FBG Rankings are LIVE (1 Viewer)

[Clayton Gray]

Clayton Gray--Randy Moss as WR #1, Mike Brown has him as #2... you guys really feel he'll not only come around mentally, but get enough catches in that offense to pass Holt, Harrison, Owens, Housh, Walker?

Obviously yes.I am a big believer in the idea that a focused Randy Moss is the premier WR in the league. Lately, he has made it perfectly clear that he really wants to win, and that's all they do in New England. He will be a happy guy in 2007. As such, he'll give his all this year.That only leaves the question of opportunity. It's true that the Patriots never produce a high quality fantasy WR. as they generally spread it around to several receivers. However, is that due to the system or due to a lack of talent? The best WR New England has had lately is Deion Branch. Consider Branch's current situation in Seattle - only three of us have him in the top 20 this season and there is some discussion that D.J. Hackett will surpass him. It's fairly obvious that we're not talking about an excellent WR when discussing Branch. If he's the best the Patriots have had lately, then Brady hasn't thrown to an elite NFL WR. He will this year.There is also the change in attitude toward roster composition. In the past, New England has been willing to take scrap-heap WRs like Jabar Gaffney, Reche Caldwell, and David Terrell. This offseason, they brought in Moss, Donte Stallworth, and Wes Welker. There is obviously a change in philosophy in regards to personnel, so it stands to follow that there will be a change in WR usage as well. They didn't bring in a guy like Randy Moss so they could keep throwing the ball to Troy Brown.Is Tom Brady capable of supporting the #1 fantasy WR? I believe so. In each of the last five seasons, he has surpassed the 3500-yard mark (over 4000 yards once) and thrown in the mid- to high- 20s in the TD department. Seeing as he he generally has a poor group of receivers, it seems likely that his numbers will improve.

 

[AB in DC]

I'll start a thread about my Benson and SJax picks tomorrow, but I'll address some of the Benson stuff now, since my projection for him is by far the most disparate that I have seen of all the RBs.

I'll respond in more detail tomorrow, but there are few flaws in your logic:1) ReceivingThomas Jones had one reception every 8 carries. Benson had one reception every 20 carries. Add the fact that the Bears chose Wolfe in the third round, and it tells me that Chicago will not be counting on Benson for a large number of RB receptions.2) % of RB carriesI haven't counted how many players account for 80% of a team's RB carries, but I suspect that the number is very small. Just to pick a few workhorses from last year:Frank Gore had 82% of team's RB carriesJamal Lewis had 78%Tomlinson had 75%If you're correct that Benson will be the workhorse, 75-80% seems reasonable, but anyone making ff projections should adjust that downward based on uncertainty. He also has quite a bit of injury history in just two years. I see 80% as his ceiling, but I would bet he'll finish a lot closer to 67% than to 80%.

 

[Tau837]

I'll start a thread about my Benson and SJax picks tomorrow, but I'll address some of the Benson stuff now, since my projection for him is by far the most disparate that I have seen of all the RBs.

I'll respond in more detail tomorrow, but there are few flaws in your logic:1) ReceivingThomas Jones had one reception every 8 carries. Benson had one reception every 20 carries. Add the fact that the Bears chose Wolfe in the third round, and it tells me that Chicago will not be counting on Benson for a large number of RB receptions.2) % of RB carriesI haven't counted how many players account for 80% of a team's RB carries, but I suspect that the number is very small. Just to pick a few workhorses from last year:Frank Gore had 82% of team's RB carriesJamal Lewis had 78%Tomlinson had 75%If you're correct that Benson will be the workhorse, 75-80% seems reasonable, but anyone making ff projections should adjust that downward based on uncertainty. He also has quite a bit of injury history in just two years. I see 80% as his ceiling, but I would bet he'll finish a lot closer to 67% than to 80%.

Colin's receiving analysis was what jumped out most at me as being overly optimistic. On the other point, it seemed clear that his entire view on Benson was based on him being a workhorse (i.e., I think he would simply agree with you that Benson will get Gore/Lewis like workload).

 

[Colin Dowling]

Benson didn't catch many balls the last two years b/c Jones was around. I believe Benson will be given plenty of opportunities to be a 3 down back (and pass catcher) before Wolfe and Peterson are brought in. I am confident he will do fine in that role.

 

[zoonation]

QBs (redraft)

Romo will be a steal if his ADP is 16. Somehow I think he will be taken a lot higher in most drafts. Vince Young and Phillip Rivers are projected higher. Not a chance. Last I checked Romo is still throwing to T.O and Glenn.

If that reflects his true ADP in Shark leagues, it allows one to build a deep team at other positions before taking a a solid starter in the later rounds.

 

[mbuehner]

Everybody dance NOW! -G.O.B.

 

[kerpow]

Is there a place to go for overall rankings that have IDPs folded in with offensive players?The hardest thing for many owners new at IDPs is when take those positions relative to the ones they are used to. Or am I missing something?

I'm still relatively new to IDP and share your sentiment. But in the FBG's defense, it would be almost impossible to do that without precise knowledge of your scoring system. I'm sure some folks in the IDP forum will be more forthcoming. These kind of questions frequently crop up.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Is there a place to go for overall rankings that have IDPs folded in with offensive players?The hardest thing for many owners new at IDPs is when take those positions relative to the ones they are used to. Or am I missing something?

I'm still relatively new to IDP and share your sentiment. But in the FBG's defense, it would be almost impossible to do that without precise knowledge of your scoring system. I'm sure some folks in the IDP forum will be more forthcoming. These kind of questions frequently crop up.

Missed this earlier.For the most part, kerpow is right. There is so much variability in IDP scoring systems that a reliable overall dynasty ranking is difficult (see also Bloom 100). The draft dominator (with your own specific knowledge of how your league values IDPs regardless of VBD) may be your best bet in generating that kind of list. We'll also be publishing a Top 200/250 with IDPs at some point this pre-season I believe.

 

[mbuehner]

Owens the #7 WR in a redraft league? That has to be predicting a meltdown. Last year he ended up #2 with all the instability at QB. He'd HAVe to miss some games to finish out of the top 5.

I understand being gunshy (and there are a lot of owners that simply cross him off their draft sheets, cant blame em) but if you are staring at Owens at the beginning of the third round... And if the choice is between Reggie Wayne, Harrison, and Owens- well those two have a new kid in town that is going to probably eat up some touches, no?

 

[Dolfan]

I can not access any of the web site content while at work (Games filter -- but the MBs are OK )..

Any chance we can get snippets (or the whole rankings) posted within this thread??

 

[DBIsports]

I noticed Jason Wood likes Brees this year(#3),but does not like the Saint wrs;Colston(20),Henderson(39),Meacham(NR)...........is this an oversight or does he expect Brees to Brady the ball around?

 

[ookook]

Is there a place to go for overall rankings that have IDPs folded in with offensive players?The hardest thing for many owners new at IDPs is when take those positions relative to the ones they are used to. Or am I missing something?

I'm still relatively new to IDP and share your sentiment. But in the FBG's defense, it would be almost impossible to do that without precise knowledge of your scoring system. I'm sure some folks in the IDP forum will be more forthcoming. These kind of questions frequently crop up.

Missed this earlier.For the most part, kerpow is right. There is so much variability in IDP scoring systems that a reliable overall dynasty ranking is difficult (see also Bloom 100). The draft dominator (with your own specific knowledge of how your league values IDPs regardless of VBD) may be your best bet in generating that kind of list. We'll also be publishing a Top 200/250 with IDPs at some point this pre-season I believe.

Hey Jene,Then why not adopt a standard FBG scoring for IDP and use it for just these sorts of things. We know there is also lots of variability in offensive scoring (PPR, 6 pts per passing TD, etc.).Why not pick one and go with it?OOK!

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Is there a place to go for overall rankings that have IDPs folded in with offensive players?The hardest thing for many owners new at IDPs is when take those positions relative to the ones they are used to. Or am I missing something?

I'm still relatively new to IDP and share your sentiment. But in the FBG's defense, it would be almost impossible to do that without precise knowledge of your scoring system. I'm sure some folks in the IDP forum will be more forthcoming. These kind of questions frequently crop up.

Missed this earlier.For the most part, kerpow is right. There is so much variability in IDP scoring systems that a reliable overall dynasty ranking is difficult (see also Bloom 100). The draft dominator (with your own specific knowledge of how your league values IDPs regardless of VBD) may be your best bet in generating that kind of list. We'll also be publishing a Top 200/250 with IDPs at some point this pre-season I believe.

Hey Jene,Then why not adopt a standard FBG scoring for IDP and use it for just these sorts of things. We know there is also lots of variability in offensive scoring (PPR, 6 pts per passing TD, etc.).Why not pick one and go with it?OOK!

Based on looking at last year, here is the scoring system for FBG:Tackle = 1Assist = 0.5Sack = 1.5 per half sack (3 pts for a sack)INT = 4Fum Rec = 2Forced Fumble = 2Pass Defensed = 1

 

[Jene Bramel]

Is there a place to go for overall rankings that have IDPs folded in with offensive players?The hardest thing for many owners new at IDPs is when take those positions relative to the ones they are used to. Or am I missing something?

I'm still relatively new to IDP and share your sentiment. But in the FBG's defense, it would be almost impossible to do that without precise knowledge of your scoring system. I'm sure some folks in the IDP forum will be more forthcoming. These kind of questions frequently crop up.

Missed this earlier.For the most part, kerpow is right. There is so much variability in IDP scoring systems that a reliable overall dynasty ranking is difficult (see also Bloom 100). The draft dominator (with your own specific knowledge of how your league values IDPs regardless of VBD) may be your best bet in generating that kind of list. We'll also be publishing a Top 200/250 with IDPs at some point this pre-season I believe.

Hey Jene,Then why not adopt a standard FBG scoring for IDP and use it for just these sorts of things. We know there is also lots of variability in offensive scoring (PPR, 6 pts per passing TD, etc.).Why not pick one and go with it?OOK!

Based on looking at last year, here is the scoring system for FBG:Tackle = 1Assist = 0.5Sack = 1.5 per half sack (3 pts for a sack)INT = 4Fum Rec = 2Forced Fumble = 2Pass Defensed = 1

Scoring system has changed for 2007.Tackle 1.5Assist 0.75Sack 4INT 5PD 1.5FF/FR 3Individual scoring systems for IDPs vary much more widely than offensive systems, though, and I still question how valuable one list would be. I know we generate bunches of cheatsheets for various offensive systems; I don't know how feasible it would be to do the same for IDPs.I appreciate the concern, though, and I'll pass this on to someone above the grunt level.

 

[5Rings]

Rookie RankingsGonzales is too low, imo. I'd take him anytime after the top 3-4 guys. He's playing with Manning, going to be the slot WR, and Harrison (hopefully not soon) will eventually slow down. I like his situation far better than #5 Sydney Rice and #6 Dwayne Bowe. Its hard to expect those two to do much w/o a passing game. Are the 5-6 rankings o Rice/Bowe redraft and not dynasty since they will have better chances to start right away, albeit in far worst passing offenses than Meachem or Gonzales? It says dynasty, but it doesn't make sense. I'll take Meachem/Gonzo starting in 3 years catcing balls from Brees/Manning over the queston marks in Minny and KC all day.

Bowe has the chance to be the #1 WR on his team - something neither Gonzales (Wayne/Harrison) or Meachem (Colston) does.Meachem also "suffers" from Reggie Bush getting a ton of targets as a receiver, taking away from the WRs.Yes, the KC QB is an issue, but with Gonzales the #3 WR at best on the Colts for at least 2 more years (Harrison isn't slowing down) that puts both rookies - with a chance to start in September - well out ahead.Rice also has the chance to be the #1 in Minnesota - who could start 2 rookies (A. Allison) - not sure if that's ever happened before.

Thanks for the reply, Jeff.Just so I understand....In dynasty, when the talent is fairly even..... the chance to start right away (on a poor passing offense w/o a QB) >> better QB, team, and long term situation?I don't agree, but respect your stance.

 

[Jason Wood]

Brandon Jacobs at #29? Can anyone give insight as to why the low ranking?

Brandon Jacobs has never been a full time starter, in college or the pros. A lot of people assume because of his hulking size that he's going to dominate. Yet, I wonder if his size isn't a material detriment. We know he can ben an effective short yardage player. But we have no Earthly idea whether he can be a 20+ carry back. With Reuben Droughns in the fold, I don't think 29th is completely unreasonable for him. Jacobs could shine in training camp and early preseason and that ranking will self correct.

sounds like an Eagles fan's ranking to me

Bri,All due respect, I would like to think we've been around long enough to know that I don't let my NFC East bias play into my fantasy projections; and implying otherwise is kind of insulting. I pimped Tiki, I've pimped Burress, I had Shockey as my top TE for most of last preseason for goodness sake. I've said good things about TO, Bledsoe [even though I was dead wrong], Witten. I've pimped Portis. C'mon...you know better.As to Brandon Jacobs, I'm not even close to being the low man on him. By my count, there are six guys who have Jacobs lower than I do.

 

[-jb-]

.

 

[Mark Wimer]

NOTE: Positions cited from last season are estimates; I'm just pointing out my starting logic

I'll start a thread about my Benson and SJax picks tomorrow, but I'll address some of the Benson stuff now, since my projection for him is by far the most disparate that I have seen of all the RBs.

In 2006 the Bears were 5th in rush attempts, avg. a paltry 3.81 ypc. and scoring 14 TDs from the RB spot on the ground..

In 2005 they were 9th in attempts, avg. a respectable 4.3 ypc. and scored 11 TDs on the ground from the RB spot.

In 2004 they were 19th in attempts, avg. a blah 3.79 ypc and scored 9 TDs on the ground from the RB spot.

I think that Ron TUrner's offense is more suited to a higher number of rushes (a la '06) then fewer attempts (a la '04. Lets split the difference between the two and call it 470 attempts (math avg. the last 3 years). Similar for the rush TDs; the average is right around 11.

Using that as a baseline, I/we can project the Bears RB position to produce 370 carries for about 11 TDs. Using the rough YPA of the last 3 years, I'll call it 3.95.

370 x 3.95 = est. 1420 yards on the ground with 11 TDs.

Since I don't think anyone on the roster can hold Benson's jock, and they clearly traded TJ with the intention of Benson being "the man", I think it's fair to say he could/should get 80% of that. So....

Rough math says 1150 rush yards and 9 TDs. That's Deuce/Addai range from 2006, which was 10th and 12th respectively. So, reasonable RUSHING projections alone put him at RB10-12.

RB receptions in 2006: 77/454/0

RB receptions in 2005: 53/293/2

RB receptions in 2004: 102/604/4

I don't expect '04 numbers by a long shot, but '06 numbers with a couple TDs is WELL within reason. Going with a rough 60% thing for Benson, lets call Benson's haul 45/300/2.

Thats 1450 yards, 11 TDs. That gets him to #9, a la Rudi Johsnon last season (1432 total yards, 12 TDs, 23.)

I happen to think he'll EXCEED those numbers, particularly in the ypa. I think he'll be good for 12 or 13 TDs on the ground and closer to 1410 rush yards (320 x 4.1, for the math). Use those numbers and add the 45/300/2 through the air and he's game for 1710 total yards, and 15 TDs...

....not using PPR (our rankings do not), that comes to 261 points, roughly. That sniffs the top-6 if 5 other guys perform as they did in '06.

My math ain't that far off, kids.

While I'm not as optimistic, I'm still on board here.I'd like to see Wimer's reasoning behind ranking Benson 58th overall.

Right now, we haven't seen Benson respond to his new responsibilities. The guy is not popular with his team-mates and has shown us a lot of attitude problems in the past with only mediocre production (4.1 YPC) as a pro. Benson is also not a polished receiver out of the backfield at this time. He didn't go over 100 yards rushing in a game until Late December 2006 (week 17 vs. a weak GB D), and has yet to carry the ball for more than 20 times a game on a regular basis (in fact, he has one game at 20+ at the NFL level (24 carries vs. NO in the playoffs last year (24/60/1 rushing with 0/0/0 receiving)). In short, Benson hasn't proven to me that he'll be anything "special" at this level, and his attitude and work ethic in Chicago haven't been up to the pro standard, IMO. \Thus he's #22 on my RB board and #58 on the overall board - his projections yield an "X" value just barely high enough to land him in my top 60 overall. There is no doubt he'll get a lot of opportunities to carry the ball, but IMO the jury is out whether he'll be able to convert those opportunities into more than an average season - and his current lack of prowess as a receiver limits his upside IMO. Now, IF he rises to the challenge of being the featured back and works hard in mini- and training camps and iimproves his attitude and assuming he improves somewhat as a pass catcher, then he'll climb my board. If I see a lot of the whiny, negative attitude that characterized his past seasons in Chicago, then he's staying just on the cusp of starting-caliber RB2 projections.

For more on the attitude problems cited above, go to Cedric Benson's News Page at FBG's - note the story from December 1 2006 and September 26th 2006 as illustrations to my "character flaws" complaint re: Benson.

My .02.

 

[mbuehner]

I'd be careful with Benson. I don't see him being chucked aside, but if he isnt productive this team loves Adrian Peterson (the veteran AP) and he will eat into his touches. I think Wolf is gonna be the same sort of guy, so if Benson is totin the rock for 5 yards a carry Wolf and Peterson will fight over the scraps, but if he's not getting the job done we could see Benson lose a significant number of carries. Not full blown RBBC, but Benson needs 20 carries to be a fantacy force with his tool set. If he starts losing a carry here and a carry there it will impact him. Nothin worse than those 98 yard, 0 TD, 0 rec running backs.

 

[Tau837]

Rookie RankingsGonzales is too low, imo. I'd take him anytime after the top 3-4 guys. He's playing with Manning, going to be the slot WR, and Harrison (hopefully not soon) will eventually slow down. I like his situation far better than #5 Sydney Rice and #6 Dwayne Bowe. Its hard to expect those two to do much w/o a passing game. Are the 5-6 rankings o Rice/Bowe redraft and not dynasty since they will have better chances to start right away, albeit in far worst passing offenses than Meachem or Gonzales? It says dynasty, but it doesn't make sense. I'll take Meachem/Gonzo starting in 3 years catcing balls from Brees/Manning over the queston marks in Minny and KC all day.

Bowe has the chance to be the #1 WR on his team - something neither Gonzales (Wayne/Harrison) or Meachem (Colston) does.Meachem also "suffers" from Reggie Bush getting a ton of targets as a receiver, taking away from the WRs.Yes, the KC QB is an issue, but with Gonzales the #3 WR at best on the Colts for at least 2 more years (Harrison isn't slowing down) that puts both rookies - with a chance to start in September - well out ahead.Rice also has the chance to be the #1 in Minnesota - who could start 2 rookies (A. Allison) - not sure if that's ever happened before.

Thanks for the reply, Jeff.Just so I understand....In dynasty, when the talent is fairly even..... the chance to start right away (on a poor passing offense w/o a QB) >> better QB, team, and long term situation?I don't agree, but respect your stance.

IMO it comes down to targets. Gonzalez will definitely be behind Harrison and Wayne, and could trail both Clark and Addai as well. Both Clark and Addai will see 50+ targets. Gonzalez will probably be fortunate to reach 50. Bowe could get 80+. That's a lot more opportunity.So the questions for dynasty becomes how fast does that change...? As Harrison fades, will Gonzalez take over his role? etc.I'm not so sure about Meacham. He'll definitely trail Colston and Bush, not sure who else. If when projected out it seems that Meacham's targets will not be significantly higher than Gonzalez's targets, I'd take Gonzalez. It's not like Colston or Bush are going to fade out of the picture within a year or two.

 

[Bri]

There is also the change in attitude toward roster composition. In the past, New England has been willing to take scrap-heap WRs like Jabar Gaffney, Reche Caldwell, and David Terrell. This offseason, they brought in Moss, Donte Stallworth, and Wes Welker. There is obviously a change in philosophy in regards to personnel, so it stands to follow that there will be a change in WR usage as well. They didn't bring in a guy like Randy Moss so they could keep throwing the ball to Troy Brown.

Not so muchGave up a 4th for Moss, cheap vet helpDonte's contract has him making a ton next year so he's probably gone in 08. "fancy deal" others bark about Colvin years ago, Thomas this year

 

[Clayton Gray]

There is also the change in attitude toward roster composition. In the past, New England has been willing to take scrap-heap WRs like Jabar Gaffney, Reche Caldwell, and David Terrell. This offseason, they brought in Moss, Donte Stallworth, and Wes Welker. There is obviously a change in philosophy in regards to personnel, so it stands to follow that there will be a change in WR usage as well. They didn't bring in a guy like Randy Moss so they could keep throwing the ball to Troy Brown.

Not so muchGave up a 4th for Moss, cheap vet helpDonte's contract has him making a ton next year so he's probably gone in 08. "fancy deal" others bark about Colvin years ago, Thomas this year

The change in philosophy is bringing in actual talent to play the WR position. This is different for the Patriots.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Rookie RankingsGonzales is too low, imo. I'd take him anytime after the top 3-4 guys. He's playing with Manning, going to be the slot WR, and Harrison (hopefully not soon) will eventually slow down. I like his situation far better than #5 Sydney Rice and #6 Dwayne Bowe. Its hard to expect those two to do much w/o a passing game. Are the 5-6 rankings o Rice/Bowe redraft and not dynasty since they will have better chances to start right away, albeit in far worst passing offenses than Meachem or Gonzales? It says dynasty, but it doesn't make sense. I'll take Meachem/Gonzo starting in 3 years catcing balls from Brees/Manning over the queston marks in Minny and KC all day.

Bowe has the chance to be the #1 WR on his team - something neither Gonzales (Wayne/Harrison) or Meachem (Colston) does.Meachem also "suffers" from Reggie Bush getting a ton of targets as a receiver, taking away from the WRs.Yes, the KC QB is an issue, but with Gonzales the #3 WR at best on the Colts for at least 2 more years (Harrison isn't slowing down) that puts both rookies - with a chance to start in September - well out ahead.Rice also has the chance to be the #1 in Minnesota - who could start 2 rookies (A. Allison) - not sure if that's ever happened before.

Thanks for the reply, Jeff.Just so I understand....In dynasty, when the talent is fairly even..... the chance to start right away (on a poor passing offense w/o a QB) >> better QB, team, and long term situation?I don't agree, but respect your stance.

This is really two questions, IMHO.1 - If talent is fairly even, yes I will take the guy who has the first opportunity, because performance now > performance later. Now if you tell me he's going to be WR40 in Year 1, WR 30 in Year 2 and WR 25 in Years 3 and 4, that doesn't beat WR99, WR30, and WR1/WR1. 2 - I don't agree that this is the situation at hand. I think the situation will improve at QB in KC, and they have been starved for a #1 receiver for years. In NO, it goes Colston then Bush as Target 1 then Target 2. Meachem is at best Target 3. Bowe has the opportunity to be WR1 and his upside now is Target 2 after Gonzo, but with the line becoming questionable (and Gonzo will have to block more, just like when the line was hurting last year and 2 years ago) I see a chance at Bowe being the primary target.So, NO has a better passing game, but also better targets. KC provides a clearer path for a true #1 (and a #1 only needs to produce about a third of the offense) so if KC gets 3300 or so passing yards, that's 1100 yards for a #1 available with 1350 a possibility.Over the next 3 years, they could net out even. However, in the case of Bowe vs. Meachem, Bowe has done more over >1 season on the collegiate level, while Meachem hasn't had a lengthy career of performing.Again, all things equal, I take the longer career of performing well.We are splitting hairs - I have both very close. So close that it becomes personal preference.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I'm surprised how low I see Bowe going in some of the Zealots drafts I'm watching.

 

[texasbirdfan]

Georgia Southern's Adrian Peterson know's this year is his shot. Could be the Bear's sleeper #1 by season start.

 

[Routilla]

Great rankings guys. Any word on the first Top 200 for 2007?

 

[kurtrudder]

Great rankings btw as always....don't know where I would be without them!

I've found what I think is an interesting anomaly in the WR redraft rankings.

We are all aware of the terrible situation developing in Minnesota for the WR's with a 2nd QB with little experience under his belt and it being very likely that the Vikings will run run run the ball.....yet 3 WR's make the list. Bobby Wade #54, Troy Williamson #60 & Sidney Rice #61. I do agree with these rankings.

Now when we compare this to the Tennessee situation, we have a 2nd year QB who was a runaway rookie of the year, made the pro bowl and has started to prove himself as a quality NFL QB. He is working very hard with his WR's currently building rapport and trying to make things happen there. Yet only 2 WR's make the list......Brandon Jones #45 which is fine....but David Givens at #68. In Givens' own opinion, he doesn't believe he will start week 1, will most likely start the year on PUP and might not even play at all this season.....so essentially we have 1 Titan's wideout on the list. I find it strange that no one has ranked Courtney Roby and to a lesser extent Roydell Williams or Paul Williams.

The projections for both QB's are similar with distribution to their WR's and TE projecting similar numbers of catches and yards....only the RB's in Minnesota expected to get more catches. The only perhaps undocumented anomaly that is possibly being factored in is that Tennessee in 2005 TE's had 149 catches though that number dropped to 49 in 2006.

I wonder if anyone has an opinion on this analysis and could come up with an explanation that maybe I haven't seen.

 

[Bob Henry]

Now when we compare this to the Tennessee situation, we have a 2nd year QB who was a runaway rookie of the year, made the pro bowl and has started to prove himself as a quality NFL QB. He is working very hard with his WR's currently building rapport and trying to make things happen there. Yet only 2 WR's make the list......Brandon Jones #45 which is fine....but David Givens at #68. In Givens' own opinion, he doesn't believe he will start week 1, will most likely start the year on PUP and might not even play at all this season.....so essentially we have 1 Titan's wideout on the list. I find it strange that no one has ranked Courtney Roby and to a lesser extent Roydell Williams or Paul Williams.The projections for both QB's are similar with distribution to their WR's and TE projecting similar numbers of catches and yards....only the RB's in Minnesota expected to get more catches. The only perhaps undocumented anomaly that is possibly being factored in is that Tennessee in 2005 TE's had 149 catches though that number dropped to 49 in 2006. I wonder if anyone has an opinion on this analysis and could come up with an explanation that maybe I haven't seen.

Hi Kurt, I can only offer you my thinking on how I approached my own rankings and projections. So, here goes. With Tennessee there is so much uncertainty beyond Brandon Jones that it's very difficult to rank any of the other Titans WRs ahead of other comparable WRs. Granted, when training camp rolls around we hope the picture clears up a little and then one of those players you mentioned - Roydell Williams, Courtney Roby, Paul Williams, etc - may wind up ranked in that general vicinity.Right now, the only players I have any confidence to rank (above the cutoff for the staff rankings) are Jones and the two Titans TEs that I foresee having a bigger role this year than last (Ben Troupe and Bo Scaife).I think you were on the right path with what you stated above, so hopefully that helps you out a little.. I'd guess that is what most of the others are thinking as well. Thanks for the feedback!

 

[nygiants56]

Guys, if you are planning on discussing rankings, please be sure to specify if you're referring to the dynasty/rookie rankings. Thanks.

Dynasty Rankings:Clinton Portis, #8 overall? ..dude has done NOTHING since going to Washington, and Betts looks like the better fit for that offense. Portis has a bad shoulder and chronic knee inflamation problems.Frank Gore way too high! anyone else but me think that losing Norv Turner is going to hurt as much as his constant injuries will?!Cedrick Benson ranked higher than Andre Johson?!?! AJ led the league in receptions with Carr throwing him the ball!!! now they have Shaub at QB, and Green is a good addition..Houston finished 27th in Time of Possession, and AJ STILL caught 103 balls!!What did Benson ever do since turning pro? oh thats right, 1 carry,1 fumble lost, and an injury in the Super Bowl. he couldn't even keep TJ off the field when the coaching staff handed the starting job to Benson..now suddenly he's the #31 player on the board. nearly had a career ending knee injury two years ago...c'mon now! Jay Cutler, #78, Benson #31? Leinart #60, Benson #31!!

 

[Tau837]

NOTE: Positions cited from last season are estimates; I'm just pointing out my starting logicI'll start a thread about my Benson and SJax picks tomorrow, but I'll address some of the Benson stuff now, since my projection for him is by far the most disparate that I have seen of all the RBs.In 2006 the Bears were 5th in rush attempts, avg. a paltry 3.81 ypc. and scoring 14 TDs from the RB spot on the ground..In 2005 they were 9th in attempts, avg. a respectable 4.3 ypc. and scored 11 TDs on the ground from the RB spot. In 2004 they were 19th in attempts, avg. a blah 3.79 ypc and scored 9 TDs on the ground from the RB spot.I think that Ron TUrner's offense is more suited to a higher number of rushes (a la '06) then fewer attempts (a la '04. Lets split the difference between the two and call it 470 attempts (math avg. the last 3 years). Similar for the rush TDs; the average is right around 11.Using that as a baseline, I/we can project the Bears RB position to produce 370 carries for about 11 TDs. Using the rough YPA of the last 3 years, I'll call it 3.95.370 x 3.95 = est. 1420 yards on the ground with 11 TDs. Since I don't think anyone on the roster can hold Benson's jock, and they clearly traded TJ with the intention of Benson being "the man", I think it's fair to say he could/should get 80% of that. So....Rough math says 1150 rush yards and 9 TDs. That's Deuce/Addai range from 2006, which was 10th and 12th respectively. So, reasonable RUSHING projections alone put him at RB10-12.RB receptions in 2006: 77/454/0RB receptions in 2005: 53/293/2RB receptions in 2004: 102/604/4I don't expect '04 numbers by a long shot, but '06 numbers with a couple TDs is WELL within reason. Going with a rough 60% thing for Benson, lets call Benson's haul 45/300/2.Thats 1450 yards, 11 TDs. That gets him to #9, a la Rudi Johsnon last season (1432 total yards, 12 TDs, 23.)I happen to think he'll EXCEED those numbers, particularly in the ypa. I think he'll be good for 12 or 13 TDs on the ground and closer to 1410 rush yards (320 x 4.1, for the math). Use those numbers and add the 45/300/2 through the air and he's game for 1710 total yards, and 15 TDs.......not using PPR (our rankings do not), that comes to 261 points, roughly. That sniffs the top-6 if 5 other guys perform as they did in '06.My math ain't that far off, kids.

Colin, I actually went looking for your Benson top 5 thread, and it doesn't come up in the search engine... have you deleted it? How you feeling about Benson now?