What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

First Draft of '06 W/Rookies, 16 team survivor (1 Viewer)

Not even close...McNair and Bledsoe don't miss that many games and they're only filling one position.

my point was less about the missing of games, and more of the variability of each's good games.  You are correct in that they both play a lot of games and have good games, but I cannot think that you feel they are a consistent option each week for this style of league.
And there's another big issue with both of them -- age.
The thing that worries me about Mcnair this year is if they draft Vince Young. I don't see the Titans being that competitive next year, so after they're eliminated from the playoffs, they're gonna want to see Young on the field IMO.
 
Radballs laps the field before the bye weeks are over.
could not agree more. Great job Radballs.
He could easily have only 1 starting RB, and as a Owens/Moss tandem owner in the past I can attest that it looks better on paper than it plays out in Survivor leagues. Also could have only 1 starting QB.He could do very well, no doubt, but RB depth is key in this format. One bad week from Vick combined with an off day from LT and this team will be gone. Just hope that those two don't materialize on the same week. I don't have the exact schedule (I don't even know if it's out yet), but bye weeks could hurt this team.
Yeah...his team is better built for re-draft than survivor. It will be interesting to see how he fares given everybody likes his team.
I can't wait to see the LHUCKS experiment play out when 45% of the team are WRs and more than half of them are either rookies or WR3s on their own respective teams.
I drafed Wilson and Randle El projecting they would be #2s next year. Matt Jones will have some big games, it's just a matter of how many. I probably should have drafted potential starters like Gaffney/Northcutt instead of the rookies but it's fun to draft the rooks.These teams with 5 or 6 WRs are going to get stung when injuries/byes come into play.
What about teams with just 3 RBs?
 
I wonder what LHUCKS knows that I don't taking Jackson at #6 overall.
There were three other RBs in his tier:Jordan - coach? QB?

Portis - boring? upside?

Cadillac - Maybe the guy I should have taken

I took Jackson knowing I would go RB in rounds 2/3...I wanted the upside, but he could easily finish outside the top 15. Six is the worst draft spot this year...easily the worst.
Portis was the player with the least risk and higher potential reward considering the shift of offensive philosophy that has made Priest and LJ head and shoulders better than other Rbs while healthy for the past 4 seasons.I would call Portis's career so far consistent/solid not boring. Even when his TDs were low 1st year transitioning with Gibbs/Redskins coupled with Oline injuries he still posted very solid yardage numbers.

I think Steven Jackson is ok but no way I think he is even in the same tier as Portis. Cadilac is the only one you listed who is maybe because of his upside. Still not worth the risk when you know what your getting with Portis.

jmo

 
That having been said, who do you take instead at 1.13?
Me, in this format. One of these 3Kevin Jones

julius Jones

Antonio Gates
KJ -- Awful supporting cast. Incompetent GM, so this is unlike to improve much. Now that Martz is OC, though, I might reconsider.JJ -- Injury prone. Marion Barber outgained him in two of their last four games. Under four yards per carry.

Gates -- In a 12 team league, definitely, but not in a 16-team league. RB value disappears too quickly, and I'd either go without a RB2, or draft so many candidates that I miss out on a lot of early and mid-round value. And in a large-roster survivor format, you're just as well off with two good TEs (or, in my case, three) than one stud.

Deuce -- Only issue is the recovery from ACL injury, though obviously, that's a biggie. At the time, I expected that he'd still be the workhorse (even if not at full strength) since his backups are so lousy, but I forgot that they're all FAs. It's certainly possible that the Saints sign a viable RB who could split time with Deuce all season. If I'd remembered this, I probably bite the bullet and go with JJ.
The upside on KJ and JJ is way higher than Deuce.When has anyone come off an ACL surgery and had a decent next season? Not to mention he had a bad ankle the year before. I think Deuce's days as a productive fantasy back are just about over.

True with Gates, but he gonna outscore most of the RB taken at that spot.

The bottom line this year in the SL's is that at the bottom your gonna need a break or two to compete.

 
Radballs laps the field before the bye weeks are over.
could not agree more. Great job Radballs.
He could easily have only 1 starting RB, and as a Owens/Moss tandem owner in the past I can attest that it looks better on paper than it plays out in Survivor leagues. Also could have only 1 starting QB.He could do very well, no doubt, but RB depth is key in this format. One bad week from Vick combined with an off day from LT and this team will be gone. Just hope that those two don't materialize on the same week. I don't have the exact schedule (I don't even know if it's out yet), but bye weeks could hurt this team.
Yeah...his team is better built for re-draft than survivor. It will be interesting to see how he fares given everybody likes his team.
I can't wait to see the LHUCKS experiment play out when 45% of the team are WRs and more than half of them are either rookies or WR3s on their own respective teams.
I drafed Wilson and Randle El projecting they would be #2s next year. Matt Jones will have some big games, it's just a matter of how many. I probably should have drafted potential starters like Gaffney/Northcutt instead of the rookies but it's fun to draft the rooks.These teams with 5 or 6 WRs are going to get stung when injuries/byes come into play.
What about teams with just 3 RBs?
That's a given that it's not so good.
 
Radballs laps the field before the bye weeks are over.
could not agree more. Great job Radballs.
He could easily have only 1 starting RB, and as a Owens/Moss tandem owner in the past I can attest that it looks better on paper than it plays out in Survivor leagues. Also could have only 1 starting QB.He could do very well, no doubt, but RB depth is key in this format. One bad week from Vick combined with an off day from LT and this team will be gone. Just hope that those two don't materialize on the same week. I don't have the exact schedule (I don't even know if it's out yet), but bye weeks could hurt this team.
Yeah...his team is better built for re-draft than survivor. It will be interesting to see how he fares given everybody likes his team.
I can't wait to see the LHUCKS experiment play out when 45% of the team are WRs and more than half of them are either rookies or WR3s on their own respective teams.
I drafed Wilson and Randle El projecting they would be #2s next year. Matt Jones will have some big games, it's just a matter of how many. I probably should have drafted potential starters like Gaffney/Northcutt instead of the rookies but it's fun to draft the rooks.These teams with 5 or 6 WRs are going to get stung when injuries/byes come into play.
What about teams with just 3 RBs?
That's a given that it's not so good.
calculated risk for sure.in '03 I had the second highest scoring team out of 48 in the SSLs...with only 3 RBs :ph34r:

 
Radballs laps the field before the bye weeks are over.
could not agree more. Great job Radballs.
He could easily have only 1 starting RB, and as a Owens/Moss tandem owner in the past I can attest that it looks better on paper than it plays out in Survivor leagues. Also could have only 1 starting QB.He could do very well, no doubt, but RB depth is key in this format. One bad week from Vick combined with an off day from LT and this team will be gone. Just hope that those two don't materialize on the same week. I don't have the exact schedule (I don't even know if it's out yet), but bye weeks could hurt this team.
Yeah...his team is better built for re-draft than survivor. It will be interesting to see how he fares given everybody likes his team.
I can't wait to see the LHUCKS experiment play out when 45% of the team are WRs and more than half of them are either rookies or WR3s on their own respective teams.
I drafed Wilson and Randle El projecting they would be #2s next year. Matt Jones will have some big games, it's just a matter of how many. I probably should have drafted potential starters like Gaffney/Northcutt instead of the rookies but it's fun to draft the rooks.These teams with 5 or 6 WRs are going to get stung when injuries/byes come into play.
What about teams with just 3 RBs?
That's a given that it's not so good.
calculated risk for sure.in '03 I had the second highest scoring team out of 48 in the SSLs...with only 3 RBs :ph34r:
Personally I think you should have snagged one back like Fisher, Faulk, Bryson, Perry, etc. that would usually post an emergency 5 spot on the board.
 
What's really early is Antonio Gates at 1.16!

Followed by Willie Parker!  :X
2 pts. per reception at TEI have Parker ranked right around there for now
I agree with the exaltedone. I was not thrilled with Willie Parker as my first RB, but liked him better than the choices remaining. With Bettis gone and another year for Willie to learn, I think he will have more scoring opportunities next year than this and if he has thirty or so recptions and 1200 yards, I'll be happy. I went with Gates as I needed to have a position where I outproduced to make up for lack of starting RB output.Sixteenth is a tough slot to pick from.

 
When has anyone come off an ACL surgery and had a decent next season? Not to mention he had a bad ankle the year before. I think Deuce's days as a productive fantasy back are just about over.
That's a remarkable odd statement, considering that Deuce just turned 27 a few months ago. I have little doubt that he'll be a productive RB once he's close to 100% -- the only questoin is whether this will be in 2006 or 2007.
 
When has anyone come off an ACL surgery and had a decent next season? Not to mention he had a bad ankle the year before.  I think Deuce's days as a productive fantasy back are just about over.
That's a remarkable odd statement, considering that Deuce just turned 27 a few months ago. I have little doubt that he'll be a productive RB once he's close to 100% -- the only questoin is whether this will be in 2006 or 2007.
Thats my point.It probably wont be in 2006.

New coach, probably a rookie QB and an ACL injury.

He wasnt really producing before the injury last year, or before or after the ankle in 04.

the bottom of 16 treamers is tough.

Heck the bottom of 12 & 14 teamer wont be a picnic either. Good thing we'll be better prepared and more informed than we are now.

 
New coach, probably a rookie QB and an ACL injury.
Though seriously, could the Saints be in any worse of a situation than they were last year?
He wasnt really producing before the injury last year
:confused: In four games, Deuce had 386 yards and 3 TDs. That on pace for about 1550 yards and 12 TDs in a full season.

, or before or after the ankle in 04.
:confused: :confused:He only played one game before the ankle injury. In the second half of 04, he had 889 yards and 4 TDs. That's on pace for about 1775 yards and 8 TD in a full season.

 
well Im glad you feel good about your pick.

Im avoiding him this year.

His stats look better than I remember. Most of that 380 last year came vs buffalo in one game.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Easily my worst pick of the draft.
well Im glad you feel good about your pick.
:confused: :confused: :confused: I don't feel good about my pick at all -- no less risky than other RBs available at 1.13, and limited upside given his injury -- but he is still a productive RB, period. Should be a top 15-20 RB easily unless the Saints sign another decent RB.

 
What about teams with just 3 RBs?
In a 16-team league, RB4s are almost worthless, unless you get lucky on a backup who ends up starting half the year.
IV - BassNBrew Pos Player Team Pts * Week # QB Trent Green KC 29 ! P:31-43-0-347 R: 1- 2 TD:P16,P7 QB Joey Harrington DET 0 RB Shaun Alexander SEA 0 RB Shawn Bryson DET 9 R: 4- 6 C: 5- 40 RB Tony Fisher GB 13 ! R:17- 51 C: 2- 7 TD:R1 RB Verron Haynes PIT 0 R: 1- 7 RB Larry Johnson KC 10 ! R: 6- 55 C: 3- 28 WR Deion Branch NE 18 ! C: 3- 92 TD:C33 WR Torry Holt STL 0 ! WR Andre Johnson HOU 0 WR Brandon Stokley IND 0 WR Amani Toomer NYG 6 ! C: 2- 43 TE Erron Kinney TEN 16 ! C: 5- 69 TE Jerramy Stevens SEA 0 PK Jason Hanson DET 7 FGs:-46,32,30 XPs:1/1 PK John Kasay CAR 8 ! FGs:-56,44 XPs:5/5 Def Minnesota MIN 0 PA:38 YA:452 Def Philadelphia PHI 1 ! S:1-0 PA:49 YA:564 Starter Points = 101 RB 4 saved my #### this week. I was the top scoring team in this league by roughly 300 points and it would have gone for nothing if Fisher or Bryson hadn't been there.

The scrubs posted scores in 5 of 17 weeks, including most of my low scoring weeks.

 
Having a RB4 is more important if you have a weak #2 and/or #3...I have Dillon as my rb3 so the value that a Bryson or Fisher adds is very nominal. Two of my RBs would have to get injured before they'll contribute and if that happens, I'm not going to win anyhow.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Having a RB4 is more important if you have a weak #2 and/or #3...I have Dillon as my rb3 so the value that a Bryson or Fisher adds is very nominal. Two of my RBs would have to get injured before they'll contribute and if that happens, I'm not going to win anyhow.
In the last 3 years Dillon has played 13, 15, and 12 games. SJax has played 14 and 15 games. Throw in byes and there's a very good chance that you'll have a week or two sans a RB.I'll bet you a 2007 FBG subscription that you won't have two RBs post a score every week next year.

 
Bait dangling. Double down?

:D btw I still think SJax over Portis was a poor choice especialy considering the risk management factors professed by L(H)UCKS even if somehow Steven Jackson manages to live up to the slot. Particularly in a 16 teamer where your waiting a lot longer for pick 2. That would cause me to want to focus even more on risk management.Survivor leagues are too easy.I like Shadowfax and Rush's squads the best.
 
Bait dangling. Double down?

:D btw I still think SJax over Portis was a poor choice especialy considering the risk management factors professed by L(H)UCKS even if somehow Steven Jackson manages to live up to the slot. Particularly in a 16 teamer where your waiting a lot longer for pick 2. That would cause me to want to focus even more on risk management.

Survivor leagues are too easy.

I like Shadowfax and Rush's squads the best.
I went SJax over Portis and Tiki in league 2. I gave consideration to Caddy also. For me, the jump from 19 to 43 receptions for SJax in his second year was the difference maker. I like the other skill position players in STL better than WAS to make space for SJax. Portis only had 30 this year and has never exceeded 40. SJax finished 9th last year in this format (Portis 7th) on a team shuffling QBs and coaches. Given his age, I just saw more upside there and I think he plays in a division where the defenses are weaker.
 
Having a RB4 is more important if you have a weak #2 and/or #3...I have Dillon as my rb3 so the value that a Bryson or Fisher adds is very nominal.  Two of my RBs would have to get injured before they'll contribute and if that happens, I'm not going to win anyhow.
In the last 3 years Dillon has played 13, 15, and 12 games. SJax has played 14 and 15 games. Throw in byes and there's a very good chance that you'll have a week or two sans a RB.I'll bet you a 2007 FBG subscription that you won't have two RBs post a score every week next year.
There may be a few weeks, but the odds of that week being a week that IA) need the three points from Bryson to avoid elimination

and

B) Bryson actually scores the three points

...are very low.

 
Having a RB4 is more important if you have a weak #2 and/or #3...I have Dillon as my rb3 so the value that a Bryson or Fisher adds is very nominal.  Two of my RBs would have to get injured before they'll contribute and if that happens, I'm not going to win anyhow.
In the last 3 years Dillon has played 13, 15, and 12 games. SJax has played 14 and 15 games. Throw in byes and there's a very good chance that you'll have a week or two sans a RB.I'll bet you a 2007 FBG subscription that you won't have two RBs post a score every week next year.
There may be a few weeks, but the odds of that week being a week that IA) need the three points from Bryson to avoid elimination

and

B) Bryson actually scores the three points

...are very low.
"may" meaning not very likely in your vocabulary and we have a bet???
 
13.10 Eric Johnson SF/6 FamilyMatters

SOD IMHO.
I thought there was a ton of TE2 value in the second half of this draft. That being said, I don't like Johnson for the survivor format.
 
Having a RB4 is more important if you have a weak #2 and/or #3...I have Dillon as my rb3 so the value that a Bryson or Fisher adds is very nominal.  Two of my RBs would have to get injured before they'll contribute and if that happens, I'm not going to win anyhow.
In the last 3 years Dillon has played 13, 15, and 12 games. SJax has played 14 and 15 games. Throw in byes and there's a very good chance that you'll have a week or two sans a RB.I'll bet you a 2007 FBG subscription that you won't have two RBs post a score every week next year.
There may be a few weeks, but the odds of that week being a week that IA) need the three points from Bryson to avoid elimination

and

B) Bryson actually scores the three points

...are very low.
"may" meaning not very likely in your vocabulary and we have a bet???
:lmao: ...keep trying.
 
Bait dangling. Double down?

:D btw I still think SJax over Portis was a poor choice especialy considering the risk management factors professed by L(H)UCKS even if somehow Steven Jackson manages to live up to the slot. Particularly in a 16 teamer where your waiting a lot longer for pick 2. That would cause me to want to focus even more on risk management.

Survivor leagues are too easy.
Risk managment in the corporate world doesn't just mean taking the safe bets. It means minimizing your risk while maximizing your potential...there's a big difference there.If survivor leagues are "too easy", I take it you've dominated the survivor scene around here of late?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
but, LHUCKS, what is wrong with taking a guy like Kevin Faulk who is guaranteed to give points most every week as RB4 to offer insurance? I understand the Bryson logic. But, one would think that if you take a backup to your rb, you would be somewhat insulated from injuries/byes. I, in no way, am asserting faulk=dillon, but may keep you alive when you need it.

Point: with three RBs, you have a very good chance of having one RB injured while another is on a bye. But, by having a backup to your stud, you are protected a little more that you are now.

 
but, LHUCKS, what is wrong with taking a guy like Kevin Faulk who is guaranteed to give points most every week as RB4 to offer insurance? I understand the Bryson logic. But, one would think that if you take a backup to your rb, you would be somewhat insulated from injuries/byes. I, in no way, am asserting faulk=dillon, but may keep you alive when you need it.

Point: with three RBs, you have a very good chance of having one RB injured while another is on a bye. But, by having a backup to your stud, you are protected a little more that you are now.
Let's look at my potential handcuffs...Faulk went too early and IMO could be wearing down and near the end of his career.

Jackson doesn't have a clear backup and I wasn't about to roll the dice on Faulk who may or may not play next year.

Suggs...this is the guy I may have taken, but in rounds 16-19 I was forced to take a Kicker, two Ds and a TE2...because of runs. I was going to take him in round 20 but he went five spots ahead of my pick. To be honest, I'm glad he was gone because I really wanted a WR9.

 
Having a RB4 is more important if you have a weak #2 and/or #3...I have Dillon as my rb3 so the value that a Bryson or Fisher adds is very nominal.  Two of my RBs would have to get injured before they'll contribute and if that happens, I'm not going to win anyhow.
In the last 3 years Dillon has played 13, 15, and 12 games. SJax has played 14 and 15 games. Throw in byes and there's a very good chance that you'll have a week or two sans a RB.I'll bet you a 2007 FBG subscription that you won't have two RBs post a score every week next year.
There may be a few weeks, but the odds of that week being a week that IA) need the three points from Bryson to avoid elimination

and

B) Bryson actually scores the three points

...are very low.
"may" meaning not very likely in your vocabulary and we have a bet???
:lmao: ...keep trying.
:D Can't blame a guy for trying. I got Cappy two years ago and you last year. Someone will fall prey.Maybe you should edit your post from "may" to "somewhere just north of 50%"

 
13.10 Eric Johnson SF/6 FamilyMatters

SOD IMHO.
I thought there was a ton of TE2 value in the second half of this draft. That being said, I don't like Johnson for the survivor format.
What part of his 82 receptions in 2004 didn't you like?
It's his 20 games missed in '03 and '05 that I don't like.
But this is '06 so he should be good for 70+. Besides, with Gonzo as my TE1 I felt I could afford the risk he brings. If he does rebound then I might be even stronger which is a good thing to be with the TE's in this league.
 
EJ was a great pick FM where you got him. Don't let anyone tell you differently. Seriously............ He was my next one. :banned:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bait dangling. Double down?

:D btw I still think SJax over Portis was a poor choice especialy considering the risk management factors professed by L(H)UCKS even if somehow Steven Jackson manages to live up to the slot. Particularly in a 16 teamer where your waiting a lot longer for pick 2. That would cause me to want to focus even more on risk management.

Survivor leagues are too easy.
Risk managment in the corporate world doesn't just mean taking the safe bets. It means minimizing your risk while maximizing your potential...there's a big difference there.If survivor leagues are "too easy", I take it you've dominated the survivor scene around here of late?
I see BnBs point about the reception points potential. Never been a scoring format I like to play in personaly. Much like survivor format that does not interest me much because of the lack of in season management decisions that I find to be very challenging. So that is what I mean by too easy. Not saying I am a expert of the format at all because its not a style of play I choose to be in.Just having a little fun with ya L(H)UCKS coz its entertaining. :P

As far as your comments about the corporate world/stock market minimizing risk while maximizing potential I still see Portis as the player doing that more so than Jackson at that draft position although BnBs point about the receptions is well taken and a good reason for the pick because the Lambs don't diversify thier short passing targets like the Redskins do with Cooley/Sellers which has had an effect on Portis TD potential also.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top