First Rankings Posted (1 Viewer)

[David Dodds]

May 5th Staff Rankings

Everything is sortable like before. We have also added links to the player pages from each of these lists.

As is almost the case when we publish our first lists, we have probably overlooked situations, etc. Let the criticism fly...we can handle it.

and that criticism helps us start our player discussions which in turn lead to our best projections.

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Vick at #6? I actually agree but you're going to get tons of heat for that.Jordan at #23, I agree again but you'll get heat for that.They look pretty good, the only ones that stood out to me was Foster is low at 30, Deion Branch is too low and Vinateri should always be #1, he was #2. Nice job in general.Oh, and no Kellen Winslow at all? If he ends up being ok you'll need to adjust that obviously.

 

[DerangedGridironGeek]

Great job guys...will take a closer look at rankings after work....but at first glance I would bump Collins up just a little...given the Oak defense, they will have to throw. I would put him ahead of Brady. Also, I would bump SJax ahead of Fragile Fred...given his great schedule and increased workload....but I've never been a Fan of Fred anyways.

 

[Sideline Sage]

It would be nice to see what the rankings would look like if you used the 1 pt/rec rule, since this is used in most of the high stakes leagues.

 

[Ozymandias]

Kevin Jones is the #9 RB, but then he is the #9 overall, even though Manning is above him.

 

[Banger]

Kevin Jones is the #9 RB, but then he is the #9 overall, even though Manning is above him.

noticed that too, he flip flopped with J. Lewis somehow in the overall ranking....

 

[David Dodds]

Kevin Jones is the #9 RB, but then he is the #9 overall, even though Manning is above him.

The overall always is a tad weird because everyone's overall is averaged. If even one person has Peyton as the #2 QB and pushes him deep into the second round or greater, it skews things. I will be creating an Expert Top 200 (I do it based on relative position placement) that will get released tonight or tomorrow. I think that will actually be a better list for Overall.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Pretty darned good.No real major complaints on the RBs. I'd argue for Rudi and Chris Brown being bumped up a few spots, but there's nothing there that screams travesty.QBs: I don't see Bulger being that high at all. I'd drop him down to around 10th overall. Seems like everyone is universally not buying Drew Brees. Kind of the "well it was a fluke" thing I guess? He's returning essentially the same cast and the defense in the division hasn't gotten any better. He gets a full year of McCardell and Gates is still there. The running game was still damned good even with a less than effective LT, so it's not like there could be a huge improvement there taking away from the passing pie. I see no real reason at this point to have him ranked lower than 10th. Only thing I don' t like is his passing attempts. I'd like to see them go up 70-80 for next year. If Schott wants to keep winning and learned any lessons from the regular season and playoffs last year, he'll let the kid throw the ball.I really think Pennington will far outperform 16th too. Other than the fact that he hasn't finished a full season yet, there's nothing not to like about the kid. One of the better decision making QBs in the NFL.WRs I don't even worry about too much. The final rankings in 2005 will be so different than 2004, it's not even worth worrying about. I'd have Chad Johnson 1st overall though. Glad to see you didn't go overboard on the Roy Williams hype and rank him top 10. 15th is about right.

 

[Wadsworth]

Thanks! It's never too early.It looks like the RB stud theroy is still in full force here. With 9 of the top 10 RBs and the 24th RB going off the board at pick 37 if the rankings were a draft(and yes, I understand that rankings are not a mock). Biggest suprise: Wimer putting Manning 19thThe Colts O is basically the same personal wise. I'm sure few people expect Manning to appraoch his numbers from last season, but Manning and C-pep were extremely valuable and did nice VBD numbers. With Moss gone and the D better in Minny, Manning's value over C-pep could increase even with a drop off. And Manning and C-pep were on a teir alone last season. Second biggest: No love for the TEsGonzo and Gates are mid-third rounders and TE3 lasts until pick 53. In my main league last season all 4 play-off teams had a top 5 TE. The other team with a top 5 TE was the last team eliminated from play-off contention. I consider TEs a position of importance this season and TEs as a group will be a lot higher on my list.

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

Wow Mark Wimer has Fitz at #6!!!!SOD BABY!!!!

 

[dotman]

I think 1 or 2 rookies will finish top 15....they won't all end up that low.

 

[David Dodds]

Second biggest: No love for the TEsGonzo and Gates are mid-third rounders and TE3 lasts until pick 53. In my main league last season all 4 play-off teams had a top 5 TE. The other team with a top 5 TE was the last team eliminated from play-off contention. I consider TEs a position of importance this season and TEs as a group will be a lot higher on my list.

But Gates was not the second TE taken in the draft. Gonzalez did as expected, but Heap and Shockey were huge disappointments. Gates was TE 7-10 in most leagues. Witten, Crumpler and Graham were in that range too.We don't disagree that a good TE can make a difference. We just think you can usually get a very good TE at a considerable bargain extremely late in the draft.

 

[JaxBill]

I really think Pennington will far outperform 16th too. Other than the fact that he hasn't finished a full season yet, there's nothing not to like about the kid. One of the better decision making QBs in the NFL.

I want to see Pennington actually throw the ball in training camp/preseason. If he's healthy, you're absolutely right, but I'm leery of the recurring or lingering shoulder/arm problems.

 

[snellman]

Great work guys. One of the reasons I love this site so much. I stumbled across it by accident last year after we went to myfantasyleague for the first time, and I have never looked back. The draft dominator helped me tremendously along with everyone on these boards. Keep up the great work.

 

[JAA]

Nate Burleson

Fantasy Football DataExplanation Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------2003 0 74 1762004 32 16 46--------------------------------------------------With Moss on the team for part of the season, Nate ranked 16 positionally at the end of the season. The Vikes get rid of Moss and bring in TroyW, a rookie speedster. FBGs has Nate dropping from positional rank 16 to 18. This and Mike Anderson doesnt have him in the top 92.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Nate Burleson

Fantasy Football DataExplanation Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------2003 0 74 1762004 32 16 46--------------------------------------------------With Moss on the team for part of the season, Nate ranked 16 positionally at the end of the season. The Vikes get rid of Moss and bring in TroyW, a rookie speedster. FBGs has Nate dropping from positional rank 16 to 18. This and Mike Anderson doesnt have him in the top 92.

You're arguing cause he dropped 2 spots at an area of the draft where 2 spots means 1 VBD?

 

[Bloom]

I'm surprised that only 6 members of the staff thinks priest will fall out of the top 4 - between the knee (which vermeil said priest is still not 100% confident in a few weeks ago), the peterson comments about an RBBC, and the fact that it just makes sense to cut down on the padre's workload and give LJ more touches because of his age/durability issues and how impressive LJ looked down the stretch, im not sure how priest has another top 5 finish. Its possible, but i think there are a lot of landmines to navigate through to get there.

 

[inca911]

It would be easy and beneficial to add standard deviation, and perhaps min/max. Large SDs generally mean large variability in valuation (or an outlier in the data), which is useful to know for us number-oriented types. None of those on this board....

 

[Wadsworth]

Second biggest: No love for the TEs

Gonzo and Gates are mid-third rounders and TE3 lasts until pick 53. In my main league last season all 4 play-off teams had a top 5 TE. The other team with a top 5 TE was the last team eliminated from play-off contention. I consider TEs a position of importance this season and TEs as a group will be a lot higher on my list.

But Gates was not the second TE taken in the draft. Gonzalez did as expected, but Heap and Shockey were huge disappointments. Gates was TE 7-10 in most leagues. Witten, Crumpler and Graham were in that range too.We don't disagree that a good TE can make a difference. We just think you can usually get a very good TE at a considerable bargain extremely late in the draft.

Like Gates, Tiki and Mushin were not early position picks either. A lot of WRs and RBs were huge disappoointmets as well. I got Gates in the 10th last season in that league and it has been my drafting style to get the TE late. I'm not sure I'll have that luxury this season. If the guy in front of me in the draft took Gates I'd have missed the play-offs last season. That league is that close. Perhaps the situation in my main league is isolated in that I expect several of the people to be looking TE early based on last season. I don't think I want to have to find a Gates in the 10th this season to win.

During the draft, runs and teirs dictates a lot of the moves you make. If you are in a league were everyone does double RB stud then you can afford to ranks TE lower than their projected value. But looking at straight value I don't see how Gonzo for example can be near as low as mid-third round. He and Gates both had borderline first round values in my league last season.

 

[loser]

I'm surprised that only 6 members of the staff thinks priest will fall out of the top 4 - between the knee (which vermeil said priest is still not 100% confident in a few weeks ago), the peterson comments about an RBBC, and the fact that it just makes sense to cut down on the padre's workload and give LJ more touches because of his age/durability issues and how impressive LJ looked down the stretch, im not sure how priest has another top 5 finish. Its possible, but i think there are a lot of landmines to navigate through to get there.

I really think Priest is the guy as long as he's healthy. Vermeil prefers him back there. Peterson doesn't coach the team. LJ did look solid down the stretch, but Priest's nose for the end zone is unmatched, not just in KC, but league wide. I don't know why you'd want to RBBC a guy who's scored 66 TD's in his last 42 games. I'll gladly take him top 5, but what do I know.

 

[David Yudkin]

Unfortunately, I was not available to partake in the first pass ranking process, but suffice it to say that my rankings would not have entirely agreed with the consensus. For example, I would value TE much higher than most others, and I was much higher/lower on several other players in general that might cause me to tacke flack as a crack cocaine user (again).Even though I have no get affection for Lamont Jordan, I felt that the staff was overly critical of his prospects for 2005. Several people had him ranked in the 25-30 range, and I question what their rationale was based on (sharing workload, ineffectiveness, no running game as a team, etc.).Similarly, for a site that always evangelizes value overall all else, I still don't see how Warrick Dunn gets no love. Only Cathy Fazio has him ranked as a RB2 even though Dunn has ranked no worse than 23rd in 7 of his 8 seasons and was ranked in the Top 15 in the other season before he got hurt and missed the last few games of the season in 2003--and he still ranked as the #27 RB that year.If nothing else, it gives us a foundation for things to talk about . . .

 

[JAA]

Nate Burleson

Fantasy Football DataExplanation Year        Value        Pos. Rank    Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------2003           0            74            1762004          32            16             46--------------------------------------------------With Moss on the team for part of the season, Nate ranked 16 positionally at the end of the season.  The Vikes get rid of Moss and bring in TroyW, a rookie speedster.  FBGs has Nate dropping from positional rank 16 to 18.  This and Mike Anderson doesnt have him in the top 92.

You're arguing cause he dropped 2 spots at an area of the draft where 2 spots means 1 VBD?

Are we talking rankings or VBD? Is Nate going to do better or worse than last year? What are the factors that cause you to make this decision?

 

[Fred Lane]

When I look right down at the details, some rankings just don't seem right...One that stands out to me is the following ranking by Cathy Fazio:Correll Buckhalter: # 39 overall (as a backup to Westbrook)Steven Jackson: not in the top 60

 

[Bloom]

I'm surprised that only 6 members of the staff thinks priest will fall out of the top 4 - between the knee (which vermeil said priest is still not 100% confident in a few weeks ago), the peterson comments about an RBBC, and the fact that it just makes sense to cut down on the padre's workload and give LJ more touches because of his age/durability issues and how impressive LJ looked down the stretch, im not sure how priest has another top 5 finish. Its possible, but i think there are a lot of landmines to navigate through to get there.

I really think Priest is the guy as long as he's healthy. Vermeil prefers him back there. Peterson doesn't coach the team. LJ did look solid down the stretch, but Priest's nose for the end zone is unmatched, not just in KC, but league wide. I don't know why you'd want to RBBC a guy who's scored 66 TD's in his last 42 games. I'll gladly take him top 5, but what do I know.

Why? To protect his knee, and to give some touches to a guy who was just as effective as priest down the stretch last year.edit: i do think priest will be the primary back in KC, dont get me wrong - however to forecast a top 5 finish, you have to assume that his knee stays healthy for at least 13-14 games, and that LJ doesnt significantly cut into his workload. Priest has had enough problems with those knees that he might be approaching Faulk territory - if he is still not trusting the knee more than 5 months since he last played, and he did not get it surgically repaired, then he carries a significant injury risk going into the season.

 

[djcolts]

The wide range of opinions on the Colts D is interesting.

 

[bostonfred]

...FBGs has Nate dropping from positional rank 16 to 18... 

Are we talking rankings or VBD? Is Nate going to do better or worse than last year? What are the factors that cause you to make this decision?

Which receivers ahead of him would you move down? I can see Coles, although that's a matter of opinion. Maybe Bennett, although he's the #1 this year so he should move up too. Maybe Roy Williams? Steve Smith and Boldin are coming back from injury, but they likely would have been ahead of Burleson if they'd been healthy last year. Michael Clayton's a stud.

 

[diesel7982]

With how WR oriented the ARI offense is, it wouldnt surprise me for it to produce two top 20 Wrs but Warner finish 22nd...but still, that seems odd.Plummer @ 14 by Joe and David? Would be interested in the reasoning there.

 

[joffer]

Does Wimer go out of his way to be different?

 

[David Yudkin]

Another player I wonder about is Eddie Kennison. Ten staff members had him ranked 40th or lower. His rankings the past three years have been 36, 24, and 18 in a Vermeil offense that has gotten stronger each year since he came to KC.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Qb's: Think Carson Palmer will definately be inside top 10 this year.Rb's: Curtis Martin is ranked to low and Edge to highWr's: Don't like Andre Johnson so high, Roy Williams looks like a steal around WR15.Thanks for releasing, good work.

 

[Kiddnets]

Still no love for DD and Curtis Martin. They both finished up with great numbers last year and are both way undervalued in the rankings IMO. Give me Curtis and DD rather than Tiki or KJ any day!I also understand Willis looks like a stud but how many TDs will he get with essentially a rookie QB?

 

[bostonfred]

With how WR oriented the ARI offense is, it wouldnt surprise me for it to produce two top 20 Wrs but Warner finish 22nd...but still, that seems odd.

Plummer @ 14 by Joe and David? Would be interested in the reasoning there.

Here's the guys they have ranked higher:Manning/Culpepper/McNabb - I don't think you'll get a lot of argument about putting them ahead of Plummer.

Bulger/Green/Hasslebeck/Favre/Brooks - All good QBs, I doubt you'd get much argument on these either.

Vick/Brady/Collins/Palmer/Brees - I think Plummer is in this tier. Where you put him is a matter of taste. Delhomme/Pennington/Leftwich/McNair/Griese all could be here too.

Someone's favorite is always going to be ranked a little high or a little low. Plummer at 14 isn't really outrageous.

 

[bostonfred]

Does Wimer go out of his way to be different?

Which ones of his rankings do you disagree with? I think they look pretty solid.

 

[aardball44]

Interesting...eight out of 16 of you rank Kevan Barlow below #32, implying he's less valuable than another back in a RBBC situation somewhere else.Kevan Barlow 2004: pass the Kool-Aid Kevan Barlow 2005: just..."pass"...

 

[Mark Wimer]

Thanks! It's never too early.

It looks like the RB stud theroy is still in full force here. With 9 of the top 10 RBs and the 24th RB going off the board at pick 37 if the rankings were a draft(and yes, I understand that rankings are not a mock).

Biggest suprise: Wimer putting Manning 19th

The Colts O is basically the same personal wise. I'm sure few people expect Manning to appraoch his numbers from last season, but Manning and C-pep were extremely valuable and did nice VBD numbers. With Moss gone and the D better in Minny, Manning's value over C-pep could increase even with a drop off. And Manning and C-pep were on a teir alone last season.

The way the numbers worked out for my first cut of rankings, the top RB's had more "X" value than usual, while I see Manning dropping back closer to his career averages this year: (352/554 for 4200 yards, 30 TDs and 17 interceptions)| 1998 ind | 16 | 326 575 56.7 3739 6.5 26 28 | 15 62 0 |

| 1999 ind | 16 | 331 533 62.1 4135 7.8 26 15 | 35 73 2 |

| 2000 ind | 16 | 357 571 62.5 4413 7.7 33 15 | 37 116 1 |

| 2001 ind | 16 | 343 547 62.7 4131 7.6 26 23 | 35 157 4 |

| 2002 ind | 16 | 392 591 66.3 4200 7.1 27 19 | 38 148 2 |

| 2003 ind | 16 | 379 566 67.0 4267 7.5 29 10 | 28 26 0 |

| 2004 ind | 16 | 336 497 67.6 4557 9.2 49 10 | 25 38 0 |

Although I did project him with more TD's (33-35) and less Interceptions (10-11) as he has drastically improved on interceptions over the past 2 seasons, to almost incredible levels last year. But 2004 was clearly a career year, IMO. With a return to more typical TD #'s, Manning is closer to the "pack" of fantasy QBs in 2005 (especially because he hardly ever runs the ball effectively anymore). Culpepper, McNabb, and Brooks (3 of my top 6 QB's) enjoy significant FP from rushing yards and TDs. Thus, Culpepper is significantly higher on the overall than Manning, as I see him doing roughly similar passing #s to Manning, (~200 yards passing and 1-2 TDs less than Manning), but getting way more valuable rushing yards/TDs. Culpepper has a fine receiving corps even without Moss (afterall, he put together last year's effort without a fully healthy Moss for roughly 1/2 the season)

When I crunched the numbers, the top RB's had a lot of value over the lower tier of backs who all have issues of either experience or competition for PT/TDs or both (Ronnie Brown, rookie, Mia OL; Warrick Dunn (Vick, Duckett); Steven Jackson (Faulk, youth, Martz ignores running game at times), and so forth.

 

[djcolts]

With I Bruce and J Smith being so close in the first rankings, I'd love to hear a debate on which one will be better next year.Not that I have any selfish reasons to ask for this.

 

[fatness]

14 QB Jake Delhomme, CarToo low.

 

[TheFanatic]

I'm surprised that only 6 members of the staff thinks priest will fall out of the top 4 - between the knee (which vermeil said priest is still not 100% confident in a few weeks ago), the peterson comments about an RBBC, and the fact that it just makes sense to cut down on the padre's workload and give LJ more touches because of his age/durability issues and how impressive LJ looked down the stretch, im not sure how priest has another top 5 finish. Its possible, but i think there are a lot of landmines to navigate through to get there.

No kidding. This guy is over. He'll have some monster games but no way he hold up for 16 games. Curtis Martin drops off on this list seemingly due to age and he was the rushing champ last year. Priest plays in 8 games and gets a bump up from last years finish of around 10th? Lemmings...

 

[wadegarrett]

This could take a while to digest...

 

[sparkky]

Nice list over all. A good jumping off point. I noticed no Winslow and Heiden listed at #45?

 

[jurb26]

Some RB comments:I would have liked to see more people vote Alexander #1 in RBs. This guy is as big a stud as there is and is the most consistent of the RBs on top of it. Suprised to see Wood vote Portis at #3, but like it. Who ever said he had a Philly bias? There will be a lot of flack for Willis being #4 and ahead of guys like McAllister, Lewis, Portis, and Holmes.Rudi at 15 just seems low IMO. Looking at it, I can see why he is that low and maybe its just a testiment to how dep RBs are this year, but either way, that seems low. This guy was ultra productive in Cinci last year while facing 1 of the toughest roads in the NFL.Jackson at 19 is interesting. It seems he will be getting much higher than that IMO as there is a lot of people who do not think Faulk will factor into the St.L O very much tis year.C.Brown is way down. Is his injury concerns the reason. He was very productive on the field last year.If Jordan does not finish in the top 20 this year, I think I'll eat my own foot!

 

[Mark Wimer]

Does Wimer go out of his way to be different?

No, I don't.One thing to remember about rankings is that sometimes few points seperate several players, so that a gap in rankings for a particular player from one observer's list to another's may actually represent very few FP in difference.

As an illustration of my logic while doing projections (and adressing one major outlier from my list) I happen to think that Deuce McAllister's OL is not top-tier (4.0 YPC average last season), and that the Saints did little to upgrade the position over the off-season. Mayberry (ex-Eagle) is often-injured and the 1st round draft pick Jammal Brown is nothing but an unproven rookie at this point. The lack of quality line play in NO limits McAllister's upside in rushing yards to a ceiling of 1300 yards this year, IMO. That sub-par OL, combined with his lack of TD chances in the passing game over the past two years (0 over 2 years) limits how many TDs one can expect. He hasn't scored double-digit TDs for 2 seasons now, even in 2003 when he had 2157 total yards (1641 rushing, 516 receiving). Even after McAllister had rehabbed his high ankle sprain last year, he only scored 4 TDs over the final 8 games of 2004. Add the signing of short-yardage bruiser/backup RB Antowain Smith on April 1 to this brew, and I am pessimistic that McAllister scores more than 11 TDs total this year. His fantasy value is middle-of-the-NFL pack, IMO.

 

[joffer]

Still no love for DD and Curtis Martin. They both finished up with great numbers last year and are both way undervalued in the rankings IMO.

Give me Curtis and DD rather than Tiki or KJ any day!

I also understand Willis looks like a stud but how many TDs will he get with essentially a rookie QB?

huh? Tiki had an incredible year last year

 

[jurb26]

Some individual questions I have (sorry if these were already asked):I see 4 people have voted Vick into the top 5 this year. Why, what makes you think he takes this jump?A few people have Collins finishing 15 or later. Are you expecting him to loose his job?Marc, your the only one with the ummm, marbles, to pick Alexander #1. I agree, but can you tell us why? It seems almost sin-like to not vote for LT around here.3 guys have Willis outside the top 10, why?Mark, seriously, WTF is up with C.Johnson at 10?Chase, read Mark's question only about A.Johnson....

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Still no love for DD and Curtis Martin.  They both finished up with great numbers last year and are both way undervalued in the rankings IMO. 

Give me Curtis and DD rather than Tiki or KJ any day!

I also understand Willis looks like a stud but how many TDs will he get with essentially a rookie QB?

huh? Tiki had an incredible year last year

Tiki is STILL one of the most under-rated NFL and fantasy backs in the league - including by the FBG staff.

 

[Bri]

McGahee, Deuce, and Priest all average a 6 ranking yet are rated 4,5, and 6. Interesting, seems the staff thinks there is a big 3 RBs and then the rest.Levin has Tiki as the 23rd best RB? Mike Brown is either a fool or a genius for putting Priest at 18. He's so awesome but he always gets hurt. Interesting.Dillon at 25 by Dave Baker. Why? Aside from the year he got hurt, he's got 1000 yards every single year.Chase not ranking Andre Johnson? Makes me wonder if it's an offseason "oops I forgot about him" more than a genuinely unranked player.Steven Jackson unranked by a handful(Ronnie Brown too) wonder if the math is right with those two players.

 

[joffer]

Does Wimer go out of his way to be different?

Which ones of his rankings do you disagree with? I think they look pretty solid.

Vick, Deuce, Fitz, E. Johnson

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Lee Evans is ranked at 32 and is even unranked by Levin. In his rookie year, he was 24th. Over the last 6 weeks of last season - he was 4th.I guess Losman is the reason, but wow.

 

[Wadsworth]

Does Wimer go out of his way to be different?

No, I don't.One thing to remember about rankings is that sometimes few points seperate several players, so that a gap in rankings for a particular player from one observer's list to another's may actually represent very few FP in difference.

As an illustration of my logic while doing projections (and adressing one major outlier from my list) I happen to think that Deuce McAllister's OL is not top-tier (4.0 YPC average last season), and that the Saints did little to upgrade the position over the off-season. Mayberry (ex-Eagle) is often-injured and the 1st round draft pick Jammal Brown is nothing but an unproven rookie at this point. The lack of quality line play in NO limits McAllister's upside in rushing yards to a ceiling of 1300 yards this year, IMO. That sub-par OL, combined with his lack of TD chances in the passing game over the past two years (0 over 2 years) limits how many TDs one can expect. He hasn't scored double-digit TDs for 2 seasons now, even in 2003 when he had 2157 total yards (1641 rushing, 516 receiving). Even after McAllister had rehabbed his high ankle sprain last year, he only scored 4 TDs over the final 8 games of 2004. Add the signing of short-yardage bruiser/backup RB Antowain Smith on April 1 to this brew, and I am pessimistic that McAllister scores more than 11 TDs total this year. His fantasy value is middle-of-the-NFL pack, IMO.

I agree more with the Deuce anaysis than Manning. But regaurdless I love that you make your picks and stick with them. A good 90% of ranking you see are basically the same. It's valuable to see outside the box opinions.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

Hmm, interesting that 10 out of 17 put Droughns ahead of Suggs. Technically 11 out of 18 since Joe and David picked together. Chase and Wood are in that group too. Interesting indeed.Thanks guys, this should keep me busy for about two weeks, way to keep us busy before the season.