Fantasy Football Myths and Cliches (1 Viewer)

[Escape Goat]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

 

[fun-b]

The term "overpaying".

If you like a player, and you want to draft him "higher than he should be", go right ahead with confidence and don't let anybody else talk you out of it. I will be overpaying for Roddy White and Chris Johnson this year (I had planned on this prior to this weekend's preseason games, but now I feel even better about it). I watched A. Peterson fall and fall in our draft last year, and me, THE ONLY OKLAHOMA FAN, didn't pull the trigger on him. That was a mistake. So, I refuse to let the most talented rookie, Chris Johnson, in my eyes, slip and fall to another team, only to be locked up on his team for years to come. I WILL OVERPAY, AND I WILL OVERPAY WITH CONFIDENCE.

Last year, during the first round in my keeper league redraft (30 players were gone, so technically a 4th round pick), I watched a guy draft Randy Moss with his first pick. We all laughed. He laughed at the end of the season.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

The biggest cliche in fantasy football is people bragging about how much they dominate their leagues-- knowing full well that nobody can verify it, attest to the level of competition in those leagues or muster enough interest to care.The second-biggest cliche is the notion that any fantasy team has "league-wide respect." Every fantasy football team has exactly one fan: The owner. Nobody else follows the team or cares about them. There's nothing to respect. It's a hobby.

The third-biggest cliche is the idea that you have to have "x" number of teams to make the league "real." x usually = 12. Leagues who have 10 good owners always end up picking a couple of scrubs who don't care about the league and tarnish it with their apathy.

The fourth-biggest cliche is a guy who posts in a thread trashing the OP for a useless thread...when it was obviously important enough for him to post in it.

 

[wholligans]

The term "overpaying".If you like a player, and you want to draft him "higher than he should be", go right ahead with confidence and don't let anybody else talk you out of it. I will be overpaying for Roddy White and Chris Johnson this year (I had planned on this prior to this weekend's preseason games, but now I feel even better about it). I watched A. Peterson fall and fall in our draft last year, and me, THE ONLY OKLAHOMA FAN, didn't pull the trigger on him. That was a mistake. So, I refuse to let the most talented rookie, Chris Johnson, in my eyes, slip and fall to another team, only to be locked up on his team for years to come. I WILL OVERPAY, AND I WILL OVERPAY WITH CONFIDENCE.Last year, during the first round in my keeper league redraft (30 players were gone, so technically a 4th round pick), I watched a guy draft Randy Moss with his first pick. We all laughed. He laughed at the end of the season.

I agree with this. Many times over the years I have drafted a player way earlier than his"value" according to the experts. I do not use this strategy every draft, but if I feel if the player is valuable to me and has a lot of potential, I will pull the trigger early. Two examples that I can think of were when I drafted E.James in the first round his rookie season and A.Petersen in the early second round last year. I do not laugh when people draft players "out of position". I have seen so many players rise and fall throughout a season. You never know. I am in a 16 team redraft league and Ryan Grant was not drafted last year. Who knew?

 

[bcr8f]

The Cowboys can win a playoff game.

 

[Varmint]

#1 Fantasy Football Myth:

The draft format is challenging.

 

[puckalicious]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

 

[Mik789fl]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

The biggest cliche in fantasy football is people bragging about how much they dominate their leagues-- knowing full well that nobody can verify it, attest to the level of competition in those leagues or muster enough interest to care.The second-biggest cliche is the notion that any fantasy team has "league-wide respect." Every fantasy football team has exactly one fan: The owner. Nobody else follows the team or cares about them. There's nothing to respect. It's a hobby.

The third-biggest cliche is the idea that you have to have "x" number of teams to make the league "real." x usually = 12. Leagues who have 10 good owners always end up picking a couple of scrubs who don't care about the league and tarnish it with their apathy.

The fourth-biggest cliche is a guy who posts in a thread trashing the OP for a useless thread...when it was obviously important enough for him to post in it.

 

[Ned]

 

[ScoobyDoo]

I hadn't seen that smiley yet. Awesome.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

How about those who are put on a pedestal in the shark pool for their evaluation of talent, but constantly get thrashed in their leagues. That's too funny and I won't name names

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

The provision of the title "fantasy expert."

 

[VTjkru]

That "moderated" is the Nostradamus of FF.

 

[MAC_32]

3rd year WR breakout

 

[LBH]

the term "reach"

If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

 

[Tanner9919]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

"Stud RB Theory"

 

[MAC_32]

the term "reach"If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

the term "reach"

If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

Please dial down the tool comments, namely the attempt to post around the profanity filter (bolded).

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

the term "reach"

If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

Please dial down the tool comments, namely the attempt to post around the profanity filter (bolded).

Maybe he was just calling him the author of "The Count of Monte Christo"?

 

[Binky The Doormat]

How about those who are put on a pedestal in the shark pool for their evaluation of talent, but constantly get thrashed in their leagues. That's too funny and I won't name names

Please come on - you can't lob something like out there with no payoff at all - how about 2 names referred here? This allows us better separate the wheat from the chaff.

 

[fatness]

The biggest cliche in fantasy football is people bragging about how much they dominate their leagues-- knowing full well that nobody can verify it, attest to the level of competition in those leagues or muster enough interest to care.

The second-biggest cliche is the notion that any fantasy team has "league-wide respect." Every fantasy football team has exactly one fan: The owner. Nobody else follows the team or cares about them. There's nothing to respect. It's a hobby.

Agree with both. Here's another one (not aimed at you): Having multiple identities on a fantasy football board is cool.

 

[MAC_32]

the term "reach"

If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

Please dial down the tool comments, namely the attempt to post around the profanity filter (bolded).

Relax. No manuvering around the profanity filter here, I guess it's just been too long since that hilarious Mr. Dumas (Doom-as) commercial.

 

[zed2283]

"Stud RB Theory"

 

[LBH]

the term "reach"If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

agreed. Just tired of hearing it when it doesnt really apply. As I explained in my post, it isnt a reach if you like a player, and have a good idea he wont be available with your next pick. A good example might be taking Gore 3rd overall while knowing he cant be had with your next pick in the late 2nd rd.

 

[MAC_32]

the term "reach"If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

agreed. Just tired of hearing it when it doesnt really apply. As I explained in my post, it isnt a reach if you like a player, and have a good idea he wont be available with your next pick. A good example might be taking Gore 3rd overall while knowing he cant be had with your next pick in the late 2nd rd.

Agreed, prime example - I got heckled in my home league drafts last year (all of them) for taking Portis in the 2nd round.

 

[Keys Myaths]

3rd year WR breakout

Love this one. Generally, with third year breakouts (see Edwards last year), you have a pretty good idea the second year that he's going to be good. Drafting the guys who were good in year two in the middle rounds (this year: Bowe, Holmes, etc.) are the real steals. These are the guys that break out in year 3--not the guys who haven't shown us anything so far.However, I follow this cliche when drafting Holmes vs. Roy Williams, for example, or Bowe vs. Wes Welker.

 

[Keys Myaths]

the term "reach"If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

agreed. Just tired of hearing it when it doesnt really apply. As I explained in my post, it isnt a reach if you like a player, and have a good idea he wont be available with your next pick. A good example might be taking Gore 3rd overall while knowing he cant be had with your next pick in the late 2nd rd.

Agreed, prime example - I got heckled in my home league drafts last year (all of them) for taking Portis in the 2nd round.

I did too (and traded for him in another league), and got heckled, but that's half the fun. People that take offense to that kind of stuff should probably find another hobby--getting heckled is half the fun of playing this thing.

 

[twistd]

The term "overpaying".If you like a player, and you want to draft him "higher than he should be", go right ahead with confidence and don't let anybody else talk you out of it. I will be overpaying for Roddy White and Chris Johnson this year (I had planned on this prior to this weekend's preseason games, but now I feel even better about it). I watched A. Peterson fall and fall in our draft last year, and me, THE ONLY OKLAHOMA FAN, didn't pull the trigger on him. That was a mistake. So, I refuse to let the most talented rookie, Chris Johnson, in my eyes, slip and fall to another team, only to be locked up on his team for years to come. I WILL OVERPAY, AND I WILL OVERPAY WITH CONFIDENCE.Last year, during the first round in my keeper league redraft (30 players were gone, so technically a 4th round pick), I watched a guy draft Randy Moss with his first pick. We all laughed. He laughed at the end of the season.

That is a good post. The last thing you want is a team full of players you don't want because they were values. I didn't like Benson last year, but he was still there in the top of the fourth round in a twelve team draft. My DD told me he was a great value. I went with that, against my instincts, and it was a mistake. You are absolutely right about drafting the players you feel strongly about. Generally I will say that drafting Chris Johnson in the second round when his ADP is the sixth round is overpaying. But I think you make a great point.

 

[mrspree15]

How about those who are put on a pedestal in the shark pool for their evaluation of talent, but constantly get thrashed in their leagues. That's too funny and I won't name names

Please come on - you can't lob something like out there with no payoff at all - how about 2 names referred here? This allows us better separate the wheat from the chaff.

+1Name names!

 

[twistd]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration. If you draft Brady or Manning you feel relatively safe that they will make it through the season. Whereas chances are pretty good that McNabb won't. I think injury consideration is really important.

 

[Keys Myaths]

That is a good post. The last thing you want is a team full of players you don't want because they were values.

It depends on what you define as 'value'.For example, I wouldn't normally draft Chad Johnson in a league. However, in one league, he fell so far that he truly was a value, even though I don't particularly like him.However, there are some players that I just can't count on to produce at all. Roy Williams is a good example for me. I honestly believe his top 10 season was an absolute fluke. Even if he drops to me at WR20-25, I just don't see him as a 'value'. I'd only see him as one in the WR40 range.Just make sure that players are valued at what YOU believe. If you're not comfortable with someone in a slot, drop them further down. If you think someone isn't a reach, bump them up your rankings.The key with 'reaching' is not to draft someone you KNOW is going to be there a round later. I love McFadden this year (secretly...shhh). However, I know my league that's drafting next weekend--there's no way I'm going to draft him in the first round, because I KNOW he'll be there in the second. That's a reach. If you take a guy that could be gone the next time you draft--and you want him--that's not a reach at all.

 

[Keys Myaths]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration.

I disagree with both of these.I think some players get hurt a lot. I think SOME players' injury risk is overblown, however--and Westbrook is one of them.People have selective memory when it comes to injuries--a player gets hurt one year when that owner has him, and he shouts from the rooftops how much of an injury risk he is, and everyone buys in. Because, hey, he's shouting it.Westbrook has played in 89% of his potential games as a pro. That's fine. People get hurt. He's not one that's out a great majority of the time.There are some players that fit this bill, but it's not always the ones that are touted.

 

[joffer]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

all right...who is this?

 

[twistd]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration.

I disagree with both of these.I think some players get hurt a lot. I think SOME players' injury risk is overblown, however--and Westbrook is one of them.People have selective memory when it comes to injuries--a player gets hurt one year when that owner has him, and he shouts from the rooftops how much of an injury risk he is, and everyone buys in. Because, hey, he's shouting it.Westbrook has played in 89% of his potential games as a pro. That's fine. People get hurt. He's not one that's out a great majority of the time.There are some players that fit this bill, but it's not always the ones that are touted.

If you judged both players the same. Tomlinson and Westbrook, injury risk could be the deciding factor. Westbrook has played in 89% of his games. Tomlinson has played in close to 100% of his games. Westbrook really isn't a great example. His injury problem is somewhat overblown, but if you have owned him the unnerving thing is he is on the injury report every week. That gets frustrating when every week you have to be concerned about whether he'll play or not. Actually, Fred Taylor is a good example of what you are saying. Fred Taylor carried the 'Fragile Fred' label long after he was really reliable.

 

[benbadman]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration. If you draft Brady or Manning you feel relatively safe that they will make it through the season. Whereas chances are pretty good that McNabb won't. I think injury consideration is really important.

Interesting you bring up the Tomlinson injury-proof myth. The tread wore off his tires in the post-season last year, and I wouldn't be surprised if after 7 consecutive seasons of 310+ carries, that 2008 is the year he underperforms this year.Quitting while you're ahead isn't the same thing as quitting. If I was in a redraft league and got Tomlinson, I wouldn't hesitate to turn around after the draft and trade him for a 2 starters (a stud WR/RB + 1, depth at least).

 

[puckalicious]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration.

I disagree with both of these.I think some players get hurt a lot. I think SOME players' injury risk is overblown, however--and Westbrook is one of them.People have selective memory when it comes to injuries--a player gets hurt one year when that owner has him, and he shouts from the rooftops how much of an injury risk he is, and everyone buys in. Because, hey, he's shouting it.Westbrook has played in 89% of his potential games as a pro. That's fine. People get hurt. He's not one that's out a great majority of the time.There are some players that fit this bill, but it's not always the ones that are touted.

I guess my point is that past injuries, or lack thereof, have no bearing on future injury risk. Unless the past injury is not 100% healed. So when people say with absolute confidence that Westbrook will miss games this year, and LT will not, I say they are full of it. For every "prediction" that player X will be hurt this year (and does happen), there are at least a dozen other players injured that were not "predicted". Therefore it is bunk. IMHO.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

RBBC

There is no proof that RBBC is on the rise. I created an excel spreadsheet charting the last 30 years (yes, that's 30 years) of RB production. A team's RB1 is the only RB to have increased his workload continually over the years. Here are some percentages:

1978

RB1 - 38.77% of the carries, 40.09% of the catches, 35.95% of the TD's

RB2 - 25.8% of the carries, 22.03% of the catches, 30.18% of the TD's

RB3 - 13.85% of the carries, 17.62% of the catches, 13.24% of the TD's

RB4 - 8.45% of the carries, 3.96% of the catches, 11.54% of the TD's

RB5 - 3.66% of the carries, 4.19% of the catches, 6.21% of the TD's

1988

RB1 - 44.29% of the carries, 44.34% of the catches, 36.85% of the TD's (increased in all 3 areas from 1978)

RB2 - 23.34% of the carries, 23.82% of the catches, 24.42% of the TD's (increased in 1 area from 1978)

RB3 - 13.01% of the carries, 9.91% of the catches, 17.77% of the TD's (increased in 1 area from 1978)

RB4 - 5.34% of the carries, 3.54% of the catches, 13.8% of the TD's (increased in 1 area from 1978)

RB5 - 2.13% of the carries, 1.89% of the catches, 4.72% of the TD's (decreased in all areas from 1978)

1998

RB1 - 57.46% of the carries, 49.87% of the catches, 37.76% of the TD's (increased in all 3 areas from 1988)

RB2 - 18.01% of the carries, 21.9% of the catches, 16.1% of the TD's (decreased in all areas from 1988)

RB3 - 7.22% of the carries, 6.6% of the catches, 21.53% of the TD's (increased in 1 area from 1988)

RB4 - 3.99% of the carries, 4.75% of the catches, 16.9% of the TD's (increased in 2 areas from 1988)

RB5 - 1.33% of the carries, 2.64% of the catches, 6.41% of the TD's (increased in 2 areas from 1988)

2006 (haven't completed 2007 yet, so had to use 2006)

RB1 - 58.62% of the carries, 54.95% of the catches, 44.23% of the TD's (increased in all 3 areas from 1998)

RB2 - 21.37% of the carries, 26.89% of the catches, 24.06% of the TD's (increased in all 3 areas from 1998)

RB3 - 5.63% of the carries, 4.95% of the catches, 15.42% of the TD's (decreased in all areas from 1998)

RB4 - 1.96% of the carries, 1.18% of the catches, 9.87% of the TD's (decreased in all areas from 1998)

RB5 - .47% of the carries, 0% of the catches, 4.52% of the TD's (decreased in all areas from 1998)

RBBC is not on the rise. The trend points toward RB's 4 and 5 being phased out, and RB3 losing touches to both RB1 and RB2. Just because RB2 has increased touches, that doesn't mean he is taking them away from RB1.

 

[Keys Myaths]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration.

I disagree with both of these.I think some players get hurt a lot. I think SOME players' injury risk is overblown, however--and Westbrook is one of them.People have selective memory when it comes to injuries--a player gets hurt one year when that owner has him, and he shouts from the rooftops how much of an injury risk he is, and everyone buys in. Because, hey, he's shouting it.Westbrook has played in 89% of his potential games as a pro. That's fine. People get hurt. He's not one that's out a great majority of the time.There are some players that fit this bill, but it's not always the ones that are touted.

I guess my point is that past injuries, or lack thereof, have no bearing on future injury risk. Unless the past injury is not 100% healed. So when people say with absolute confidence that Westbrook will miss games this year, and LT will not, I say they are full of it. For every "prediction" that player X will be hurt this year (and does happen), there are at least a dozen other players injured that were not "predicted". Therefore it is bunk. IMHO.

I guess that's fair, but I still would like the 2001 article on this site (that does show you can somewhat predict injuries--although not as significantly as people want to believe) is false. It was a pretty good statistical study--shame I can't link it.It very well could be false due to a small sample size--which is just par for the course in the NFL.My theory will remain that certain people are injury prone, just not the ones that everyone shouts.

 

[Binky The Doormat]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

all right...who is this?

Smells of the Otis/McJose/Finless genre - but anyone really obnoxious sounds like him(s).

 

[twistd]

the term "reach"

If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

Please dial down the tool comments, namely the attempt to post around the profanity filter (bolded).

Maybe he was just calling him the author of "The Count of Monte Christo"?

Not nearly enough literary references on this board. I gotta love that.

 

[Keys Myaths]

the term "reach"

If you really like a player and you feel he wont be available with your next pick, then its really not a "reach" regardless of what others feel his ADP is, or should be

It's over used, but it's still applicable. If I select Calvin Johnson in the 4th round and you call it a reach you are a dumas. If I select Rudi Johnson in the 1st round and I don't hear "reach" from half of the other owners in the room I'd be disappointed.

Please dial down the tool comments, namely the attempt to post around the profanity filter (bolded).

Wait, ####### is censored?ETA: Son of a #####, it is.

 

[twistd]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration.

I disagree with both of these.I think some players get hurt a lot. I think SOME players' injury risk is overblown, however--and Westbrook is one of them.People have selective memory when it comes to injuries--a player gets hurt one year when that owner has him, and he shouts from the rooftops how much of an injury risk he is, and everyone buys in. Because, hey, he's shouting it.Westbrook has played in 89% of his potential games as a pro. That's fine. People get hurt. He's not one that's out a great majority of the time.There are some players that fit this bill, but it's not always the ones that are touted.

I guess my point is that past injuries, or lack thereof, have no bearing on future injury risk. Unless the past injury is not 100% healed. So when people say with absolute confidence that Westbrook will miss games this year, and LT will not, I say they are full of it. For every "prediction" that player X will be hurt this year (and does happen), there are at least a dozen other players injured that were not "predicted". Therefore it is bunk. IMHO.

I disagree completely. You can never say, with absolute confidence, that someone will or won't get injured. Brady and Manning have never missed time with injury, in the regular season. But even there it is possible that one or the other could get hurt. It is certainly an inexact science trying to predict injuries, but if you look at a players history it can give you some indication of what you think is likely. And that has to be taken in to consideration when drafting. McNabb hasn't played a full season since 2003. In his nine years in the league he has played a full sixteen games three times. In Peyton Manning 's ten year career he has never missed a regular season game. So you are telling me that it is silly to figure it is more likely for Manning to play all sixteen games than McNabb? Since you can't predict injuries it is silly to imagine that LT has more of a chance to stay healthy than, say Ahman Green? And in both cases the opposite could occur. Manning could get hurt in week one, and McNabb could play the whole year. And Green could play all year while LT could go down in week one. However, that seems unlikely. No one can predict injuries absolutely, but you have to consider injury history, or what you feel is the likelihood of injury into the equation when evaluating players.

 

[bonesman]

Here's a cliche I'd like to see stripped from the fantasy footballers' vernacular:

"Drinking the Kool-Aid"

This is a reference to "Jonestown" where over 900 people... mostly women and children were forced to drink cyanide laced kool-aid at gun point.

I'm not a big "PC" (politically correct) guy... but I think it's a disgusting analogy to draw... and on top of that, it's hardly accurate since noone is pointing a gun at you and forcing you and your family to "drink the kool aid" as you plead against it.

 

[sholditch]

BMI

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Here's a cliche I'd like to see stripped from the fantasy footballers' vernacular:"Drinking the Kool-Aid"This is a reference to "Jonestown" where over 900 people... mostly women and children were forced to drink cyanide laced kool-aid at gun point. I'm not a big "PC" (politically correct) guy... but I think it's a disgusting analogy to draw... and on top of that, it's hardly accurate since noone is pointing a gun at you and forcing you and your family to "drink the kool aid" as you plead against it.

Do you know what a figure of speech is? It's not a contextual reference.

 

[sholditch]

Here's a cliche I'd like to see stripped from the fantasy footballers' vernacular:"Drinking the Kool-Aid"This is a reference to "Jonestown" where over 900 people... mostly women and children were forced to drink cyanide laced kool-aid at gun point. I'm not a big "PC" (politically correct) guy... but I think it's a disgusting analogy to draw... and on top of that, it's hardly accurate since noone is pointing a gun at you and forcing you and your family to "drink the kool aid" as you plead against it.

Do you know what a figure of speech is? It's not a contextual reference.

Shut up and drink your kool-aid

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

:X

 

[Lehigh98]

One of the things I've learned over the last quarter century of DOMINATING leagues and being a student of both football statistics and trends is the community is full of myths and cliches. Listening to the myths and the uninformed posters who SPEW them may be the difference between a HEFTY payday, another trophy on the mantle and league wide respect or an early exit from the playoffs. Anyone can be a parrot. Its a HUGE problem. Real fantasy HAWKS can weed though the nonsense and cruise to Championships consistently year to year.



Never bench your studs...ever

all right...who is this?

Smells of the Otis/McJose/Finless genre - but anyone really obnoxious sounds like him(s).

I would say a Zman alias but I think that guy likes seeing his own name too much to use an alias.

 

[puckalicious]

That someone claims to be able to "predict" injury.

No one can predict injury, but c'mon, when you compare Westbrook to Tomlinson you have to take the injury risk into consideration.

I disagree with both of these.I think some players get hurt a lot. I think SOME players' injury risk is overblown, however--and Westbrook is one of them.People have selective memory when it comes to injuries--a player gets hurt one year when that owner has him, and he shouts from the rooftops how much of an injury risk he is, and everyone buys in. Because, hey, he's shouting it.Westbrook has played in 89% of his potential games as a pro. That's fine. People get hurt. He's not one that's out a great majority of the time.There are some players that fit this bill, but it's not always the ones that are touted.

I guess my point is that past injuries, or lack thereof, have no bearing on future injury risk. Unless the past injury is not 100% healed. So when people say with absolute confidence that Westbrook will miss games this year, and LT will not, I say they are full of it. For every "prediction" that player X will be hurt this year (and does happen), there are at least a dozen other players injured that were not "predicted". Therefore it is bunk. IMHO.

I disagree completely. You can never say, with absolute confidence, that someone will or won't get injured. Brady and Manning have never missed time with injury, in the regular season. But even there it is possible that one or the other could get hurt. It is certainly an inexact science trying to predict injuries, but if you look at a players history it can give you some indication of what you think is likely. And that has to be taken in to consideration when drafting. McNabb hasn't played a full season since 2003. In his nine years in the league he has played a full sixteen games three times. In Peyton Manning 's ten year career he has never missed a regular season game. So you are telling me that it is silly to figure it is more likely for Manning to play all sixteen games than McNabb? Since you can't predict injuries it is silly to imagine that LT has more of a chance to stay healthy than, say Ahman Green? And in both cases the opposite could occur. Manning could get hurt in week one, and McNabb could play the whole year. And Green could play all year while LT could go down in week one. However, that seems unlikely. No one can predict injuries absolutely, but you have to consider injury history, or what you feel is the likelihood of injury into the equation when evaluating players.

So it comes down to what is worse - avoiding Fred Taylor in 2002 because he was an "injury risk", or having him in 2001 when he only played 2 games? Isn't it easier to draft based on talent/situation, rather than who *might* be injured or not? Football is a game where injuries are common for all players (non Qb's/K's in particular) so trying to predict who will or will not get tackled awkwardly and tear up a knee is fool's gold.

 

[clinton_c]

Everyone that complains when the 1st TE is taken too early. For years I would select Tony Gonzalez in the 3rd round and would watch people complain....and then I would watch them scramble later to find a decent TE.

Of course this year with the depth at TE....I will probably be waiting till at least the 5th maybe 6th.