What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

FanEx Analysis Draft (1 Viewer)

C'mon now. What's it going to be, "48 straight games" next year?
Hey, I drafted him last year when everyone thought he'd break down then, and rode Taylor to a very good season. But the difference is that I drafted him at 2.10, not 2.01...I'm just saying that when you're talking about what amounts to a first round pick, why go for the guy with the long & storied injury history? The potential upside is admittedly huge, and I can see why David made the pick based on that, but I wouldn't have.Of course, I'm the guy typing away at home and he's the professional and defending champ. :thumbup:
 
I'm not sure I like that trade down. He strengthened his 4th round pick by about 13 picks, but also weakened his 2nd round pick by 8 picks. I'm not a fan of trading down unless you are clearly one of if not the best player in your league. I'd need more compensation than what he got to do it.

 
I was wondering why you stopped at 1.04 and not 1.06?
I see the top 6 as being too similar right now. It's the top of the third round where I see as the leveling off in talent. Here is where the WR's are taken fast and the first and second tier gets diminished before mid third.
 
This is tough, guys. Real tough.

Sixteen of the first eighteen selections were rushers. Geeze.. With only three slots prior to my 2.07 pick, hopes of claiming WR Moss are near gone - Kellogg likes him and preceeds me. My 'dream list' is quickly dwindling to a select few. Sure.. I also want the less popular, yet solid producing guys on my rosters, but I NEED a real fantasy power that will be a difference maker.

In spite of the pick-passers-late popularity of this era. I am thinking QB McNabb is such a power player. Will announce the selection, Thursday morning.

Yep, Alexander + McNabb will be a solid start. Okay. I'm ready.

http://fanexfootball.com/03/FAD

 
But the difference is that I drafted him at 2.10, not 2.01...
You only get one second round pick unless you really screw someone over in a trade. He certainly wont be there at 3.12 . If you like a player you have to pick him before someone else does or you wont get him. Pretty lame argument. I havent seen the draft but he's either the 12th or 13th running back taken. He's in most people's top 12
 
Is Cahill thinking Canidate will be there at 4.03? If so, he's brilliant for that trade.

TC= ><>J

TC, you are as likely to grab McNabb right now as I am to hop up on my desk and sing Misty.

 
Harv - If I had not gone for Fred Taylor, I would have pulled the trigger on Marvin Harrison. Although I can't think of a single down side in taking Harrison at a player, I think it would have absolutely forced my hand to take at least 1 if not 2 RBs in rounds 3 and 4. This is a situation pay me now or pay me later. After the first 6 RBs were taken, every RB for the rest of the draft will be overpriced. And if you look at past FanEx FAD Drafts that is exactly what happened and will happen again. The rules favor having at least 3 starting RBs. Since all teams can't have that there is a big push to get a couple that could win you the league.Did I overpay for Fred Taylor? Yes a little. Most leagues allow waiver pickups, trading, etc which devalues the RB more. This league does not. But let's say I paid a 3 slots too high for Fred Taylor. With the continued run on RBs going to be going strong, what will be the price for an Amos Zereoue or an aging Emmitt Smith. I bet these guys will cost way more than everybody believes they are worth.That is the dilemma. I fully understand someone saying they would have taken Harrison. And that is a solid pick. I just think that team would have terrible RBs.Greg Kellogg started this draft last year with Moss and Harrison at the 12 spot. And although both of those picks looked like they represented solid value, he never recovered at RB and was forced to overpay on that position the rest of the draft. He did not do well during the season either. Value is had by having an approach that does not lock you into future round decisions. I believe I maintained the strongest possible roster by drafting two RBs with my first two picks. I considered Charlie Garner over Fred Taylor, but only briefly. I might be wrong, but I think Taylor is a better pick than Garner this season. The other picks, Davis, Lewis and Dillon did not excite me at all. Recapping I was pleased to get Barber. I knew I overpaid for Taylor, but liked his situation and felt it gave me the best chance not to be forced into a situation where I would overpay the rest of the draft (or at least in the next 2 picks).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Im curious if you considered trading down a few spots with the 2.01 pick and if you had any offers for it. It would seem to me that any additional value you could have acquired would have served you well in the remainder of the draft as it is unlikely that any player would slip through the cracks. It might have even afforded you the luxury of taking one of the top TE.

 
Yes I did consider trading down, but I only wanted to move a few spots as I knew the RB panic would continue. I did not get any offers to just move a few pics and actually warmed up to taking Fred Taylor. I tried to make a deal to secure Charlie Garner by giving up my 3rd and 4th round picks (just to show you I still have more insanity going through my veins), but Emil Kadlec rejected my offer (Garner - 16th overall + his 8th - 88th overall) for my 3rd and 4th (36 and 37 overall).Believe me I still have more tricks up my sleeve.

 
I'm not sure I like that trade down. He strengthened his 4th round pick by about 13 picks, but also weakened his 2nd round pick by 8 picks. I'm not a fan of trading down unless you are clearly one of if not the best player in your league. I'd need more compensation than what he got to do it.
BGP? i could be wrong but this is how i see the trade...he moves up 8 spots in the second and grabs what could and should be the best wr in the league...now, i wouldnt say he strengthened his 4th round pick...he traded his 3rd and got the 4th rounder so id say its more like he lost 13 positions on his 3rd rounder and then lost 8 on his 5th...i think its an excellent trade...anyway...thats how i see it.
 
I was going to say that it always is best to start runs on positions than finish them, but these fellas continue to select running backs.However, I would be surprised if 6 more got taken by the time it got back to Davids 3rd and 4th rounder.Maybe William Green or Pittman makes it back, maybe someone even better. But the choice at Quarterback or Wide Receiver is going to be missing the Tier 1 players.If you have no Tier 1 players you need to have a very even squad. At least 1 of the picks should have been on a non running back, but easy said from the comfort here.

 
I support DD in his picks. He got 2 RBs that, if healthy, are guaranteed to produce especially well in this system (all purpose yards, receptions +1). If you need a WR to catch 100+ you can get a guy like Marty Booker much later when everybody else is picking over the bones of Trung Canidate and Emmitt Smith (at best).

 
BGP? i could be wrong but this is how i see the trade...he moves up 8 spots in the second and grabs what could and should be the best wr in the league...now, i wouldnt say he strengthened his 4th round pick...he traded his 3rd and got the 4th rounder so id say its more like he lost 13 positions on his 3rd rounder and then lost 8 on his 5th...i think its an excellent trade...anyway...thats how i see it.
I wasn't talking about the guy who traded up to get Harrison. I was talking about the other guy who traded down and out of that spot. He didn't get enough to trade down.
 
However, I would be surprised if 6 more got taken by the time it got back to Davids 3rd and 4th rounder.
I totally agree with the Barber pick. Solid under-valued player, and should put up top 10 #'s if healthy. Taylor went a few picks early, but a deal couldn't be worked out so he had to take his RB2. I love Harrison, but in this system, one decent WR along with potential ones do fine. Yes you could have penciled in Harrison's name every week, and not picked another one until the middle rounds, but would be affected at RB greatly.Right now there is 17picks until DD picks again. I think there will be at least 6 RB's taken and would be very suprised if more weren't gone. Everyone has talked about how deep QB's are this year, and in this system where your best QB starts for the week, a strong QBBC does almost as well as a stud QB. There will be some taken though.Quick projection of the 17 picks gone have these players being gone:QB: McNabb, CPep, Vick, Manning and possibly Warner/GannonWR:Moss, Moulds, Burress, Ward, then possibly Horn/Boston/K.Rob/Holt/ToomerI expect Shockey going early round 4, Gonzo and Heap either late 4th/5th round.So that leaves RB's C.Mart, Bennett, W.Green, George, Staley, Barlow, A.Thomas, and also possibly Candidate, Zereoue, and Dunn gone before DD picks again....If DD didn't take Taylor, it would be tough to possibly depend on a Pittman/A.Smith for RB2, even with Harrison. If DD decides to go with a WR in his 3/4 picks, he will still have a decent WR1 and still snatch up a good QB1, Shockey, or the all important RB3/great flex starter in this league.
 
Greg Kellogg started this draft last year with Moss and Harrison at the 12 spot. And although both of those picks looked like they represented solid value, he never recovered at RB and was forced to overpay on that position the rest of the draft. He did not do well during the season either.
That's not quite how I see how Kellogg's 2002 draft went. Kellogg's problem was that the RB he chose, Dominic Rhodes, tore his ACL. That was just rotten luck. His RB1 was Hearst, who at least turned out to be decent with 1200 yards and 9TDs. He took Hearst at 4.04. William Green went at 4.05. Duce Staley went at 4.07. Travis Henry went at 4.09. Another thing that hurt Kellogg was taking Trent Green at 6.04 after already taking his guy McNair in the 5th round. Charlie Garner of the 1900 yards and 11 TDs went at 6.08.Then of course there was the drafting of Dominic Rhodes of the torn ACL at 7.09. Like he was supposed to know that would happen. Three picks later at 7.12 goes Clinton Portis.http://fanexfootball.com/02/FAD/index.htmlLooking back, I really really like what Kellogg did in the 02 FAD. The RBs WERE THERE to make that a monster team. He just whiffed. I think he should make it a 3-year plan. Take stud WRs each year in the top two rounds. I think its likely he'd crush one out of the park in one of those years. He'd select the Portis or Shaun Alexander of the draft and just dominate. In an experts league, I think you need to think out of the box like that. Too bad he didn't stick with it this year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
At this point if I were DD, with his next 2 picks I would probably be looking RB3 if there are any with decent potential left (who falls?), and a WR1. If he gets a decent RB3 and a decent WR1, with his 5/6 round picks, he can either get 2 good QBBC guys, or if one of the TE happens to fall, one of them. And even if there is a RB left, snatch up RB4....DD is in good shape right now, plus remember "he's still got some tricks up his sleeve".

 
Looking back, I really really like what Kellogg did in the 02 FAD. The RBs WERE THERE to make that a monster team. He just whiffed. I think he should make it a 3-year plan. Take stud WRs each year in the top two rounds. I think its likely he'd crush one out of the park in one of those years. He'd select the Portis or Shaun Alexander of the draft and just dominate. In an experts league, I think you need to think out of the box like that. Too bad he didn't stick with it this year.
I agree with a lot of what you said about Kellogg's draft last year. He could have won it with a couple different picks. He couldn't try it this year at number 6 though with a Portis/McCalister type still on the board....He really could have had a monster team last year.....and I think he took a little too much criticism. What he did was a risk, and lost-but also from the 12 spot last year he tried something very different and wasn't that far off...Just as easily could have had Henry, or Garner/Portis....and he didn't finish last or anything....
 
i like the barber/taylor picks.wr's are easy to find. i have yet to draft a big 3 wr in my money leagues because guys like moulds, horn, ward are always around to pick later.the chances of taylor getting hurt are only slightly higher than the chances of ricky williams/ladanian tomlinson this early in the season.nice job david.

 
It will be interesting to see if Kellogg takes Moss or if he learned from his mistake last year. I like how TC comes out with a statement like, 'I want Moss, but Kellogg is in front of me.' That has to be a bluff. No one would tell the person in front of them who they want. There are a couple of running backs left on the board that should have huge years. I'm thinking TC wants one of those.Kellogg has the opportunity to have a really special backfield if he adds the right guy here.I think I am pulling for Kellogg this year.I like underdogs and I think he got a good value in Portis at 6.

 
I was going to say that it always is best to start runs on positions than finish them, but these fellas continue to select running backs.
It's also better to get guys in the middle of a long run than to get guys at the end of it, which I think is why these fellas continue to select running backs.Being in the middle of a 20-player run is like being at the front end of a 10-player run.
 
Kellogg's problem was that the RB he chose, Dominic Rhodes, tore his ACL. That was just rotten luck.
FWIW, James Mungro was the #40 RB last year. Is there reason to suspect Rhodes would have done a lot better than that even if he stayed healthy?
 
Rhodes 2001: 233 attempts for 1104 yards, 4.7 y/cMungro 2002: 97 attempts for 336 yards, 3.5 y/c
Edge missed more games in 2001 than 2002, and the Colts' offense in general was better in 2001.Rhodes would have been a backup RB last year even if he'd been healthy.
 
Rhodes 2001: 233 attempts for 1104 yards, 4.7 y/cMungro 2002: 97 attempts for 336 yards, 3.5 y/c
Edge missed more games in 2001 than 2002, and the Colts' offense in general was better in 2001.Rhodes would have been a backup RB last year even if he'd been healthy.
At the time of FAD 02, it wasn't clear that James was going to be recovered enough from his torn ACL to play. If Rhodes was healthy, its entirely possible that they bring James back much more slowly.But, we'll never know since Rhodes tore his ACL.
 
But, we'll never know since Rhodes tore his ACL.
Right, but my point was that a seventh-round RB who doesn't produce isn't "just rotten luck" -- it's a longshot that didn't pan out, i.e. normal luck. Rhodes ended up getting hurt, but even if he hadn't, he was the backup RB on a team whose backup RB got fewer than 100 carries last year.Now whoever drafted Terrell Davis in 1999, that was rotten luck!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right, but my point was that a seventh-round RB who doesn't produce isn't just "bad luck" -- it's a longshot that didn't pan out, i.e. normal luck. Rhodes ended up getting hurt, but even if he hadn't, he was the backup RB on a team whose backup RB got fewer than 100 carries last year.

Now whoever drafted Terrell Davis in 1999, that was bad luck!
Exactly, by not taking a RB in round one and two, he had to reach for backup RB's later. None panned out. Sure, some could have, but the odds were very long. He got zero production out of those guys. If you reverse it, you can more easily get production out of 5th, 6th and 7th round WR's.
 
Right, but my point was that a seventh-round RB who doesn't produce isn't "just rotten luck" -- it's a longshot that didn't pan out, i.e. normal luck. Rhodes ended up getting hurt, but even if he hadn't, he was the backup RB on a team whose backup RB got fewer than 100 carries last year.

Now whoever drafted Terrell Davis in 1999, that was bad luck!
Didn't someone take Terrel Davis in this draft last year in like the 3rd round?
 
I'm surprised that Dodds passed over Stephen Davis. It was a tough call.
I was too, but I guess you have to go with who's best on your board. He obviously wasn't even considering him from some of his comments. Looks like he was only looking at pass catching backs and Davis doesn't fit that mold as much.
 
Right, but my point was that a seventh-round RB who doesn't produce isn't "just rotten luck" -- it's a longshot that didn't pan out, i.e. normal luck. Rhodes ended up getting hurt, but even if he hadn't, he was the backup RB on a team whose backup RB got fewer than 100 carries last year.

Now whoever drafted Terrell Davis in 1999, that was rotten luck!
Again, its not at all certain that Rhodes would have been the backup RB had he not torn his ACL. So yes it was rotten luck.
 
Being in the middle of a 20-player run is like being at the front end of a 10-player run.
Slightly disagree.All value in zero sum formats is based on demand and the scarcity inflates this unreasonably in longer runs. In shorter runs, more value rational decisions can be made. Value rational in this case would be based more on anticipated performance.

Quite fortunate for Dodds that he was forced to only reach slightly for Taylor (arguably) while these other guys will be forced to reach even further. I like the Taylor pick for reasons that I won't get into now.

Edited for confusion over trades.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, the biggest mistake so far was Terrell Owens at 1.11

Bonini has to take his top RB here. No way does Dodds take two WRs at the turn, so Bonini was virtually assured of either Harrison/Owens at 2.2

Instead, he gets stuck with Stephen Davis instead of Tiki.

 
IMO, the biggest mistake so far was Terrell Owens at 1.11

Bonini has to take his top RB here. No way does Dodds take two WRs at the turn, so Bonini was virtually assured of either Harrison/Owens at 2.2

Instead, he gets stuck with Stephen Davis instead of Tiki.
Very good point!
 
IMO, the biggest mistake so far was Terrell Owens at 1.11

Bonini has to take his top RB here. No way does Dodds take two WRs at the turn, so Bonini was virtually assured of either Harrison/Owens at 2.2

Instead, he gets stuck with Stephen Davis instead of Tiki.
what are the chances he likes davis over tiki?
 
There will be a trade glut of RBs after week #4 to benefit those more patient and who can swing a win/win deal with any of the 3-4 owners who are leaving points on the bench with their RB hoards.
There is NO Trading in this league once the draft is completed. This is what makes the RB position extremely scarce. Deep injuries, key benchings, etc end up with someone posibly not even drafted taking up one of the spots.Dynamic Drafting principles apply here. Value is based on what can be picked with the next pick. Even though 10 RBs were picked before me at 1.12, six of the next eight picks have been RB after I chose two. Only the big three WRs have been taken off the board so far other than the run at RB. The drop at RB IMHO as been steep already and will be significant by the time I get back in at 3.12 and 4.01.More thoughts on this draft: - I agree that KFFL made a bad tactical mistake by not grabbing a RB before me. This would have put more pressure on me to grab a WR and they still could have gotten Owens after I picked (if they wanted him). A quick look at our FBG rankings shows I like Harrison and Moss more than Owens so he was never at risk.Let's relook at all this after my 3.12 and 4,01 selections and we can ask the question would I have a better team by drafting Harrison at 2.01 or taking a RB and getting what is available at WR there. Watching RBs continue to come off of the board leads me to believe I chose the right position. The question is whether he will be the player I need him to be.
 
I think you made the safe choice. You are correct, as the RB run continues, your options for that position will be slim.However, if you did get 2 of the "big 3"... and then happen to get lucky with the RBs you do get, you likely would've been untouchable. It's very much a risk/reward proposal. I've done it twice in leagues, and it's an ulcer causing roller coaster ride... scoring huge some weeks, and hardly anything in others. Maybe if this draft was a week before the season, and you had more information on in camp battles, it would be more feasible?

 
David,Just wanted to say thanks for the response. I understand your point completely, and based on what you were looking for at that point in the draft I'd have to concur that Taylor was the best pick--if it had been me, I'd have gone Stephen Davis there (and then in my current role, questioned picking him that early). But that's just a question of personal preferences and projections.FWIW, I wouldn't have picked Harrison there either. While I think he's an excellent value with a 2nd round pick, I'd much rather let someone else have that value while I stock up on the RBs.

 
I'm not sure where this 1 pt per reception nonsense started. Nowhere on the rules page does it mention 1 pt per reception.If it does say this on the page, then I am blind and can't find it.[Edited to admit that I need glasses]

 
Last edited by a moderator:
what are the chances he likes davis over tiki? What are the chances that S. Davis has a better season than Tiki?50/50 IMO.
I agree that KFFL could have liked Stephen Davis over Tiki Barber, but the fact remains by taking Terrell Owens where they did, they risked not getting the RB they wanted. I chose two RBs and they may have liked one better than Stephen Davis. They had no idea which ones I would choose and I could have taken Davis. My point was that I was not going to take Terrell Owens with one of my next two picks and that was easy info to find.So to me that constitutes a tactical error. Much like the Minnesota Vikings making a tactical error at the NFL Draft. Both situations might have ended up with the same players, but they could have traded down to get that value. There was no pressure on Terrell Owens so they should have traded down (or tried to even if they got little value). If they did not trade down, they should have taken the RB they wanted instead of waiting and possibly losing out on that player.This is all moot if they wanted Stephen Davis, but by taking a RB before me there would have been more pressure for me to go WR and I clearly did not covet Owens.All moot anyway as I run away with this draft in the next few picks...LOL
 
Considering all of the people in this draft regularly publish their rankings, do you guys ever go to their sites to check them out before you make a selection?Also, I would say that last year was the exception when it came to going Stud WR in the draft. The RB position had several potential studs with huge question marks. Taylor and Lewis were injury concerns. Garner looked to be a RBBC guy. Everyone undervalued Tiki. There was a complete mess in Denver. Hearst and Barlow cut each others value in half. The Cards insisted on giving Thomas Jones one more chance. Travis Henry hadnt impressed the prior year. This year, the RB spots around the league are much more settled on the whole. If you wait until the 5th round to draft your second starting RB, you will have even less possibility of finding a serviceable starter.

 
I have already asserted that William Del Pilar was being an unprepared time wasting %^&*@! in the draft. Anyone that takes this pastime seriously and is drafting at the tail end of the serpentine draft should have several scenarios ready. He did not. It is one thing to go out on a limb and take a reach pick (Faulk). Everyone makes their own projections.It is quite another to have your name and to a smaller degree, your reputation on the line, and to be unprepared. That is unexcuable.

 
I'm not sure where this 1 pt per reception nonsense started. Nowhere on the rules page does it mention 1 pt per reception.If it does say this on the page, then I am blind and can't find it.[Edited to admit that I need glasses]
Wolfe = The voice of the blind
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have already asserted that William Del Pilar was being an unprepared time wasting %^&*@! in the draft. Anyone that takes this pastime seriously and is drafting at the tail end of the serpentine draft should have several scenarios ready. He did not. It is one thing to go out on a limb and take a reach pick (Faulk). Everyone makes their own projections.It is quite another to have your name and to a smaller degree, your reputation on the line, and to be unprepared. That is unexcuable.
RFW = The Voice of ReasonAlso, one thing that bothers me about the analysis is no one is critical of any picks. Are all the guest analysis guys in favor of the pick made in that position? There have been a few controversial picks, but the analysis always comes back with a :shock: . I don't know why I waste time reading them.....
 
Also, one thing that bothers me about the analysis is no one is critical of any picks. Are all the guest analysis guys in favor of the pick made in that position? There have been a few controversial picks, but the analysis always comes back with a :D . I don't know why I waste time reading them.....
One thing that might be causing this is Terry has given choices to some people about which player they do guest analysis for. In my case, TC asked me to do anyone in round 1, so I chose Travis Henry who I really am high on this year. I'd happily write negatives on a player if I think it is warranted.Oh, and I think the way the guidelines are is there isn't supposed to be too much discussion on why a player was taken in a particular position, and who was passed by. It should be more an assessment of the player. That is my understanding anyway. First 2 rounds, generally the guys taken have more positives than negatives.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top