First Rankings Posted (1 Viewer)

[MelvinTScupper]

Aaron Brooks looks like he's being under-rated (ranking-wise) once again as the 9th QB despite being 8th or better the last 4 years.

Easy guy to foget about as people seem to love to hate him. Bottom line though is he produces fantasy points.

Same thing with the Harrington rating (26th) after seasons ranked 19th and 17th and getting one of the top WR's in the draft. I'm not a believer in Garcia and think he's only there to push Harrington, not to take over.

I think that 26th is justified given you might be wrong about why Garcia is there.

 

[jurb26]

Aaron Brooks looks like he's being under-rated (ranking-wise) once again as the 9th QB despite being 8th or better the last 4 years.

Easy guy to foget about as people seem to love to hate him. Bottom line though is he produces fantasy points.

Same thing with the Harrington rating (26th) after seasons ranked 19th and 17th and getting one of the top WR's in the draft. I'm not a believer in Garcia and think he's only there to push Harrington, not to take over.

I think that 26th is justified given you might be wrong about why Garcia is there.

Yeah, Garcia certainly adds an element of risk to Harrington this year.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Pardon me if this has been brought up, as I skimmed the thread and didn't catch it mentioned.

Aaron and Will Grant, can you guys explain how you have Barlow and/or Frank Gore as the 47th and/or 50th players taken?

I mean, having had what everyone in FF would call a miserable year, Barlow was still the 27th RB last year, which makes him the 3rd best backup.

Last year Barlow had 244 rushes and the team had 413 total. Just how few carries do you see them having this year to not put a player in the top 46?

I'm not a fan of either player. I suppose they have to be rated higher by virtue of currently being #1 and #2 on the depth chart, but I think San Fran's offense is going to be terrible again this year. I would not be surprised to see Barlow get benched at some point again, to see Gore get hurt again, and for a player like Terry Jackson or Maurice Hicks to get yet another chance.Now that I look at my rankings though, it appears I left Barlow off completely. That was not intentional and he'll likely show up in the low 30s or so in my next set of rankings.

Still not a player I'd feel very comfortable drafting.

 

[Will Grant]

Pardon me if this has been brought up, as I skimmed the thread and didn't catch it mentioned.

Aaron and Will Grant, can you guys explain how you have Barlow and/or Frank Gore as the 47th and/or 50th players taken?

I mean, having had what everyone in FF would call a miserable year, Barlow was still the 27th RB last year, which makes him the 3rd best backup.

Last year Barlow had 244 rushes and the team had 413 total. Just how few carries do you see them having this year to not put a player in the top 46?

I have never been a big Barlow fan.. I came out hard on him last year with the first ranking (I think I ranked him at 50 the first time!) and had to warm up to him. I even wrote the downside on him in a face off. So too will it be this year.

In the end, I think SF is going to be a giant RBBC, and I personally feel that Hicks is the guy who's going to come out with the most carries in SF...

With Gore in the mix now, Hicks is ranked 4th on the depth chart, but I'm not convinced that he's going to stay there..... maybe as the season gets closer and I start drinking more cool aid, my opinion on Barlow will change. Right now I am not convinced that Barlow is going to be the primary back in SF when the season is over.

 

[Newman]

It would be interesting to throw out the highest and the lowest individual rankings when calculating an average. Eliminates the impact of outliers to the extent there are some (even though it's somewhat mitigated by the fact that there are 16 values).

 

[morbid]

first thoughts on the rankings:

QB

Vick@6 - yes he's a great athlete but is he a QB?

Brees@15 - i'm giving him the benefit of the doubt this year.

RB

Edge@3 - i think he shares more caries this year.

Dunn@26 - he is the go to guy in ATL.

WR

Harrison@4 - i think he's a little over valued at this position with all the targets in Indy.

McCardell@42 - if Drew is anything like he was last year I could see top 20 easily.

TE

Cooley@17 - just can't see this happening

Stevens@19 - in my opinion could be top 10.

PK



DEF

Denver@14 - would have them 20 something because of division.

Houston@23 - would have them in the teens because of division.

take with a grain of salt

 

[Sack-Religious]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds. Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960. In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice. It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career. Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off. If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire. IMO, that is not smart drafting

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I think McGahee has a very good chance to finish as a top-10 RB this year, and most likely top-5.

Here are some reasons:

Tiki Barber finished 2004 ranked as the #2 fantasy RB on a team that went 6-10 with a rookie QB under center for most of the year.

Domanick Davis finished 2004 ranked as the #5 fantasy RB on a team that went 7-9.
Rudi Johnson finished 2004 ranked as the #8 fantasy RB on a team that went 8-8 and started a QB with exactly as much experience as Losman will have coming into this season.
McGahee finished 2004 as the #9 fantasy RB despite barely playing in the first 4 games of the season and being less than 2 years removed from a devastating knee injury. Expecting improvement from him as he regains his speed and additional touches from 3 or 4 more starts seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Drew Bledsoe was not a good QB in 2004. I think having a mobile QB who can evade pressure and keep drives alive with his feet may actually help the offense.
After taking over as the Bills starter in 2004, McGahee averaged 22 attempts per game and averaged 4 yards per carry. If he gets the same workload over a 16 game season and maintains exactly the same average, he'd finish with 1400+ rushing yards. If you anticipate him regaining some of the burst that he lost due to his injury (which many do) or getting a heavier workload, then 1500 rushing yards is certainly plausible.
The Bills defense and special teams should continue to be at or near the best in the league and will consistently provide the offense with good field position.
Few elite fantasy RBs in the league run with as much power as McGahee does, and I'd be shocked if he stays healthy but fails to reach 13 TDs again.

 

[Dreamer]

It would be interesting to throw out the highest and the lowest individual rankings when calculating an average. Eliminates the impact of outliers to the extent there are some (even though it's somewhat mitigated by the fact that there are 16 values).

Interesting theory. There should probably be a name for something like this. There will always be dissenters from popular belief, and there will always be the darkhorses only a handful saw coming. I like the fact FBGs aren't afraid to go out on a limb. It gives you something to consider and they usually support their opinion.

 

[Newman]

It would be interesting to throw out the highest and the lowest individual rankings when calculating an average.  Eliminates the impact of outliers to the extent there are some (even though it's somewhat mitigated by the fact that there are 16 values).

Interesting theory. There should probably be a name for something like this. There will always be dissenters from popular belief, and there will always be the darkhorses only a handful saw coming. I like the fact FBGs aren't afraid to go out on a limb. It gives you something to consider and they usually support their opinion.

I'm not saying you don't show everybody's rankings, just that you throw out the high and low in computing the consensus average.And you make it sound like there is a formal name for this. I plead ignorance if there is.

 

[Sack-Religious]

It would be interesting to throw out the highest and the lowest individual rankings when calculating an average.  Eliminates the impact of outliers to the extent there are some (even though it's somewhat mitigated by the fact that there are 16 values).

Interesting theory. There should probably be a name for something like this. There will always be dissenters from popular belief, and there will always be the darkhorses only a handful saw coming. I like the fact FBGs aren't afraid to go out on a limb. It gives you something to consider and they usually support their opinion.

I'm not saying you don't show everybody's rankings, just that you throw out the high and low in computing the consensus average.And you make it sound like there is a formal name for this. I plead ignorance if there is.

I did this for the running backs, and there was no meaningful variance from the consensus provided. The only effect that was substantial was on the players who only receive 1 or 2 top 60 rankings.

 

[Dreamer]

It would be interesting to throw out the highest and the lowest individual rankings when calculating an average.  Eliminates the impact of outliers to the extent there are some (even though it's somewhat mitigated by the fact that there are 16 values).

Interesting theory. There should probably be a name for something like this. There will always be dissenters from popular belief, and there will always be the darkhorses only a handful saw coming. I like the fact FBGs aren't afraid to go out on a limb. It gives you something to consider and they usually support their opinion.

I'm not saying you don't show everybody's rankings, just that you throw out the high and low in computing the consensus average.And you make it sound like there is a formal name for this. I plead ignorance if there is.

You misunderstand. I agree with everything you said.

 

[nerangers]

Just looking at the Overall:7 RB Clinton Portis, Was - Seems high, considering the OL (should be behind the likes of Kevin Jones, Jamal Lewis, and Ahman Green).17 RB Fred Taylor, Jac - Already hurt and the season hasn't started (should be lower - and Jones Higher)19 RB Steven Jackson, StL - probably ranked here because of Faulk. I think he will be closer to 12th.26 RB Warrick Dunn, Atl - Above average OL, and no love for Dunn? Falcons do love to run the ball, and unless you think Duckett is going to steal TDs, Dunn should be higher30 RB DeShaun Foster, Car - Behind that OL, if he is healthy he will be higher than this (Benson, Arrlington, and Williams are all rookies, and ranked higher behind worse OL)61 RB Greg Jones, Jac - See Taylor

 

[jurb26]

Just looking at the Overall:

7 RB Clinton Portis, Was - Seems high, considering the OL (should be behind the likes of Kevin Jones, Jamal Lewis, and Ahman Green.

This seems high seeing that he was ranked 11th last year and the line should be VASTLY improved? Not only that, but the system needed serious altering which is also said to have been done.

 

[Gringoloco]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds. Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.

That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960. In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice. It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career. Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.

To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off. If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire. IMO, that is not smart drafting

One thing is for sure. This is not an exact science and no doubt some mistakes/omissions could occur, especially when direct comparisons are made. This is our first cut and I will likely make many changes the next time around, both as more information becomes available and in some degree of retrospect.Did I truly pay attention that I happened to have four rookies higher than Martin and Dillon? Not particularly. I just knew that I did not feel good about drafting Martin or Dillon highly this year and will likely let others do that. Would I draft more than one rookie this year in a redraft? Probably not, as I would not feel right about it.

This process is borne to controversy. Scrutiny abounds. I have no problem with that. Between now and draft day, my thoughts and rankings are ever changing. The result posted was based on my earnest feelings at the time.

 

[cstu]

Aaron Brooks looks like he's being under-rated (ranking-wise) once again as the 9th QB despite being 8th or better the last 4 years.

Easy guy to foget about as people seem to love to hate him. Bottom line though is he produces fantasy points.

Same thing with the Harrington rating (26th) after seasons ranked 19th and 17th and getting one of the top WR's in the draft. I'm not a believer in Garcia and think he's only there to push Harrington, not to take over.

I think that 26th is justified given you might be wrong about why Garcia is there.

Yeah, Garcia certainly adds an element of risk to Harrington this year.

Perhaps, but I would be fine with Harrington and getting Garcia very late. Either QB is going to put up big numbers this year.

 

[nerangers]

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.

Good Job Mark...McAllister is one I have been looking at. He seems to make the top 5 on many list, but in looking at his TD production and the OL, I don't see how he can be ranked that high. It is good to see some free thinking around here.

I hope I am wrong about McAllister and that he really can be a top 5 since I own him in my Dynasty league. Been thinking about trading him while perception is still high on him.

I don't agree with Priest as #1, but he is in a much better situation than most. I just don't think he will go 16 games this year. Foster and Jordan look right where you have them as well as Portis! Glad to see the rookie RBs all in the 20's as well. Good Job.

 

[Sack-Religious]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds. Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.

That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960. In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice. It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career. Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.

To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off. If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire. IMO, that is not smart drafting

One thing is for sure. This is not an exact science and no doubt some mistakes/omissions could occur, especially when direct comparisons are made. This is our first cut and I will likely make many changes the next time around, both as more information becomes available and in some degree of retrospect.Did I truly pay attention that I happened to have four rookies higher than Martin and Dillon? Not particularly. I just knew that I did not feel good about drafting Martin or Dillon highly this year and will likely let others do that. Would I draft more than one rookie this year in a redraft? Probably not, as I would not feel right about it.

This process is borne to controversy. Scrutiny abounds. I have no problem with that. Between now and draft day, my thoughts and rankings are ever changing. The result posted was based on my earnest feelings at the time.

I appreciate your responses and I am not intentionally picking on the new guy. Discussion about different view points is a good thing.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Mark, seriously, WTF is up with C.Johnson at 10?

Chase, read Mark's question only about A.Johnson....

Chase not ranking Andre Johnson? Makes me wonder if it's an offseason "oops I forgot about him" more than a genuinely unranked player.

To address jurb26's point about ranking Andre Johnson 23rd at WR and Bri's point about not ranking him overall in my top 60....Last year, Andre Johnson's ADP was pretty high. He went as WR14 in Survivor I and WR12 in Survivor II, a league in which Johnson was one of the few busts that I didn't manage to draft. Anyway, I ranked Johnson as WR22nd, and took some flak for it. Here's what I wrote regarding Andre Johnson's downside:

It's generally easier for a rookie WR to perform well as defenses don't game plan around them. You can guarantee Andre Johnson will be facing a lot more double teams this time around. In 2003, Houston ranked in the bottom four in pass attempts, completions, passing touchdowns and passing yards, as well as total offense. They ran the fewest plays in the league, 895, by far. The last team to run less than 900 offensive plays in a season were the expansion Browns. This is a bad offensive team, led by a QB that hasn't proven he can play well, and a HC that's proved he can't coach offense well. Carr has thrown ten more INTs than TDs in his career, and didn't play any better than Tony Banks last year (who posted slightly better stats against tougher opponents). Dom Capers has been a head coach for six seasons, and four of those years his offense has ranked in the bottom five. I don't think Houston has done much to improve their passing game, and I just don't see much protection in that lineup for Andre Johnson. I think he's going to struggle learning how to beat the double teams, and his upside is limited because of that. All the talent in the world doesn't help you if your team can't (or chooses not to) pass the ball.

Basically I didn't like Andre Johnson because:

1) Houston didn't run many plays

2) Houston/Capers ranks low in pass attempts, completions, pass TDs, passing yards and total offense.

3) Carr isn't very good

4) Little protection in the lineup

So what happenned?

1) Houston ran 1,001 plays, much closer to league average.

2) Houston ranked 23rd in pass attempts, 24th in completions, 27th in passing TDs, 16th in passing yards and 15th in total offense.

3) Carr made some pretty big improvements. His YPC jumped again (from 5.8 to 6.8 to 7.6), and his TD/INT ratio was finally positive. He also ranked as the 14th best QB.

4) Jabar Gaffney improved a little bit, Derick Armstrong improved a lot, and Corey Bradford declined a bit. Billy Miller fell off the map, but Dom Davis improved nicely.

One could argue that all my reservations regarding Andre Johnson turned out to be false. Yet here's the catch: Johnson ranked 23rd in 2003, and 22nd last year (right where I ranked him ). So what happenned?

Johnson caught 34.3% of Houston's receiving yards in 2003, but only 32.2% last year. I'm STILL not sold on Capers or Johnson's supporting cast, but I am a little more bullish on David Carr. But from my perspective, everything went right for Houston last year in terms of offensive output, and Johnson still was far from dominant. And remember, if AJ had two more TDs last year he would have ranked 14th.

But the Texans have just 30 TDs the past two years. And if a team's averaging just 15 passing touchdowns a season, they're coached by Dom Capers and they do little to nothing to improve the offense in the off-season, I'm not going to be thrilled to rank their top WR in the top fifteen.

 

[jurb26]

Mark, seriously, WTF is up with C.Johnson at 10?

Chase, read Mark's question only about A.Johnson....

Chase not ranking Andre Johnson? Makes me wonder if it's an offseason "oops I forgot about him" more than a genuinely unranked player.

To address jurb26's point about ranking Andre Johnson 23rd at WR and Bri's point about not ranking him overall in my top 60....Last year, Andre Johnson's ADP was pretty high. He went as WR14 in Survivor I and WR12 in Survivor II, a league in which Johnson was one of the few busts that I didn't manage to draft. Anyway, I ranked Johnson as WR22nd, and took some flak for it. Here's what I wrote regarding Andre Johnson's downside:

It's generally easier for a rookie WR to perform well as defenses don't game plan around them. You can guarantee Andre Johnson will be facing a lot more double teams this time around. In 2003, Houston ranked in the bottom four in pass attempts, completions, passing touchdowns and passing yards, as well as total offense. They ran the fewest plays in the league, 895, by far. The last team to run less than 900 offensive plays in a season were the expansion Browns. This is a bad offensive team, led by a QB that hasn't proven he can play well, and a HC that's proved he can't coach offense well. Carr has thrown ten more INTs than TDs in his career, and didn't play any better than Tony Banks last year (who posted slightly better stats against tougher opponents). Dom Capers has been a head coach for six seasons, and four of those years his offense has ranked in the bottom five. I don't think Houston has done much to improve their passing game, and I just don't see much protection in that lineup for Andre Johnson. I think he's going to struggle learning how to beat the double teams, and his upside is limited because of that. All the talent in the world doesn't help you if your team can't (or chooses not to) pass the ball.

Basically I didn't like Andre Johnson because:

1) Houston didn't run many plays

2) Houston/Capers ranks low in pass attempts, completions, pass TDs, passing yards and total offense.

3) Carr isn't very good

4) Little protection in the lineup

So what happenned?

1) Houston ran 1,001 plays, much closer to league average.

2) Houston ranked 23rd in pass attempts, 24th in completions, 27th in passing TDs, 16th in passing yards and 15th in total offense.

3) Carr made some pretty big improvements. His YPC jumped again (from 5.8 to 6.8 to 7.6), and his TD/INT ratio was finally positive. He also ranked as the 14th best QB.

4) Jabar Gaffney improved a little bit, Derick Armstrong improved a lot, and Corey Bradford declined a bit. Billy Miller fell off the map, but Dom Davis improved nicely.

One could argue that all my reservations regarding Andre Johnson turned out to be false. Yet here's the catch: Johnson ranked 23rd in 2003, and 22nd last year (right where I ranked him ). So what happenned?

Johnson caught 34.3% of Houston's receiving yards in 2003, but only 32.2% last year. I'm STILL not sold on Capers or Johnson's supporting cast, but I am a little more bullish on David Carr. But from my perspective, everything went right for Houston last year in terms of offensive output, and Johnson still was far from dominant. And remember, if AJ had two more TDs last year he would have ranked 14th.

But the Texans have just 30 TDs the past two years. And if a team's averaging just 15 passing touchdowns a season, they're coached by Dom Capers and they do little to nothing to improve the offense in the off-season, I'm not going to be thrilled to rank their top WR in the top fifteen.

I dont agree, but certainly I see improvments in the Oline making for less dump-offs to DD and more down field passes to Johnson this year. Carr did not look comfortable at all and used his safety valve far too often IMO last year. I expect that to change and that is the major reason I am high on Johnson this year, though I was with you last year and very down on him.

 

[BGP]

QB Luke McCown was traded to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for a 6th round draft pick. The rankings still list him as a Brown.

 

[MelvinTScupper]

Perhaps, but I would be fine with Harrington and getting Garcia very late.  Either QB is going to put up big numbers this year.

No offense, and best of luck to you, but why? I think Garcia COULD put up big numbers, if he can return to form that he previously had under Mariucci, but I'm not 100% certain he'll win the starting job. (I think he will win the starting job, most don't) But I also don't think he'll return completely to form in one season. Harrington, on the other hand...why would he put up huge numbers? His accuracy is and has always been terrible. It's not like he didn't have any weapons last year. You think the one addition of Mike Williams will make the difference between being 17th or 18th (not even a starter on a fantasy league squad) and being top 10? Maybe you'll end up being right, but it's way to iffy at this stage.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Lions QB, whoever it winds up being, could potentially be getting 3 new weapons in the passing game this year:WR Mike Williams (will be a beast in the red zone)WR Charles Rogers (if he can stay healthy, he'll stretch the defense)TE Marcus Pollard (reliable target to work the middle of the field)If Kevin Jones picks up where he left off, it's hard not to be optimistic about the Lions offense this year.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I dont agree, but certainly

I see improvments in the Oline making for less dump-offs to DD and more down field passes to Johnson this year. Carr did not look comfortable at all and used his safety valve far too often IMO last year. I expect that to change and that is the major reason I am high on Johnson this year, though I was with you last year and very down on him.

Hey jurb26,I think those are good points that you bring up. It leads me to two problems I sometimes make in projections:

1) I'm not much into subjective analysis -- I look to find most of my information in the stats. Many times Carr not looking comfortable and using his safety valve in year X may or may not be true -- and may or may not improve in year X+1. But it's certainly possible that an improved OLINE (which let up 36 sacks in 2003 and 49 sacks in 2004) will lead to more downfield passing.

Of the 32 leaders in pass attempts last year, Carr's 12.4 yards per completion rate ranked 10th. That puts him in between Daunte Culpepper (8th), Trent Green, Marc Bulger and Aaron Brooks (12th). I don't think that lends a lot of credence to the "check-off" theory.

Out of curiosity, what specifically do you see in terms of improvement for Houston's offensive line?

2) It's important to separate years. Everyone was high on AJ last year and I wasn't -- and AJ dissapointed. Everyone's high on AJ this year, so I'm naturally going to be down on him from the start. That's not a good reason to dislike Johnson, and it's something I'll have to battle to have the best rankings/projections/drafting season possible.

I do think he's a phenomenal talent, and I DO like David Carr. But the whole Dom Capers thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Bri]

Chase, I appreciate your honesty and candor. I applaud you realizing you're down on a guy that others really are fond of. You've given a few real good informative replies, thanks

 

[Mark Wimer]

I love to see going out on a limb too. I've got Cadillac as RB7 myself.

No offense intended Mark, I respect the opinion of the entire staff, thanks for the explaination. I have just noticed that your rankings seem to deviate the most from the rest of the staff on a consistent basis.

Didn't work out too good with Q-dog last year

No offense taken, I just wanted to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question.On Quentin Griffin -- no, that didn't work out at all. As I drafted him for a lot of my teams, it's fair to say I had trouble in many leagues thanks to that call. But, I don't recall many people touting R. Droughns as "the man" in Denver during the pre-season last year, so I don't feel too bad. Bell boosters suffered almost as much as me in 2004...

 

[Rovers]

I havent read through all the posts yet, but Dave Baker has Curtis Martin at 27? Is he predicting an injury, or was he on sabaticle last year? LMFAO!

PS: Dillon at 25? Dave, get one of these.....

I was well aware that ranking Dillon and Martin would be controversial. The rankings are obviously a very subjective process. One thing that must be done, whether in a person's head or on paper is to have an idea of what kind of numbers that player will have for that current season. When it comes to the actual projections that FBG's puts out, this is especially important. Everything must "match" at the end of the day, with each team's QB passing yardage equaling all the players receiving totals, etc.For me, in the rankings, I combine that process with an estimate of where I rank them if I were drafting. Where this comes into play, at least for me, is when I rank maybe a team's #3 RB higher than others, even though I don't necessarily think all 3 RB's obtain those totals. This aspect is sort of a gut feeling I have as I attempt to incorporate some upside for players into the rankings. This is perhaps why, as Maxwell pointed out, I have 4 Vikings RB's in my top 50. While I clearly don't think all 4 will end up top 50, when it comes to a draft, I rank them top 50 because of respective upsides they all have.

To the same degree, I need to incorporate some downside. Downside could be due to a variety of reasons, whether it be because of increasing age, to injury history, to various changes in the offensive system or players around you. But personally I felt obligated to allow some of those gut feelings of upside or downside to become a part of my ranking process.

Sure, it's easy to just rank everyone where they fit last year with minimal changes. That's certainly the safe thing to do and the last likely to cause controversy. But I would be dong an injustice to the readers and FBGs if I did not try to allow for how I would rank those players in a draft if held today. So I ranked 'em as I saw 'em. As I would draft them today.

This leads me to Curtis Martin and Corey Dillon (amongst others I may have ranked to more extremes when compared to other staff members or poster expectations). I completely recognize the years both had last year. Martin had a career year for rushing, with 30% more yards than the previous season and 55% more than the year before that. He had about 185 more rushing yards than in hs prevous best season of 2001. That's all the more amazing when you consider he was 31 years old last year.

Should we expect another career year for Martin? Likely not, even if you are a Martin fan. So then where does he end up? When it came down to it, I started to suspect Martin for a down year more and more. Certainly all evidence to the contrary, as Martin has aged like a fine wine. But I am scared of a variey of things happening. He now is 32 years old. How much longer can he defy mother nature? A wall will be hit and hit soon, at least if you look at the numbers for almost every previous RB in history. He also has 3,300 total carries. That's 4th all-time. And I saw one of the players ahead of him, Walter Payton, his that wall at about 32, when he had 1715 yards and 11 TD's one season and the following dropped to 750/1. Even taking into account the injury he had that year, he prorated out to over a 40% dip in numbers.

So when it came down to me ranking players, I just did not feel right about Martin being higher than he is. First, I would not draft him any higher. Second, I just feel that he has hit an age and number of career carries that bring with it an imposing wall that RB's hit harder than any other position. Will my personal drop in Martin be caused by injury? The team splitting carries out of age concerns? Just the luck of the draw, as some years you just end up with different amount of carries and gola line touches, etc? I'm not sure. But the combination of the above spinning around in my head made the move down necessary IMO.

It's much the same to a certain degreee with Corey Dillon. At 30 years old, he had career numbers for carries, rushing yards, rushing TD's and a tie for total TD's. Is he likely to do more of the same? I just don't think so. It's so tough to replicate career numbers as it is, but I admit it's an awfully good team to do so with. Although he has less carries and is younger than Martin, part of my thinking goes along the same line in the end result. I think Dillon is precariously close to hitting the wall himself and when it came down to it, I would not feel good drafting him highly.

As I said, I understand the controversy and strong opinions. That's what this is all about. But I was not about to revise my rankings simply because I think others will disagree.

There are many reasons why Dillon and Martin should be higher, but when I came down to it, I did not feel good about ranking them any higher than I did. That's where I would draft them in a league.

Fair enough, gutsy call. I was a lone wolf on the mountaintop last year telling people to look out for Martin last year (no, it wasnt here, but if one insisted, I could provide links) . I knew that for the first time in three years he was healthy. I also knew what he was doing in the off season, he was a man possesed. But, I'm not going to claim I knew he'd win the rushing title either. I did think he would be top five though. It's early, but I don't like what I'm hearing, about him skipping the pro bowl because he felt beat up. Barring an injury though, I just don't see him not being in the top 15...... I'd put him around 12 or so. His production will drop for several reasons. An increase in the Jets reliance on the passing game, especially going more vertical, and being another year older won't help. N.E. is hard to figure this year, which makes Dillon's numbers hard to predict. As of now, Belichick is still the OC. That could be a disaster waiting to happen, or it might not be. The guy pulls another rabbit out of his hat after your sure it's empty time and again. I just don't see the sort of drop off you predict, however. I think he, like Martin, could repeat in the top ten, but will struggle to get here.

Looking at the defenses both of these RB's face in the AFC East: The Jets run defense may have taken a step backwards with the loss of Ferguson at slant nose. Whether or not FA Legree or 4th round rookie Pouha can fill his shoes remains to be seen. The Bill's D returns pretty intact, but both of these RB's had to play the Bills twice last year, and it didnt hurt thier numbers overall. Miami's D was under rated last year, but now has to learn a whole new, very complex scheme. Seau and Zach Thomas seem to have bought into it, but all the terminology is different, as well as the overall scheme. They will try to replicate the N.E. defensive scheme, and I'm not sure that can be done in one year. The Pats may be without Bruschki (sp?) this year, and Fletcher is gone. Belechick will be occupied with the offense, and with a new DC, I have to think N.E.'s defense wont be quite as good as last year, or at least will be prone to making more mistakes.

Given the fact that I see NY, NE and Miami defenses taking a step backwards, that offsets whatever these two RB's might lose by being another year older, to a large degree. I'll give you credit for not having to be prompted to put yer neck on the chopping block, but look out for the ax.

 

[cstu]

Perhaps, but I would be fine with Harrington and getting Garcia very late.  Either QB is going to put up big numbers this year.

No offense, and best of luck to you, but why? I think Garcia COULD put up big numbers, if he can return to form that he previously had under Mariucci, but I'm not 100% certain he'll win the starting job. (I think he will win the starting job, most don't) But I also don't think he'll return completely to form in one season. Harrington, on the other hand...why would he put up huge numbers? His accuracy is and has always been terrible. It's not like he didn't have any weapons last year. You think the one addition of Mike Williams will make the difference between being 17th or 18th (not even a starter on a fantasy league squad) and being top 10? Maybe you'll end up being right, but it's way to iffy at this stage.

Where are the Lions going if they bench Harrington in favor of Garcia? Maybe they do a little better this year, but in the long-run they are in trouble. Garcia hasn't been that good since 2001 and he's 35. Harrington on the other hand is getting better and only 27, entering his prime as a QB. He gets a lot of grief but has endured a lot the last 3 years since the Lions haven't been the most stable team (no running game, injuries to his WR's and OL).The Lions also weren't blown out down the stretch after Kevin Jones came on, except against the Colts. In their 4 other losses in weeks 11-17, they loss to the Vikings twice by a total of 4 points, the Titans by 5 points, and the Packers by 3 points.

 

[Newman]

Mark, seriously, WTF is up with C.Johnson at 10?

Chase, read Mark's question only about A.Johnson....

Chase not ranking Andre Johnson? Makes me wonder if it's an offseason "oops I forgot about him" more than a genuinely unranked player.

To address jurb26's point about ranking Andre Johnson 23rd at WR and Bri's point about not ranking him overall in my top 60....Last year, Andre Johnson's ADP was pretty high. He went as WR14 in Survivor I and WR12 in Survivor II, a league in which Johnson was one of the few busts that I didn't manage to draft. Anyway, I ranked Johnson as WR22nd, and took some flak for it. Here's what I wrote regarding Andre Johnson's downside:

It's generally easier for a rookie WR to perform well as defenses don't game plan around them. You can guarantee Andre Johnson will be facing a lot more double teams this time around. In 2003, Houston ranked in the bottom four in pass attempts, completions, passing touchdowns and passing yards, as well as total offense. They ran the fewest plays in the league, 895, by far. The last team to run less than 900 offensive plays in a season were the expansion Browns. This is a bad offensive team, led by a QB that hasn't proven he can play well, and a HC that's proved he can't coach offense well. Carr has thrown ten more INTs than TDs in his career, and didn't play any better than Tony Banks last year (who posted slightly better stats against tougher opponents). Dom Capers has been a head coach for six seasons, and four of those years his offense has ranked in the bottom five. I don't think Houston has done much to improve their passing game, and I just don't see much protection in that lineup for Andre Johnson. I think he's going to struggle learning how to beat the double teams, and his upside is limited because of that. All the talent in the world doesn't help you if your team can't (or chooses not to) pass the ball.

Basically I didn't like Andre Johnson because:

1) Houston didn't run many plays

2) Houston/Capers ranks low in pass attempts, completions, pass TDs, passing yards and total offense.

3) Carr isn't very good

4) Little protection in the lineup

So what happenned?

1) Houston ran 1,001 plays, much closer to league average.

2) Houston ranked 23rd in pass attempts, 24th in completions, 27th in passing TDs, 16th in passing yards and 15th in total offense.

3) Carr made some pretty big improvements. His YPC jumped again (from 5.8 to 6.8 to 7.6), and his TD/INT ratio was finally positive. He also ranked as the 14th best QB.

4) Jabar Gaffney improved a little bit, Derick Armstrong improved a lot, and Corey Bradford declined a bit. Billy Miller fell off the map, but Dom Davis improved nicely.

One could argue that all my reservations regarding Andre Johnson turned out to be false. Yet here's the catch: Johnson ranked 23rd in 2003, and 22nd last year (right where I ranked him ). So what happenned?

Johnson caught 34.3% of Houston's receiving yards in 2003, but only 32.2% last year. I'm STILL not sold on Capers or Johnson's supporting cast, but I am a little more bullish on David Carr. But from my perspective, everything went right for Houston last year in terms of offensive output, and Johnson still was far from dominant. And remember, if AJ had two more TDs last year he would have ranked 14th.

But the Texans have just 30 TDs the past two years. And if a team's averaging just 15 passing touchdowns a season, they're coached by Dom Capers and they do little to nothing to improve the offense in the off-season, I'm not going to be thrilled to rank their top WR in the top fifteen.

I dont agree, but certainly

I disagree as well, but that's some damn serious analysis. More than I would ever do on a particular player. Gotta give him credit for the research.

 

[cstu]

Mark, seriously, WTF is up with C.Johnson at 10?

Chase, read Mark's question only about A.Johnson....

Chase not ranking Andre Johnson? Makes me wonder if it's an offseason "oops I forgot about him" more than a genuinely unranked player.

To address jurb26's point about ranking Andre Johnson 23rd at WR and Bri's point about not ranking him overall in my top 60....Last year, Andre Johnson's ADP was pretty high. He went as WR14 in Survivor I and WR12 in Survivor II, a league in which Johnson was one of the few busts that I didn't manage to draft. Anyway, I ranked Johnson as WR22nd, and took some flak for it. Here's what I wrote regarding Andre Johnson's downside:

It's generally easier for a rookie WR to perform well as defenses don't game plan around them. You can guarantee Andre Johnson will be facing a lot more double teams this time around. In 2003, Houston ranked in the bottom four in pass attempts, completions, passing touchdowns and passing yards, as well as total offense. They ran the fewest plays in the league, 895, by far. The last team to run less than 900 offensive plays in a season were the expansion Browns. This is a bad offensive team, led by a QB that hasn't proven he can play well, and a HC that's proved he can't coach offense well. Carr has thrown ten more INTs than TDs in his career, and didn't play any better than Tony Banks last year (who posted slightly better stats against tougher opponents). Dom Capers has been a head coach for six seasons, and four of those years his offense has ranked in the bottom five. I don't think Houston has done much to improve their passing game, and I just don't see much protection in that lineup for Andre Johnson. I think he's going to struggle learning how to beat the double teams, and his upside is limited because of that. All the talent in the world doesn't help you if your team can't (or chooses not to) pass the ball.

Basically I didn't like Andre Johnson because:

1) Houston didn't run many plays

2) Houston/Capers ranks low in pass attempts, completions, pass TDs, passing yards and total offense.

3) Carr isn't very good

4) Little protection in the lineup

So what happenned?

1) Houston ran 1,001 plays, much closer to league average.

2) Houston ranked 23rd in pass attempts, 24th in completions, 27th in passing TDs, 16th in passing yards and 15th in total offense.

3) Carr made some pretty big improvements. His YPC jumped again (from 5.8 to 6.8 to 7.6), and his TD/INT ratio was finally positive. He also ranked as the 14th best QB.

4) Jabar Gaffney improved a little bit, Derick Armstrong improved a lot, and Corey Bradford declined a bit. Billy Miller fell off the map, but Dom Davis improved nicely.

One could argue that all my reservations regarding Andre Johnson turned out to be false. Yet here's the catch: Johnson ranked 23rd in 2003, and 22nd last year (right where I ranked him ). So what happenned?

Johnson caught 34.3% of Houston's receiving yards in 2003, but only 32.2% last year. I'm STILL not sold on Capers or Johnson's supporting cast, but I am a little more bullish on David Carr. But from my perspective, everything went right for Houston last year in terms of offensive output, and Johnson still was far from dominant. And remember, if AJ had two more TDs last year he would have ranked 14th.

But the Texans have just 30 TDs the past two years. And if a team's averaging just 15 passing touchdowns a season, they're coached by Dom Capers and they do little to nothing to improve the offense in the off-season, I'm not going to be thrilled to rank their top WR in the top fifteen.

I dont agree, but certainly

I disagree as well, but that's some damn serious analysis. More than I would ever do on a particular player. Gotta give him credit for the research.

Andre Johnson has the talent to be a top 5 WR, but when has a Capers WR been ranked that high? I don't any change to the Texans offense that makes me think that AJ will all of a sudden jump from WR22 to WR7.Levin is close to where I'd rank him at 14.

 

[David Yudkin]

Chase and I agree on AJ. The Texans last year were a putrid passing team in the second half of last season. He only had 449/2 in the Texans last 8 games. At that pace, he would have ranked as the #35 WR for a full season. (Yes, I am aware that he did have a much better first 8 games).Carr's best 8 passing games were the Texans first 8 games in terms of passing yards, and of course his worst 8 passing games were his last 8 games. 2162 yards and 9 TD in the first 8 games, 1377 and 7 TD in his last 8 games.

 

[cstu]

Chase and I agree on AJ.  The Texans last year were a putrid passing team in the second half of last season.  He only had 449/2 in the Texans last 8 games.  At that pace, he would have ranked as the #35 WR for a full season.  (Yes, I am aware that he did have a much better first 8 games).

Carr's best 8 passing games were the Texans first 8 games in terms of passing yards, and of course his worst 8 passing games were his last 8 games.  2162 yards and 9 TD in the first 8 games, 1377 and 7 TD in his last 8 games.

WR23 is too low though and at least he's a "safe" pick, unlike the other WR's in the late teens/early 20's - Bruce, Mason, Driver, Muhammed, Fitzgerald, Coles, and Smith.

 

[David Yudkin]

Chase and I agree on AJ.  The Texans last year were a putrid passing team in the second half of last season.  He only had 449/2 in the Texans last 8 games.  At that pace, he would have ranked as the #35 WR for a full season.  (Yes, I am aware that he did have a much better first 8 games).

Carr's best 8 passing games were the Texans first 8 games in terms of passing yards, and of course his worst 8 passing games were his last 8 games.  2162 yards and 9 TD in the first 8 games, 1377 and 7 TD in his last 8 games.

WR23 is too low though and at least he's a "safe" pick, unlike the other WR's in the late teens/early 20's - Bruce, Mason, Driver, Muhammed, Fitzgerald, Coles, and Smith.

WR 23 is too low in your opinion. I would put the over/under for Johnson at WR 20.

 

[Chris Smith]

McAllister is one I have been looking at. He seems to make the top 5 on many list, but in looking at his TD production and the OL, I don't see how he can be ranked that high. It is good to see some free thinking around here.

I hope I am wrong about McAllister and that he really can be a top 5 since I own him in my Dynasty league. Been thinking about trading him while perception is still high on him.

The Saints run blocking has the potential to be very good this season. The linemen with the exception of tackle Wayne Gandy are all better at run blocking than pass blocking. Mayberry will be a steadying presence with this group at guard and big rookie tackle, Jammal Brown will get every opportunity to win the starting job out of the gate and he is a force when it comes to run blocking. The potential starting unit of Bentley

Holland

Mayberry

Brown

Gandy

will struggle when it comes to pass protection but could be among the league leaders at run blocking in 2005.

 

[Mark Wimer]

McAllister is one I have been looking at.  He seems to make the top 5 on many list, but in looking at his TD production and the OL, I don't see how he can be ranked that high.  It is good to see some free thinking around here.

I hope I am wrong about McAllister and that he really can be a top 5 since I own him in my Dynasty league.  Been thinking about trading him while perception is still high on him.

The Saints run blocking has the potential to be very good this season. The linemen with the exception of tackle Wayne Gandy are all better at run blocking than pass blocking. Mayberry will be a steadying presence with this group at guard and big rookie tackle, Jammal Brown will get every opportunity to win the starting job out of the gate and he is a force when it comes to run blocking. The potential starting unit of Bentley

Holland

Mayberry

Brown

Gandy

will struggle when it comes to pass protection but could be among the league leaders at run blocking in 2005.

Mayberry had trouble staying healthy over the past few seasons when he was in Philadelphia, and is an aging player (31 years old, 10 year NFL veteran) with tons of mileage on his body. Brown may have been a force run blocking in college, but we have no idea if he'll be able to translate into a viable NFL player at this point in the year.

I don't see much quality depth along the line to step in if Mayberry gets knocked out of the lineup and/or Brown busts. OT's Gandy and Folau are both way on the wrong side of 30. Considering that New Orleans was 19th in the NFL in yards per carry (4.0) last year, and Deuce only managed 9 rushing scores last year (8 in 2003), I don't see a lot of reasons to feel optimistic about his upside behind this OL.

If Brown pans out and Mayberry makes it through training camp in good health, I'll have to revisit my analysis of McAllister/the Saints OL, but at this stage of the pre-season I'm a pessimist.

 

[Marc Levin]

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.

???"most"?

 

[Marc Levin]

McAllister is one I have been looking at.  He seems to make the top 5 on many list, but in looking at his TD production and the OL, I don't see how he can be ranked that high.  It is good to see some free thinking around here.

I hope I am wrong about McAllister and that he really can be a top 5 since I own him in my Dynasty league.  Been thinking about trading him while perception is still high on him.

The Saints run blocking has the potential to be very good this season. The linemen with the exception of tackle Wayne Gandy are all better at run blocking than pass blocking. Mayberry will be a steadying presence with this group at guard and big rookie tackle, Jammal Brown will get every opportunity to win the starting job out of the gate and he is a force when it comes to run blocking. The potential starting unit of Bentley

Holland

Mayberry

Brown

Gandy

will struggle when it comes to pass protection but could be among the league leaders at run blocking in 2005.

Now if they could just whisper in Haslett's ears to run the ball more . . .

 

[joffer]

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.

???"most"?

WCOFF - yesFFMasters - yes

FantasyVIPs - yes

NFFC - yes

Payday - yes (WR and TE only)

 

[MelvinTScupper]

Perhaps, but I would be fine with Harrington and getting Garcia very late.  Either QB is going to put up big numbers this year.

No offense, and best of luck to you, but why? I think Garcia COULD put up big numbers, if he can return to form that he previously had under Mariucci, but I'm not 100% certain he'll win the starting job. (I think he will win the starting job, most don't) But I also don't think he'll return completely to form in one season. Harrington, on the other hand...why would he put up huge numbers? His accuracy is and has always been terrible. It's not like he didn't have any weapons last year. You think the one addition of Mike Williams will make the difference between being 17th or 18th (not even a starter on a fantasy league squad) and being top 10? Maybe you'll end up being right, but it's way to iffy at this stage.

Where are the Lions going if they bench Harrington in favor of Garcia? Maybe they do a little better this year, but in the long-run they are in trouble. Garcia hasn't been that good since 2001 and he's 35. Harrington on the other hand is getting better and only 27, entering his prime as a QB. He gets a lot of grief but has endured a lot the last 3 years since the Lions haven't been the most stable team (no running game, injuries to his WR's and OL).The Lions also weren't blown out down the stretch after Kevin Jones came on, except against the Colts. In their 4 other losses in weeks 11-17, they loss to the Vikings twice by a total of 4 points, the Titans by 5 points, and the Packers by 3 points.

Let's put it this way. 1 of the 2 Lions QB's has, in a 2 year span, thrown for nearly 8,0000 yards and 2 TD's. Joey H's best two year span is 5800 yards and 36 TD's. If anyone hasn't been "good" since entering the league, it's Harrington. In fact, in every full season Garcia has played, he's outperformed Harringotn. I think Joey's failure to do anything well may catch up to him if he doesn't have a superb camp. Otherwise, why would Mariucci bring in his former star?

 

[Marc Levin]

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.

???"most"?

WCOFF - yesFFMasters - yes

FantasyVIPs - yes

NFFC - yes

Payday - yes (WR and TE only)

I misunderstood what you meant by hiugh stakes leagues - I see what you mean now and I agree we should have alternative WR lists based on pt/rec. Thta is a decision out of my hands.For high stakes, I thought you meant leagues with high payouts - I consdier a 2G payout league with 150+ entry fee a "high stakes" league.

 

[zoonation]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds. Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.

That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960. In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice. It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career. Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.

To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off. If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire. IMO, that is not smart drafting

With respect to Ken Maxwell - seriously - a 40% drop. Come on. He is THE guy on a team with a great OLine, excellent defense, and a QB who is not a great redzone passer. Add to this he will no doubt be in great shape again, and hungry as ever.---------

also wanted to suggest to those who say this past year was an exception for CuMArt, that he played hurt for a lot of 2002 and most of 2003.

The situation dictates everything IMO, and CuMart's is pretty good.

To suggest that ALL of the rookies will outproduce him fantasy wise is doing an inward two-and-a-half, in the tucked position, into a giant pool of koolaid.

 

[Sack-Religious]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds. Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.

That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960. In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice. It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career. Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.

To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off. If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire. IMO, that is not smart drafting

With respect to Ken Maxwell - seriously - a 40% drop. Come on. He is THE guy on a team with a great OLine, excellent defense, and a QB who is not a great redzone passer. Add to this he will no doubt be in great shape again, and hungry as ever.---------

also wanted to suggest to those who say this past year was an exception for CuMArt, that he played hurt for a lot of 2002 and most of 2003.

The situation dictates everything IMO, and CuMart's is pretty good.

To suggest that ALL of the rookies will outproduce him fantasy wise is doing an inward two-and-a-half, in the tucked position, into a giant pool of koolaid.

Hey zoonation,You are reading my post out of context. Those are not my predictions for Curtis Martin. An earlier poster made reference to Walter Payton having a 40% drop off at the same age. I used a 40% drop off as a baseline for prior rookie performance. I don't think that 4 rookies should be ranked ahead of Martin and Dillon.

 

[zoonation]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds.  Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.

That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960.  In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice.  It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career.  Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.

To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off.  If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire.  IMO, that is not smart drafting

With respect to Ken Maxwell - seriously - a 40% drop. Come on. He is THE guy on a team with a great OLine, excellent defense, and a QB who is not a great redzone passer. Add to this he will no doubt be in great shape again, and hungry as ever.---------

also wanted to suggest to those who say this past year was an exception for CuMArt, that he played hurt for a lot of 2002 and most of 2003.

The situation dictates everything IMO, and CuMart's is pretty good.

To suggest that ALL of the rookies will outproduce him fantasy wise is doing an inward two-and-a-half, in the tucked position, into a giant pool of koolaid.

Hey zoonation,You are reading my post out of context. Those are not my predictions for Curtis Martin. An earlier poster made reference to Walter Payton having a 40% drop off at the same age. I used a 40% drop off as a baseline for prior rookie performance. I don't think that 4 rookies should be ranked ahead of Martin and Dillon.

Yes, I believe I am.Although, I was just trying to add to your point about the rookies. The 40% stuff is my bad...sorry

What are you doing up so early?

 

[Sack-Religious]

With respect to Curtis Martin, a 40% drop in total yards from his career high, or a 20% reduction from his worst statistical year nets him about 1200 total yds. Figuring 6 total tds, that places him at about 156 fantasy points.

That mark has been eclipsed by rookie running backs 64 times since 1960. In the same season, 3 or more rookies have eclipsed that mark only 5 times, and 4 have eclipsed that mark only twice. It is just not reasonable to project 4 unproven rookies over a proven, uninjured veteran, even when you are predicting that veteran to have his worst season of his career. Statistically, you have a 50% chance of picking the wrong rookie running back.

To say that you would take all four of those rookies with both Dillon AND Martin still on the board is the type drafting that gives unbelievable value to your league mates and will most likely destroy your season if your projections on the rookies are even slightly off. If you are right, you are a genius, if you are wrong then you are already behind the 8-ball, hoping that you are lucky enough to find a gem on the waiver wire. IMO, that is not smart drafting

With respect to Ken Maxwell - seriously - a 40% drop. Come on. He is THE guy on a team with a great OLine, excellent defense, and a QB who is not a great redzone passer. Add to this he will no doubt be in great shape again, and hungry as ever.---------

also wanted to suggest to those who say this past year was an exception for CuMArt, that he played hurt for a lot of 2002 and most of 2003.

The situation dictates everything IMO, and CuMart's is pretty good.

To suggest that ALL of the rookies will outproduce him fantasy wise is doing an inward two-and-a-half, in the tucked position, into a giant pool of koolaid.

Hey zoonation,You are reading my post out of context. Those are not my predictions for Curtis Martin. An earlier poster made reference to Walter Payton having a 40% drop off at the same age. I used a 40% drop off as a baseline for prior rookie performance. I don't think that 4 rookies should be ranked ahead of Martin and Dillon.

Yes, I believe I am.Although, I was just trying to add to your point about the rookies. The 40% stuff is my bad...sorry

What are you doing up so early?

Darn cough woke me up an hour ago. I'm praying for a quick death

 

[Liquid Tension]

Is will Grant for real ranking Lee Suggs ahead of Lamont Jordan. As a Jet hater, I know Lamont can play the game and was happy to see him leave. Lamont has all the makings of s stud and is a complete back. His vision may be his weakest link, but he is fast, can cut and catch the ball; Suggs has NO vision. Barring injury, Lamont will be a top 15 back and not one of the experts put him in their top 15without question. His overall ranking from everyone is out of line as well. For the record, while this may contradict what I just wrote, when I rank Lamont I have him at 14. What will happen is that many will fall behind him.