested much beyond 40

[1] Kris Brown HOU - Inaccurate and in a poor offense

[1] Dave Rayner GB - Can he hold off Crosby?

[1] Billy Cundiff ATL - Just not accurate enough. I’m sure ATL will have Morten Andersen or John Carney on speed dial.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

Value

 

[Limp Dogg Bizkits]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

Value

As in an auction type league?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

Value

As in an auction type league?

Have you tried to read through the thread?It's a weighted scale to better reflect value than a simple 1 thru 75 number sequence. Sorry to be short, but I'm trying to get these finished for people who have drafts this weekend.Please feel free to check the thread yourself for a better explanation. Start on page 5 if you don't want to read the whole thing.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

DEFENSES

TIER ONE

[25] Bears CHI – Best returner in the league + healthy return of Tommie Harris & Mike Brown

[23] Chargers SD - Playmaker in Merriman, excellent defensive front and great young nucleus

[22] Patriots NE - Addition of Adalius Thomas and Meriweather + Welker as return man

[20] Ravens BAL - Addition of Figurs as return man, but loss of Adalius Thomas & key defenders likely to lose a step

[17] Jaguars JAX - Great foundation in the front seven plus playmakers Mathis & Nelson in secondary

TIER TWO

[10] Panthers CAR - Strong defensive nucleus picks up Ryne Robinson for return game

[10] Eagles PHI - Return of Kearse, addition of Spikes

[9] Broncos DEN

[8] Seahawks SEA - Add Kearney to already strong sack unit

[7] Steelers PIT

[7] Packers GB - Talented young nucleus

[7] Dolphins MIA - Ginn in the return game, Taylor & Porter on pass rush

[7] Cowboys DAL - Spencer could be impact rookie, Ware ready to make the leap?

[6] Vikings MIN

[5] Jets NYJ - Could be a sleeper defense

[5] Raiders OAK

TIER THREE

[2] Rams STL

[2] 49ers SF

[2] Saints NO

[2] Cardinals ARI

[2] Bengals CIN

[1] Colts IND

[1] Falcons ATL

[1] Giants NYG

[1] Chiefs KC

[1] Titans TEN

[1] Bills BUF

[1] Buccaneers TB

[1] Texans HOU

[1] Browns CLE

[1] Redskins WAS

[1] Lions DET

 

[-OZ-]

Oz, I'll be happy to move him into tier one for you.

The difference between CJ and Lee Evans or basically any other WR in football right now is that I see CJ as a guy who has the ability to rack up TDs to the tune of around 15/season like a young Randy Moss. There are no other WRs in football right now that I could say the same thing about. I want true difference makers on my team, and I'm willing stick my neck out to get them. I want a guy who has the possibility of giving me an advantage over every other team in the league. I want to put the fear of god into every other owner in my league: "Like Genghis Kahn on an iron horse, a monster steed with a fiery ######, flat out through the eye of a beer can and up your daughter's leg with no quarter asked and none given; show the squares some class, give em a whiff of those kicks they'll never know." I want to ride to victory on a trail of bones. The innocent will suffer along with the guilty. When I evaluate WRs, I'm a sucker for WRs with high TD totals as long as they're also heavily involved in the offense (no James Jett's with 12 TDs for me). Get the ball in the endzone and win me that week's match-up.

I agree on his potential, so it's a matter of preference. FWIW, I doubt I could get CJ for Boldin or Walker, so you're probably right on his ranking. Probably not for Evans either, but I wouldn't make that offer. (FWIW, I acquired Evans in every league I was in last year)

 

[Chunky Soup]

F&L, I question MBIII being ranked in the 3rd tier. Has there been any clear indication that his carries will increase? The only thing he really had going for him was his TDs, and you say you expect them to go down. What exactly is his upside, then?

 

[Donnybrook]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

 

[Biabreakable]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

Value

As in an auction type league?

See Post #238 on page 5 where F&L kind of explians the number value ranking. I am still kind of unclear how one would utilize these numbers and what they may mean in terms of roster size and number of starters for your league. Which they do not attempt to address as far as I know.However I would assume that the players with very small numerical value should be considered barely replacement level players when considering them in trades. I have not looked at the number values close enough to determine if they have utility in multi-player trades across positions or not.If F&L could further explain these numbers and how he would use them I think it would help readers to better understand thier meaning. While he did explain the ideas behind these numbers as being un-scientific and based on instinct in post 238.. points well taken btw.. I still do not really understand how he or someone else might use them? And further explaination of this may help readers to better understand thier meaning.*ETA - I did ask F&L for further clairification on this issue in Post #274 however going back through it I do not see the question or the meaning of these numbers being addressed. Other posters seem to understand it and how to use it though?Perhaps we are just dense and slow in understanding what those numbers may mean.

 

[-OZ-]

Perhaps we are just dense and slow in understanding what those numbers may mean.

I think we probably are. I've always ASSumed that players with equal #'s would be valued equally. For example, if you wanted to trade the Bears D for a TE/WR/RB/QB, you might be able to get Mercedes Lewis, Brandon Jones, Kevin Jones, or Matt Schaub. All of those except KJ look possible to me. BUT (and this is where I'm thrown off), this would mean he thinks Peyton = LT = Gates, and all 3 are worth more than SJax. I doubt that's his opinion.

 

[Ariakis]

Kind of deep but until they sign someone shouldn't DeDe Dorsey be listed until an upgrade is found? Addai just strikes me as a bit of an injury risk and someone more likely to share time regardless.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

Value

As in an auction type league?

See Post #238 on page 5 where F&L kind of explians the number value ranking. I am still kind of unclear how one would utilize these numbers and what they may mean in terms of roster size and number of starters for your league. Which they do not attempt to address as far as I know.However I would assume that the players with very small numerical value should be considered barely replacement level players when considering them in trades. I have not looked at the number values close enough to determine if they have utility in multi-player trades across positions or not.If F&L could further explain these numbers and how he would use them I think it would help readers to better understand thier meaning. While he did explain the ideas behind these numbers as being un-scientific and based on instinct in post 238.. points well taken btw.. I still do not really understand how he or someone else might use them? And further explaination of this may help readers to better understand thier meaning.*ETA - I did ask F&L for further clairification on this issue in Post #274 however going back through it I do not see the question or the meaning of these numbers being addressed. Other posters seem to understand it and how to use it though?Perhaps we are just dense and slow in understanding what those numbers may mean.

Bia,Thanks for replying. I think you might be missing the big picture here. You appear to be reading too much into the numbers.As requested by several posters here and elsewhere, the scale is solely intended to be a way to better reflect value than a simple 1 thru 75 numbering sequence. By way of example, if I had McNabb, Brady, Bulger, Vick & V.Young a hair's width apart in value, I needed a better system than a simple 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8. V. Young at #8 may well be much closer in value to McNabb at #4 than whomever I have ranked at #9. I needed a system to reflect that, and a "100 scale" was the number I picked. There really is no significance to the number 100 beyond that. Furthermore, as I tried to explain earlier these numbers aren't intended as a trade guide across positions. If they do happen to serve that purpose for some owners who find a beneficial way to tinker with the numbers, that's a bonus. I probably wasn't all that clear in my intentions, but I think this quote sums up the problems with an overall ranking vs. a positional ranking:

*I am very resistant to a weighted scale on an overall ranking as opposed to position by position. League rules, set-ups and scoring systems are still so disparate that I think trying an overall weighted ranking that could suit everybody's tastes would be fruitless. I've been in QB-heavy leagues where the highest scoring players are always QBs, and I've been in basic scoring leagues where the highest scoring kickers match the highest scoring QBs.

Until we all start playing by the same rules and scoring systems, I think an overall ranking with a built-in trade value scale for dynasty leagues would be next to impossible. I imagine I could take a stab at it if I had to, but there's really no incentive to put even more time and effort into something that probably wouldn't be all that useful.Let me know if it's still not clear. I know there's probably a better way of explaining this system, but I get the feeling it's a lot less complex than we're making it out to be here.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

He was rarely startable in New England, so why do you assume he would be now that he's splitting the position with Scheffler -- who looked awfully good once Cutler took over later in the year?It's pretty clear to me that Graham is far superior as a blocker, and Scheffler is a much better receiver. I think that's how they'll be used for the most part, and I don't see Graham putting up more than 250 or 300 yards in a season going forward.Do you think the Broncos have made the decision to banish Scheffler to the end of the bench after the impressive showing he had to close out the season? I just don't believe that. I think the Broncos will use the two players in a way that will maximize both of their strengths.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

F&L, I question MBIII being ranked in the 3rd tier. Has there been any clear indication that his carries will increase? The only thing he really had going for him was his TDs, and you say you expect them to go down. What exactly is his upside, then?

That's a very good question. I don't think there's been a clear indication of anything in DAL regarding the running backs. I've always seen Barber's ideal role to be the one he's been in for the past two years. I think he'd be stretched a bit as a workhorse back. I know that many guys think differently -- that he will take more and more of the carries away from Jones until he weeds him out altogether, and then he'll thrive as the starter. I think I may have subconsciously allowed that to seep into my thinking on the subject.My ranking on MBIII is probably a bit of hedging. Even if I don't believe 16 TDs is a possibility again, he could easily put up 9-12 and take some further yardage and value from Jones. With a new coaching staff in town and Jones a possibility to be gone after the season, betting on Barber to gain value isn't a bad idea. I guess I was trying to anticipate and hedge a bit at the same time.To be quite frank, Barber's ranking is not one that I feel very solid about. Edit to add: I think I'll do some further research and revisit MBIII's ranking. Do any of the MBIII lovers have a solid argument (i.e. please give me more than last year's TD total) for ranking him highly?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Kind of deep but until they sign someone shouldn't DeDe Dorsey be listed until an upgrade is found? Addai just strikes me as a bit of an injury risk and someone more likely to share time regardless.

Well, I don't suppose it could harm anything to put Dorsey in there at the bottom. I'm assuming the Colts will add a RB before the season starts. I would have worked Dorsey in by July if they failed to pick up a Chris Brown or Ricky Williams. You're right. There's nothing wrong with having him in there in the meantime, but I could say that about a lot of guys...including Priest Holmes. It's probably just a matter of having to make a cut-off at some point. I'll put Dorsey in. Thanks.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I agree on his potential, so it's a matter of preference. FWIW, I doubt I could get CJ for Boldin or Walker, so you're probably right on his ranking. Probably not for Evans either, but I wouldn't make that offer. (FWIW, I acquired Evans in every league I was in last year)

As did I. Every league. Like I said, I me some Lee Evans.

But I love me some Calvin Johnson even more.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

So how did this weekend's drafts go for everybody?

Let's hear it.

 

[Biabreakable]

I just started following this thread, what do the numbers in red stand for?

Anyone?

Value

As in an auction type league?

See Post #238 on page 5 where F&L kind of explians the number value ranking. I am still kind of unclear how one would utilize these numbers and what they may mean in terms of roster size and number of starters for your league. Which they do not attempt to address as far as I know.However I would assume that the players with very small numerical value should be considered barely replacement level players when considering them in trades. I have not looked at the number values close enough to determine if they have utility in multi-player trades across positions or not.If F&L could further explain these numbers and how he would use them I think it would help readers to better understand thier meaning. While he did explain the ideas behind these numbers as being un-scientific and based on instinct in post 238.. points well taken btw.. I still do not really understand how he or someone else might use them? And further explaination of this may help readers to better understand thier meaning.*ETA - I did ask F&L for further clairification on this issue in Post #274 however going back through it I do not see the question or the meaning of these numbers being addressed. Other posters seem to understand it and how to use it though?Perhaps we are just dense and slow in understanding what those numbers may mean.

Bia,Thanks for replying. I think you might be missing the big picture here. You appear to be reading too much into the numbers.As requested by several posters here and elsewhere, the scale is solely intended to be a way to better reflect value than a simple 1 thru 75 numbering sequence. By way of example, if I had McNabb, Brady, Bulger, Vick & V.Young a hair's width apart in value, I needed a better system than a simple 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8. V. Young at #8 may well be much closer in value to McNabb at #4 than whomever I have ranked at #9. I needed a system to reflect that, and a "100 scale" was the number I picked. There really is no significance to the number 100 beyond that. Furthermore, as I tried to explain earlier these numbers aren't intended as a trade guide across positions. If they do happen to serve that purpose for some owners who find a beneficial way to tinker with the numbers, that's a bonus. I probably wasn't all that clear in my intentions, but I think this quote sums up the problems with an overall ranking vs. a positional ranking:

*I am very resistant to a weighted scale on an overall ranking as opposed to position by position. League rules, set-ups and scoring systems are still so disparate that I think trying an overall weighted ranking that could suit everybody's tastes would be fruitless. I've been in QB-heavy leagues where the highest scoring players are always QBs, and I've been in basic scoring leagues where the highest scoring kickers match the highest scoring QBs.

Until we all start playing by the same rules and scoring systems, I think an overall ranking with a built-in trade value scale for dynasty leagues would be next to impossible. I imagine I could take a stab at it if I had to, but there's really no incentive to put even more time and effort into something that probably wouldn't be all that useful.Let me know if it's still not clear. I know there's probably a better way of explaining this system, but I get the feeling it's a lot less complex than we're making it out to be here.

I hope that explaination gets everyone on the same page.One more question so that I do not assume anymore.. the players with low numbers such as 1 and 2 .. are these players close to being waiver wire material? And thus not really players one should consider in trades?I ask this question independent of league roster size. As you pointed out we do not all play by the same rules or have the same number of teams or roster slots available. Some may disagree but I think it is useful to have a homogenius set of rankings that can apply to any league dynamic. However I think it is somthing worth clairifying. As a friend brought up to me earlier today.. why do people bother using valuable resources on players that will never start for them? So it is my guess that these players in lower tiers with small value numbers would be in that same category. They may be roster fillers until somthing better comes along and in a pinch maybe they would even get a one time spot start during hard times. But other than that they are basicly just taking up space. Like my cousins.Of course there are always some dark horses who suprise. But I would think any player that might have that synergy would at least get a ranking with 4 points or somthing to show a glimer of upside?Hopefully I am tracking here F&L but please point out if you agree/disagree with my assumptions.Awesome work here that anyone can use to check thier own systems of ranking against.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I hope that explaination gets everyone on the same page.

Good point. I could have made this more clear for everybody, but I never got too in depth on the explanation. In my mind it was an easy system, so I never really reached a point where I figured I'd draw more attention to the system itself as opposed to the actual rankings of players. Looking back, though, it was something I probably neglected.

One more question so that I do not assume anymore.. the players with low numbers such as 1 and 2 .. are these players close to being waiver wire material? And thus not really players one should consider in trades?I ask this question independent of league roster size. As you pointed out we do not all play by the same rules or have the same number of teams or roster slots available. Some may disagree but I think it is useful to have a homogenius set of rankings that can apply to any league dynamic. However I think it is somthing worth clairifying. As a friend brought up to me earlier today.. why do people bother using valuable resources on players that will never start for them? So it is my guess that these players in lower tiers with small value numbers would be in that same category. They may be roster fillers until somthing better comes along and in a pinch maybe they would even get a one time spot start during hard times. But other than that they are basicly just taking up space. Like my cousins.

Right. I think that's a pretty good summary. Players with a value of 1 or 2 are basically roster filler. I agree with your friend about using valuable resources on players who will never see your starting lineup. It's nonsensical. I doubt there are any players with a value of 1 or 2 that I would even have on a roster, but I know there are plenty of guys who play in leagues with monster rosters. Thanks for taking an interest here, Bia. I know you're always trying to get a handle on all aspects of the dynasty phenomenon, so if these rankings help in any way, well...cool. That's what they're here for. Don't be a stranger,F&L

 

[Mapmaker]

Great thread F&L, I'm sure your efforts to get this updated and out for the weekend drafters was much appreciated.

WR question for you ...

I realize the receiving corp in San Diego takes a down tick because of the high value of Gates and LTs play in the passing game but I am curious as to your thoughts on they're very young and talented WRs.

Looking at the depth charts we see Jackson, Parker, Floyd & 1st round rookie Davis, then Osgood, Camarillo, Simmons and 5th round rookie Naanee.

You have rankings for Jackson top of the 4th tier and Davis midtop of tier 6 but nothing on the others ... is this an oversite due to the rush to get the data out for the weekend warriors or do you see little value in the outside passing game for Rivers and Company.

Personally I have a feeling the depth chart will shift as the season moves forward and we'll see Davis finish the year as the WR2 behind Jackson with Floyd as the eventual WR3 ... but thats just a hunch and maybe thats why you have nothing on the others, but if that is the case are these guys slotted properly?

I'm also curious about your thoughts of the Naanee pick (6'2+, 225, 4.41 40 time, workout warrior) if you have any .. hes very talented but raw and theres some speculation he may end up in a Cooley role as an H-Back

 

[a005511]

Really enjoy your post. Keep up the great work. Why not advertise how many league championships you have won(especially a few years ago) like a lot of pay sites do. That said jokingly, your rankings are right up there in quality with some of the best FF writers in the business.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Great thread F&L, I'm sure your efforts to get this updated and out for the weekend drafters was much appreciated.WR question for you ... I realize the receiving corp in San Diego takes a down tick because of the high value of Gates and LTs play in the passing game but I am curious as to your thoughts on they're very young and talented WRs.Looking at the depth charts we see Jackson, Parker, Floyd & 1st round rookie Davis, then Osgood, Camarillo, Simmons and 5th round rookie Naanee.You have rankings for Jackson top of the 4th tier and Davis midtop of tier 6 but nothing on the others ... is this an oversite due to the rush to get the data out for the weekend warriors or do you see little value in the outside passing game for Rivers and Company.Personally I have a feeling the depth chart will shift as the season moves forward and we'll see Davis finish the year as the WR2 behind Jackson with Floyd as the eventual WR3 ... but thats just a hunch and maybe thats why you have nothing on the others, but if that is the case are these guys slotted properly?I'm also curious about your thoughts of the Naanee pick (6'2+, 225, 4.41 40 time, workout warrior) if you have any .. hes very talented but raw and theres some speculation he may end up in a Cooley role as an H-Back

I think you hit on the crux of the problem in your first sentence. With Gates & Tomlinson dominating the passing game & V-Jax coming on so strong late in the season, there isn't going to be much room left for the other WRs to be productive fantasy entities. Parker is a guy who will help you lose fantasy games in my opinion. There's no upside with him, and he never gets in the endzone...never. He played poorly enough in the playoffs that the Chargers knew WR was an area needing a major upgrade. Floyd could have been a sleeper for a little value had the Chargers not drafted Davis. Osgood doesn't have value unless you get points for special teams tackles.Naanee looks like an interesting project, but likely has no value at WR unless he bursts on the scene in the next few months. It's mostly just a matter of these guys have little to no value except in the deepest of leagues. If we started ranking guys like that, this would look more like a depth chart than a value ranking.Thanks mapmaker. Good questions.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Really enjoy your post. Keep up the great work. Why not advertise how many league championships you have won(especially a few years ago) like a lot of pay sites do. That said jokingly, your rankings are right up there in quality with some of the best FF writers in the business.

a005511 (if that is your real name),Thanks for the kind words.

I guess I don't advertise championships for the same reason that only a Chach would wear a wife-beater or a tight black shirt in public.

None of us are really interested in anyone else's fantasy teams, are we?

 

[Donnybrook]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

He was rarely startable in New England, so why do you assume he would be now that he's splitting the position with Scheffler -- who looked awfully good once Cutler took over later in the year?It's pretty clear to me that Graham is far superior as a blocker, and Scheffler is a much better receiver. I think that's how they'll be used for the most part, and I don't see Graham putting up more than 250 or 300 yards in a season going forward.

Do you think the Broncos have made the decision to banish Scheffler to the end of the bench after the impressive showing he had to close out the season? I just don't believe that. I think the Broncos will use the two players in a way that will maximize both of their strengths.

I suspect if Graham doesn't get the ball, he won't be happy. He signed with Denver with the understanding that he will get the ball more.

"It was frustrating not to get balls thrown my way, but it's part of being a tight end," Graham said. "I feel that because of my blocking ability, they kept me in more, but I'm just so happy now to have the opportunity to extend the role."

Receiving that chance was a high priority for Graham in determining where he would sign.

"Coming into the free-agent market, that was my No. 1 concern -- just how I would be utilized in the offense," Graham said.

"I stressed that to (Head Coach) Mike Shanahan, that they know I want to come and extend my role more than what was utilized back in New England, and he showed me that I'm going to get some opportunities to get the ball thrown my way here."

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=3...mp;storyID=6628

 

[Fear & Loathing]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

He was rarely startable in New England, so why do you assume he would be now that he's splitting the position with Scheffler -- who looked awfully good once Cutler took over later in the year?It's pretty clear to me that Graham is far superior as a blocker, and Scheffler is a much better receiver. I think that's how they'll be used for the most part, and I don't see Graham putting up more than 250 or 300 yards in a season going forward.

Do you think the Broncos have made the decision to banish Scheffler to the end of the bench after the impressive showing he had to close out the season? I just don't believe that. I think the Broncos will use the two players in a way that will maximize both of their strengths.

I suspect if Graham doesn't get the ball, he won't be happy. He signed with Denver with the understanding that he will get the ball more.

"It was frustrating not to get balls thrown my way, but it's part of being a tight end," Graham said. "I feel that because of my blocking ability, they kept me in more, but I'm just so happy now to have the opportunity to extend the role."

Receiving that chance was a high priority for Graham in determining where he would sign.

"Coming into the free-agent market, that was my No. 1 concern -- just how I would be utilized in the offense," Graham said.

"I stressed that to (Head Coach) Mike Shanahan, that they know I want to come and extend my role more than what was utilized back in New England, and he showed me that I'm going to get some opportunities to get the ball thrown my way here."

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=3...mp;storyID=6628

And you believe Shanny? Why would the Broncos bring Graham on? For blocking. Paying lip service to his role in the passing game is just part of the wooing process.Like I said, I'll be shocked if he's going over 250 to 300 yards with any regularity the next few seasons. I don't see how you spend a 2nd round draft choice on a talented young pass catcher like Scheffler, watch him play very impressively down the stretch and show a good rapport with Cutler, and then shove him aside a year later to start passing to a guy who is best known for blocking abilities.

Sometimes you have to read through the lines in fantasy football. This is one of those times.

 

[Chunky Soup]

F&L --

I'm making my next pick soon on RBs, and don't really want a very high risk pick. How high risk is Norwood? You said you don't see him as every down back, but what exactly do you see him as? How many carries/game? Is there a chance that Petrino messes with a great running system and it fails miserably?

 

[Donnybrook]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

He was rarely startable in New England, so why do you assume he would be now that he's splitting the position with Scheffler -- who looked awfully good once Cutler took over later in the year?It's pretty clear to me that Graham is far superior as a blocker, and Scheffler is a much better receiver. I think that's how they'll be used for the most part, and I don't see Graham putting up more than 250 or 300 yards in a season going forward.

Do you think the Broncos have made the decision to banish Scheffler to the end of the bench after the impressive showing he had to close out the season? I just don't believe that. I think the Broncos will use the two players in a way that will maximize both of their strengths.

I suspect if Graham doesn't get the ball, he won't be happy. He signed with Denver with the understanding that he will get the ball more.

"It was frustrating not to get balls thrown my way, but it's part of being a tight end," Graham said. "I feel that because of my blocking ability, they kept me in more, but I'm just so happy now to have the opportunity to extend the role."

Receiving that chance was a high priority for Graham in determining where he would sign.

"Coming into the free-agent market, that was my No. 1 concern -- just how I would be utilized in the offense," Graham said.

"I stressed that to (Head Coach) Mike Shanahan, that they know I want to come and extend my role more than what was utilized back in New England, and he showed me that I'm going to get some opportunities to get the ball thrown my way here."

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=3...mp;storyID=6628

And you believe Shanny? Why would the Broncos bring Graham on? For blocking. Paying lip service to his role in the passing game is just part of the wooing process.Like I said, I'll be shocked if he's going over 250 to 300 yards with any regularity the next few seasons. I don't see how you spend a 2nd round draft choice on a talented young pass catcher like Scheffler, watch him play very impressively down the stretch and show a good rapport with Cutler, and then shove him aside a year later to start passing to a guy who is best known for blocking abilities.

Sometimes you have to read through the lines in fantasy football. This is one of those times.

I think you are seriously under estimating Graham receiving abilities. I will leave it at that. We can revisit this in December.

 

[kevthegrad]

Mike Vick is in tier 1!?!?!?! Since when!? Rothlisberger above Leinart?! Say WHAT?

 

[Fear & Loathing]

F&L -- I'm making my next pick soon on RBs, and don't really want a very high risk pick. How high risk is Norwood? You said you don't see him as every down back, but what exactly do you see him as? How many carries/game? Is there a chance that Petrino messes with a great running system and it fails miserably?

I see him as a guy who will be paired with another runner. I don't have a great feel for his receiving abilities yet, but I watched quite a few Falcons games last year...and it was clear he was much more effective as the change of pace guy. I don't think he's the kind of every down stud that an offense builds its running game around. I think he'd ideally be paired with a pounder to get the tough yards and soften up the defense. We'll see.I personally would not draft Norwood unless I got him late in the draft at a good discount. It's not that I don't believe he's talented or explosive. I just believe his ultimate role is going to be paired with another runner. Can he take that and make it valuable like Bush & Mo-Jo? That's the $20,000 question.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Mike Vick is in tier 1!?!?!?! Since when!? Rothlisberger above Leinart?! Say WHAT?

Thanks for contributing.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

He was rarely startable in New England, so why do you assume he would be now that he's splitting the position with Scheffler -- who looked awfully good once Cutler took over later in the year?It's pretty clear to me that Graham is far superior as a blocker, and Scheffler is a much better receiver. I think that's how they'll be used for the most part, and I don't see Graham putting up more than 250 or 300 yards in a season going forward.

Do you think the Broncos have made the decision to banish Scheffler to the end of the bench after the impressive showing he had to close out the season? I just don't believe that. I think the Broncos will use the two players in a way that will maximize both of their strengths.

I suspect if Graham doesn't get the ball, he won't be happy. He signed with Denver with the understanding that he will get the ball more.

"It was frustrating not to get balls thrown my way, but it's part of being a tight end," Graham said. "I feel that because of my blocking ability, they kept me in more, but I'm just so happy now to have the opportunity to extend the role."

Receiving that chance was a high priority for Graham in determining where he would sign.

"Coming into the free-agent market, that was my No. 1 concern -- just how I would be utilized in the offense," Graham said.

"I stressed that to (Head Coach) Mike Shanahan, that they know I want to come and extend my role more than what was utilized back in New England, and he showed me that I'm going to get some opportunities to get the ball thrown my way here."

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=3...mp;storyID=6628

And you believe Shanny? Why would the Broncos bring Graham on? For blocking. Paying lip service to his role in the passing game is just part of the wooing process.Like I said, I'll be shocked if he's going over 250 to 300 yards with any regularity the next few seasons. I don't see how you spend a 2nd round draft choice on a talented young pass catcher like Scheffler, watch him play very impressively down the stretch and show a good rapport with Cutler, and then shove him aside a year later to start passing to a guy who is best known for blocking abilities.

Sometimes you have to read through the lines in fantasy football. This is one of those times.

I think you are seriously under estimating Graham receiving abilities. I will leave it at that. We can revisit this in December.

I know Graham can catch the ball. That's not the problem. The problems are two-fold:1. He may well be THE pre-eminent full time blocking tight end in the league.

2. Again, he's being paired with a guy who is a better receiver and playmaker than he is.

You still haven't addressed Scheffler. Do you really believe they're going to banish him to the bench?

 

[Donnybrook]

[7] Daniel Graham DEN 28.8 - He blocks so Scheffler can catch

Hard to believe that Denver would pay him that kind of money just to block. I would rank him higher than all of your tier 3 players.

He was rarely startable in New England, so why do you assume he would be now that he's splitting the position with Scheffler -- who looked awfully good once Cutler took over later in the year?It's pretty clear to me that Graham is far superior as a blocker, and Scheffler is a much better receiver. I think that's how they'll be used for the most part, and I don't see Graham putting up more than 250 or 300 yards in a season going forward.

Do you think the Broncos have made the decision to banish Scheffler to the end of the bench after the impressive showing he had to close out the season? I just don't believe that. I think the Broncos will use the two players in a way that will maximize both of their strengths.

I suspect if Graham doesn't get the ball, he won't be happy. He signed with Denver with the understanding that he will get the ball more.

"It was frustrating not to get balls thrown my way, but it's part of being a tight end," Graham said. "I feel that because of my blocking ability, they kept me in more, but I'm just so happy now to have the opportunity to extend the role."

Receiving that chance was a high priority for Graham in determining where he would sign.

"Coming into the free-agent market, that was my No. 1 concern -- just how I would be utilized in the offense," Graham said.

"I stressed that to (Head Coach) Mike Shanahan, that they know I want to come and extend my role more than what was utilized back in New England, and he showed me that I'm going to get some opportunities to get the ball thrown my way here."

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=3...mp;storyID=6628

And you believe Shanny? Why would the Broncos bring Graham on? For blocking. Paying lip service to his role in the passing game is just part of the wooing process.Like I said, I'll be shocked if he's going over 250 to 300 yards with any regularity the next few seasons. I don't see how you spend a 2nd round draft choice on a talented young pass catcher like Scheffler, watch him play very impressively down the stretch and show a good rapport with Cutler, and then shove him aside a year later to start passing to a guy who is best known for blocking abilities.

Sometimes you have to read through the lines in fantasy football. This is one of those times.

I think you are seriously under estimating Graham receiving abilities. I will leave it at that. We can revisit this in December.

I know Graham can catch the ball. That's not the problem. The problems are two-fold:1. He may well be THE pre-eminent full time blocking tight end in the league.

2. Again, he's being paired with a guy who is a better receiver and playmaker than he is.

You still haven't addressed Scheffler. Do you really believe they're going to banish him to the bench?

Umm....No. Never ever said that. Do I think that Graham will be splitting time with him? Yes. Will they will be used in 2 TE sets often? Yes. Do I think that Graham could put up better numbers than Scheffler as the highest paid TE in the NFL? Yes.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Umm....No. Never ever said that. Do I think that Graham will be splitting time with him? Yes. Will they will be used in 2 TE sets often? Yes. Do I think that Graham could put up better numbers than Scheffler as the highest paid TE in the NFL? Yes.

Fair enough. We just see things shaking out differently.

 

[Chunky Soup]

Hey, F&L -- Do you think pairing KJ and TB are a recipe for success or failure? If you were to bet on just one of them, which would you bet on?

 

[EBF]

Hey, F&L -- Do you think pairing KJ and TB are a recipe for success or failure? If you were to bet on just one of them, which would you bet on?

Not F&L, but if Tatum Bell couldn't be an FF star in Denver then what makes people think he'll be any better in Detroit? The guy just isn't that good. If Kevin Jones gets back to 100%, he'll be the main man for the Lions. No one else on the roster is nearly as good as him.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Hey, F&L -- Do you think pairing KJ and TB are a recipe for success or failure? If you were to bet on just one of them, which would you bet on?

Not F&L, but if Tatum Bell couldn't be an FF star in Denver then what makes people think he'll be any better in Detroit? The guy just isn't that good. If Kevin Jones gets back to 100%, he'll be the main man for the Lions. No one else on the roster is nearly as good as him.

Re: Pairing them. Like anything else, it depends where you draft them or what you have to give up to get them. I think that both a healthy Jones (big if) and/or a healthy Tatum (OK for now) would have a lot room to make some noise in this offense. But both of them have sizable question marks, and you can't rule out T.J. Duckett as a TD vulture there.I agree with EBF that a 100% Kevin Jones would be the man, but I wonder how likely that is and when it will happen. I would gamble on Tatum Bell while is value is low as long I could get him cheaply. That situation is so up in the air for '07 (especially the beginning of '07) that it's tough to get read on what's going on. I still consider Tatum a boom or bust type of gamble, but I'm a riverboat gambler kind of owner. As long as I understand the cost/benefit analysis, I don't mind rolling the dice with a player of Tatum's talent. I think it's fair to say that Tatum Bell has less of a feel for the position than you want. It's also fair to question his toughness, fumbling tendencies, receiving ability and blocking ability. But on the positive side he's averaged 5.0 yards per carry over his 3-year career, he was on pace for 1300-1400 yards last year before the turf toe injuries came into play, and his speed game could wreak havoc in a beefed up Martz offense on turf.How lucky do you feel?