Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
How early do you draft Larry Johnson (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter John 14:6
- Start date
Just to show you what you are putting on the gigantic show about, here's the past 3 years' top 6 FF RBs, without 0.5 ppr & then with 0.5 ppr:2004 w/o .5 ppr
Shaun Alexander 2004 306.6
Tiki Barber 2004 299.6
LaDainian Tomlinson 2004 287.5
Curtis Martin 2004 277.9
Domanick Davis 2004 261.6
Edgerrin James 2004 257.1
Change from #5 to #6: 4.5 FF pts
2004 w/ .5 ppr
Tiki Barber 2004 325.6
Shaun Alexander 2004 318.1
LaDainian Tomlinson 2004 314
Curtis Martin 2004 298.4
Domanick Davis 2004 295.6
Edgerrin James 2004 282.6
Change from #5 to #6: 13.0 FF pts
2003 w/o .5 ppr
Priest Holmes 2003 372.6
Ahman Green 2003 345.7
LaDainian Tomlinson 2003 341.65
Jamal Lewis 2003 310.6
Clinton Portis 2003 274.7
Shaun Alexander 2003 268.3
Change from #5 to #6: 6.4 FF pts
2003 w/ .5 ppr
Priest Holmes 2003 409.1
LaDainian Tomlinson 2003 391.65
Ahman Green 2003 370.7
Jamal Lewis 2003 323.6
Deuce McAllister 2003 296.3
Clinton Portis 2003 293.7
Change from #5 to #6: 2.6 FF pts
2002 w/o .5 ppr
Priest Holmes 2002 367.5
Ricky Williams 2002 320.1
LaDainian Tomlinson 2002 306.1
Clinton Portis 2002 288.3
Shaun Alexander 2002 271.4
Deuce McAllister 2002 268.5
Change from #5 to #6: 2.9 FF pts
2002 w/ .5 ppr
Priest Holmes 2002 401.5
LaDainian Tomlinson 2002 345.6
Ricky Williams 2002 343.6
Clinton Portis 2002 304.8
Shaun Alexander 2002 300.9
Tiki Barber 2002 298.1
Change from #5 to #6: 2.8 FF pts
That's what you've been so pissy about - a average change in FF scoring of 1.5 FF pts in favor of using .5 ppr receptions between the 5th best FF RB & the 6th best FF RB.
Had no clue, did you? Do everyone here a favor. Stop puffing out your chest & throwing around illusions about your internal fortitude as compared to everyone else until you learn a little more about the game...
I'd take your bet - despite your whining - without the points for receptions, but based upon the way you have acted in this thread, I have very little doubt you wouldn't honor it.
Later, my friend.
Last edited by a moderator:
acefootball
Footballguy
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Wow, logic just ain't your game now is it. See if I'm whining about not .5 and that reflects badly upon me because it's seemingly a meaningless stat, then you are just as much of a tool for arguing for it as vehemently. Logic 101. Check it out. Your local juco or community college probably teaches it. Your shot at me is a shot at yourself.Glad to see you sacked up and took the bet. I would've taken the .5 stipulation if you wouldn't have been such a jackass about it. But you had to act like the righteous avenger of Priest's honor and mock my exception to the reception rule which does favor you, and you know it you weasel. You were trying to hedge your bet a little and got called on it. You know damn good and well that I never even alluded to a reception rule in my original statement and yet you insisted on it to help your odds. That's not the gauntlet I threw down. Now you have to take my bet to save face.
Actually, I'll still take your bet. I'm that confident that he won't do all that well this year that I will spot you the extra place by giving you the .5/reception. It's totally up to you. I can deal with either.
Oh, and try to be as good of a loser as I am as a winner. Ask SalmonStud what I made him put in his sig after I won last year. The answer is nothing. I won, that's all that mattered. I didn't need the fame or his humility. All I needed to know was that I won. Not sure if I will be as forgiving with you. SStud at least acted like an adult when he made the bet with me....
Good luck.....
Last edited by a moderator:
The Man Who Met Andy Griffith
Footballguy
Could we get back on topic?
cstu
Footballguy
If you have Priest already, I think you'd be foolish not to consider LJ in the 6th round. At that point all the starting RB's are gone and you're looking at #2 WR's and middle of the pack QB's. I guess I don't see where the problem is with taking LJ somewhat early, given the other options.In bigger leagues (14+) it gets a little more difficult since you are looking using 2 of your first 5 picks on one position, but I still think having your bases covered with the Chiefs running game is the way to go given the risk of injury with Priest. You don't want to be trying to fill that hole in the middle of the season.
Last edited by a moderator:
6th is different, 4th and 5th were where this thread started. I WOULD consider him in the 6th but.....I will try to explain this again. I'm not drafting any player and having that affect how the rest of my draft goes.(Aside from obvious position needs and such)If I got Priest, I got him...next pick. It's not, I got Priest I need LJ then in the 14th I need Joe Smith (or whomever)so I have the 3rd RB. That I won't do. If LJ is the best guy I'll take him but (in a way, like any other RB say Tiki+Jacobs) Priest won't have anything to do with it.
The 6th, there's some very good WRs left IMO and also a QB run is fairly likely. I MAY not want to miss out on that for a backup RB. If it's start 3 WR, if it's 6 points per pass TD I doubt I'd take LJ in the 6th.
WR-Driver, Jimmy Smith, Isaac Bruce, Eric Moulds
QB Green, Vick, Favre, Hasselbeck.
I may need Green at that point and he's a good one to use here.
With LJ you want to bring up KC scoring and "high powerred offense" well Green's the QB and all that applies to him. I get a starter, you get a backup RB that may start.
I think those WRs are solid. I've also seen Detroit WRs slip because evryone gets worried about whom is the #1 and they slip a bit in the actual draft. Rod Smith too. It's very likely a solid WR is there.
As to starting RBs being gone.
No they're not.
Pittman, Jones, Shipp all have a shot at starting albeit a minimal one.
(Sadly)We could make a good bet whom will get hurt first Priest or Michael bennett. Minny RBs are excellent for FF, you know that. Mewelde is going in the 9th. I like him there very much. Similarly, whomever backs up Chris Brown. Off the beaten path, starters:
Ricky, can you definitively say he won't get significant time after say week 6?
Travis Henry
People here are loving Frank Gore's chances to replace Barlow, he's available.
Pick a Denver RB, they all seem to have a shot.
Droughns. Why'd Cleveland trade for him if they won't start him? Not saying he will but he'll get a good look in camp. William Green is in terrific shape and being an angel like Dillon in New England last year. He could, though longshot, start.
There's some and yes I totally think they are "iffy" starters but...isn't LJ?
Without Priest on my team, I may take a stab at LJ and likely earlier. But that's what it would be a "stab" or taking a shot on a guy. That's my prob with the line of thinking here. He's no lock. If after 5 rounds you are secure with your team fine take a shot but if not, then take the QB or WR. He's not the dead certain gotta have player people are making him seem. Not at all.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Good (but dated) piece from Doug Drinen's website about predicting injuries.
http://pro-football-reference.com/articles/iron.htm
Everybody is an injury risk
Football is a violent game. No player -- not Eddie George, not Brett Favre, not Cris Carter -- is immune to the injury bug.
But some players are seemingly greater injury risks than others. You'll read in countless places this preseason that you should be somewhat wary of Fred Taylor and Ricky Williams, among others, because they've been injured in the past. Well, they certainly have been injured in the past -- neither of them has ever played a full season -- but does it necessarily follow that they are more likely to be injured this year? Common sense says yes, but common sense isn't always right. Further, there are numerous counterexamples.
Robert Smith, James Stewart, and Charlie Garner all had giant "Handle With Care" labels stamped on their foreheads last preseason, but all three turned in healthy and productive 2000 campaigns.
On the flip side, Mike Alstott, Marshall Faulk, and Duce Staley had missed a combined total of 4 games in 13 NFL seasons prior to last year, but they all missed time due to injury in 2000.
Of course, it's not hard to point to examples that confirm the common sense viewpoint, either. The aforementioned Fred Taylor and Ricky Williams would be two. Tim Biakabutuka would be another. But proof by example isn't very compelling. We need to look at this systematically.
The main idea is this: find all players who played a certain number of games one year, and then see how many games they played the next year. If the common sense is correct, then players who played 16 games one year (like Edge James) will be more likely to stay healthy the next year than players who played only 13 games (a la Fred Taylor).
Let's first consider the RBs. I looked at 422 RB seasons between 1988 and 1998. I'll show you a line of data and then explain what it means:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
--------------------------
16 233 13.7 111 47.6
Alright, what is all this? This is a summary of the RBs who played in a full 16 games in a given season (that's what the G stands for). There were 233 of them (that's the no. column). AGNY stands for "average games next year." So these 233 backs averaged 13.7 games the year after playing 16. PFS means "played full season" -- this denotes how many of the 233 played a full 16 games the following year. And finally, the 47.6 in the PFS% column tells you that 47.60f all the RBs who played 16 games in one year also played 16 games the next year.
FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year.
Here is the full set of results:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
--------------------------
16 233 13.7 111 47.6
15 68 12.6 30 44.1
14 39 13.4 11 28.2
13 20 14.4 11 55.0
12 16 10.4 3 18.8
11 11 12.6 4 36.4
10 15 12.8 7 46.7
9 15 13.2 5 33.3
8 5 14.4 3 60.0
To smooth out the bumps, let's break that down into groups:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
16 233 13.7 111 47.6
13-15 127 13.1 52 40.1
8-12 62 12.4 22 35.5
The most important piece of information here is the following: of RBs who played a full season one year, less than half of them played a full season the next year. So that's where the title of the article comes from: Everybody is an injury risk. At least based on this data, you shouldn't bet on any running back to play 16 games this year.
Also note that the expected difference between an iron man (16-game performer) and a injury-prone RB (8-12 games) is just over a game. An iron man has about a 50/50 shot at playing a full season next year, while an injury-prone RB has about a 35hance. That's certainly a significant difference, but not as large as I might have guessed.
This is the point where I typically pause and warn readers not to wager their kids' shoe money on this data. There are a lot of reasons why games played isn't a perfect way to measure health. First, it's possible that a player might have been perfectly healthy, but was just benched. I'm not too worried about this one, actually, because I only included players who were fairly productive when they did play (see the fine print above). Another reason for missed games is suspension, and another problem is my inability to distinguish partial games. Eddie George, for example, was credited with 16 games played in 2000, but in one of those, he was injured after one carry and left the game. Morally, he only played 15 games last year, but this study doesn't account for that. So as usual, this is not a perfect study. You can judge for yourself whether it's better than no study at all.
Aha, you say, but Fred Taylor has repeatedly shown that he can't stay healthy. It's not just that he was hurt last year, but he was hurt the year before that (and so on). Maybe the trend will become more clear if we look at two years instead of just one. So we'll do just that. Here's the breakdown by games played in a two year period:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
32 92 14.0 44 47.8
29-31 102 13.2 48 47.1
25-28 61 12.7 20 32.8
17-24 37 12.6 10 27.0
FINE PRINT: all pairs of RB seasons from 1988-1989 through 1997-1998 in which the player averaged at least 5 fantasy points per game in both years.
The spread is a little wider, but there's still not a game and a half difference between the expectation of an RB with a spotless health record and one who missed several games. Again, note that fewer than half (47.8%) of the iron men were able to play 16 games the next year. Football is a rough game, and running back is a rough position.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the situation is somewhat different for wide receivers. Here is the one-season breakdown:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
16 324 14.5 210 64.8
13-15 95 14.1 49 51.6
8-12 42 12.6 17 40.5
And the two-season data:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
32 194 14.7 131 67.5
29-31 119 13.7 68 57.1
25-28 42 13.8 23 54.8
17-24 31 13.1 13 41.9
[same fine print as the RB data]
The difference between a sturdy WR and a fragile WR seems to be roughly equivalent to the difference between a sturdy RB and a fragile RB. But across all levels of injury history, WRs are more likely to stay healthy than RBs are. Again, no real surprise, but it's nice to be able to attach a numerical estimate to the difference.
Now check out the QBs:
======
1-year
======
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
16 96 12.9 36 37.5
13-15 97 12.0 26 26.8
8-12 71 10.6 17 23.9
======
2-year
======
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
32 34 12.9 15 44.1
29-31 65 12.4 21 32.3
25-28 60 12.6 13 21.7
17-24 43 9.6 10 23.3
[same fine print as the RBs and WRs, but the minimum fantasy point production needed for inclusion was 9 points per game for the 1-year data and 8 points per game for both years for the 2-year data.]
Quarterbacks just flat out shouldn't be expected to play 16 games, except those named Brett Favre. I didn't realize just how grim the situation was. Although from an injury standpoint, it's probably not as grim as it appears here. Since only one QB can play at a time, QBs are probably a lot more likely to lose time due to non-injury reasons than RBs or WRs are. And that is probably skewing these numbers downward a little.
Conclusions
Here is a brief summary of what we've seen here:
Expected Number of Probability of Playing
Player Games This Year 16 Games This Year
-------------------------------------------------------------
Edgerrin James 14 about 50%
Fred Taylor 12 or 13 30 - 35%
Torry Holt 15 65 - 70%
Terry Glenn 13 or 14 40 - 50%
Peyton Manning 13 ? 40 - 50% ?
Chris Chandler 10 to 12 ? 20 - 30% ?
Now don't take this too literally. When I say "Edgerrin James" I really mean "an RB with no recent history of injury." Likewise, "Terry Glenn" is shorthand for "a WR who has been injured quite a bit in the past." (I've got question marks on all the QB estimates because I'm not convinced this is an appropriate way to study them (although I'm not convinced it's not, either).) And of course, every player has his own unique situation that makes him different from the "typical" player who is being assessed here. So this shouldn't be taken as anything other than a rough starting point for your assessments of injury risk.
If the numbers above are about what you would have guessed, then you've got confirmation that your intuition was right on. If not, maybe now you've got something to think about.
http://pro-football-reference.com/articles/iron.htm
Everybody is an injury risk
Football is a violent game. No player -- not Eddie George, not Brett Favre, not Cris Carter -- is immune to the injury bug.
But some players are seemingly greater injury risks than others. You'll read in countless places this preseason that you should be somewhat wary of Fred Taylor and Ricky Williams, among others, because they've been injured in the past. Well, they certainly have been injured in the past -- neither of them has ever played a full season -- but does it necessarily follow that they are more likely to be injured this year? Common sense says yes, but common sense isn't always right. Further, there are numerous counterexamples.
Robert Smith, James Stewart, and Charlie Garner all had giant "Handle With Care" labels stamped on their foreheads last preseason, but all three turned in healthy and productive 2000 campaigns.
On the flip side, Mike Alstott, Marshall Faulk, and Duce Staley had missed a combined total of 4 games in 13 NFL seasons prior to last year, but they all missed time due to injury in 2000.
Of course, it's not hard to point to examples that confirm the common sense viewpoint, either. The aforementioned Fred Taylor and Ricky Williams would be two. Tim Biakabutuka would be another. But proof by example isn't very compelling. We need to look at this systematically.
The main idea is this: find all players who played a certain number of games one year, and then see how many games they played the next year. If the common sense is correct, then players who played 16 games one year (like Edge James) will be more likely to stay healthy the next year than players who played only 13 games (a la Fred Taylor).
Let's first consider the RBs. I looked at 422 RB seasons between 1988 and 1998. I'll show you a line of data and then explain what it means:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
--------------------------
16 233 13.7 111 47.6
Alright, what is all this? This is a summary of the RBs who played in a full 16 games in a given season (that's what the G stands for). There were 233 of them (that's the no. column). AGNY stands for "average games next year." So these 233 backs averaged 13.7 games the year after playing 16. PFS means "played full season" -- this denotes how many of the 233 played a full 16 games the following year. And finally, the 47.6 in the PFS% column tells you that 47.60f all the RBs who played 16 games in one year also played 16 games the next year.
FINE PRINT: the data set consisted of RBs who played at least 8 games and averaged at least 6 fantasy points per game between 1988 and 1998. I threw out any players who retired the next year.
Here is the full set of results:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
--------------------------
16 233 13.7 111 47.6
15 68 12.6 30 44.1
14 39 13.4 11 28.2
13 20 14.4 11 55.0
12 16 10.4 3 18.8
11 11 12.6 4 36.4
10 15 12.8 7 46.7
9 15 13.2 5 33.3
8 5 14.4 3 60.0
To smooth out the bumps, let's break that down into groups:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
16 233 13.7 111 47.6
13-15 127 13.1 52 40.1
8-12 62 12.4 22 35.5
The most important piece of information here is the following: of RBs who played a full season one year, less than half of them played a full season the next year. So that's where the title of the article comes from: Everybody is an injury risk. At least based on this data, you shouldn't bet on any running back to play 16 games this year.
Also note that the expected difference between an iron man (16-game performer) and a injury-prone RB (8-12 games) is just over a game. An iron man has about a 50/50 shot at playing a full season next year, while an injury-prone RB has about a 35hance. That's certainly a significant difference, but not as large as I might have guessed.
This is the point where I typically pause and warn readers not to wager their kids' shoe money on this data. There are a lot of reasons why games played isn't a perfect way to measure health. First, it's possible that a player might have been perfectly healthy, but was just benched. I'm not too worried about this one, actually, because I only included players who were fairly productive when they did play (see the fine print above). Another reason for missed games is suspension, and another problem is my inability to distinguish partial games. Eddie George, for example, was credited with 16 games played in 2000, but in one of those, he was injured after one carry and left the game. Morally, he only played 15 games last year, but this study doesn't account for that. So as usual, this is not a perfect study. You can judge for yourself whether it's better than no study at all.
Aha, you say, but Fred Taylor has repeatedly shown that he can't stay healthy. It's not just that he was hurt last year, but he was hurt the year before that (and so on). Maybe the trend will become more clear if we look at two years instead of just one. So we'll do just that. Here's the breakdown by games played in a two year period:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
32 92 14.0 44 47.8
29-31 102 13.2 48 47.1
25-28 61 12.7 20 32.8
17-24 37 12.6 10 27.0
FINE PRINT: all pairs of RB seasons from 1988-1989 through 1997-1998 in which the player averaged at least 5 fantasy points per game in both years.
The spread is a little wider, but there's still not a game and a half difference between the expectation of an RB with a spotless health record and one who missed several games. Again, note that fewer than half (47.8%) of the iron men were able to play 16 games the next year. Football is a rough game, and running back is a rough position.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the situation is somewhat different for wide receivers. Here is the one-season breakdown:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
16 324 14.5 210 64.8
13-15 95 14.1 49 51.6
8-12 42 12.6 17 40.5
And the two-season data:
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
32 194 14.7 131 67.5
29-31 119 13.7 68 57.1
25-28 42 13.8 23 54.8
17-24 31 13.1 13 41.9
[same fine print as the RB data]
The difference between a sturdy WR and a fragile WR seems to be roughly equivalent to the difference between a sturdy RB and a fragile RB. But across all levels of injury history, WRs are more likely to stay healthy than RBs are. Again, no real surprise, but it's nice to be able to attach a numerical estimate to the difference.
Now check out the QBs:
======
1-year
======
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
16 96 12.9 36 37.5
13-15 97 12.0 26 26.8
8-12 71 10.6 17 23.9
======
2-year
======
G no. AGNY PFS PFS%
-----------------------------
32 34 12.9 15 44.1
29-31 65 12.4 21 32.3
25-28 60 12.6 13 21.7
17-24 43 9.6 10 23.3
[same fine print as the RBs and WRs, but the minimum fantasy point production needed for inclusion was 9 points per game for the 1-year data and 8 points per game for both years for the 2-year data.]
Quarterbacks just flat out shouldn't be expected to play 16 games, except those named Brett Favre. I didn't realize just how grim the situation was. Although from an injury standpoint, it's probably not as grim as it appears here. Since only one QB can play at a time, QBs are probably a lot more likely to lose time due to non-injury reasons than RBs or WRs are. And that is probably skewing these numbers downward a little.
Conclusions
Here is a brief summary of what we've seen here:
Expected Number of Probability of Playing
Player Games This Year 16 Games This Year
-------------------------------------------------------------
Edgerrin James 14 about 50%
Fred Taylor 12 or 13 30 - 35%
Torry Holt 15 65 - 70%
Terry Glenn 13 or 14 40 - 50%
Peyton Manning 13 ? 40 - 50% ?
Chris Chandler 10 to 12 ? 20 - 30% ?
Now don't take this too literally. When I say "Edgerrin James" I really mean "an RB with no recent history of injury." Likewise, "Terry Glenn" is shorthand for "a WR who has been injured quite a bit in the past." (I've got question marks on all the QB estimates because I'm not convinced this is an appropriate way to study them (although I'm not convinced it's not, either).) And of course, every player has his own unique situation that makes him different from the "typical" player who is being assessed here. So this shouldn't be taken as anything other than a rough starting point for your assessments of injury risk.
If the numbers above are about what you would have guessed, then you've got confirmation that your intuition was right on. If not, maybe now you've got something to think about.
Last edited by a moderator:
tandl71
Footballguy
Let's assume something...If the following RBs were off the table at 4.12/5.01--TomlinsonHolmesAlexanderJamesMcAllisterMcGaheeDavisKevin JonesJulius JonesBarberPortisDillonWestbrookRudi JohnsonLewisAhman GreenSteven JacksonMartinJordanBarlowTatum BellTaylorCarnell WilliamsChris Brown--would you consider drafting Larry Johnson as a RB3 over the likes of Ronnie Brown, DeShaun Foster or Thomas Jones? I'd really like to have a RB3 locked up by the early 5th round, because I doubt there will be ANY starters available at the 6.12/7.01 turn.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Unconstructive Bump...Pony Boy?
T
trader jake
Guest
exactly, this is why i selected him late 4th in the zealot masters draft. end of round 4/round 5 the players are mostly interchangeable...so i swung for a home run. i'd rather take my chances with larry johnson here than what some are doing selecting a te in the 3rd, etc
priest didn't play in the fantasy playoffs last season eitherDid you miss this?Unconstructive Bump...Pony Boy?
And please stop PMing me with your drivel about manlihood & how my Dad must feel about me.You had a chance to take this bet, and instead you made excuse after excuse for not taking it until I finally clearly terminated our conversation, after which point you came back to accept.
Now after we get this news about Holmes you actually have the sack to dredge this up? Amazing...
Last edited by a moderator:
Pretty weak Pony Boy, or did you miss this post:Did you miss this?Unconstructive Bump...Pony Boy?And please stop PMing me with your drivel about manlihood & how my Dad must feel about me.You had a chance to take this bet, and instead you made excuse after excuse for not taking it until I finally clearly terminated our conversation, after which point you came back to accept.
Now after we get this news about Holmes you actually have the sack to dredge this up? Amazing...
I have no idea who either or you are, but it's pretty clear TheFanatic excepted your bet, and now you seem to be trying to get out of it.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Way to take it like a man Pony Boy. I called you a punchline earliy on this this thread. Thanks you for proving the pointPretty weak Pony Boy, or did you miss this post:Did you miss this?Unconstructive Bump...Pony Boy?And please stop PMing me with your drivel about manlihood & how my Dad must feel about me.You had a chance to take this bet, and instead you made excuse after excuse for not taking it until I finally clearly terminated our conversation, after which point you came back to accept.
Now after we get this news about Holmes you actually have the sack to dredge this up? Amazing...I have no idea who either or you are, but it's pretty clear TheFanatic excepted your bet, and now you seem to be trying to get out of it.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Pretty weak Pony Boy, or did you miss this post:Did you miss this?Unconstructive Bump...Pony Boy?And please stop PMing me with your drivel about manlihood & how my Dad must feel about me.You had a chance to take this bet, and instead you made excuse after excuse for not taking it until I finally clearly terminated our conversation, after which point you came back to accept.
Now after we get this news about Holmes you actually have the sack to dredge this up? Amazing...I have no idea who either or you are, but it's pretty clear TheFanatic excepted your bet, and now you seem to be trying to get out of it.
TommyGilmore
Footballguy
He still wasn't worth drafting earlier than the 7th-8th round. LJ was quite vulnerable in weeks 3-4 -- he probably got cut in a lot of (smaller) leagues, and could have easily been acquired for mid-level players.Examples: Boldin, Burress, Shockey, Carson Palmer, Ronnie Brown. All taken in the 5th-7th rounds and all tradeable for LJ.
suspected
Footballguy
Took Priest at 1.4 and was planning to handcuff LJ in the fourth, but he was taken one pick before me at 4.8. Was pleased to get Gates however at 4.9. His production (compared to the average TE) has been the difference between winning and losing in 2 games this season. Of course I'd rather have LJ now, but only time will tell if it would have been better to have LJ start for for 1/2 season vs. Gates for a full year.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I drafted him at 4.11 as the 25th RB chosen. He has outperformed his ADP to date, and the future is looking pretty sweet. I look back at that draft and look at the 24 RBs who went before him, and I couldn't be happier with the pick. I also know he wouldn't have made the corner and come back to me at 5.02.
CalBear
Footballguy
That logic makes no sense. There will always be late-round players who overperform and could be traded for earlier-round players; that doesn't mean the early-round players didn't perform as expected. Most of the players taken in the 5th-7th rounds could not have been traded for Larry Johnson; you can't cherry-pick the ones who have done better than expected.I also disagree with your assertion; I offered Kevan Barlow for Johnson to a guy who had just one starting RB after injury and he turned down the trade. With the possible exception of Ronnie Brown once he had a good game, I don't think any LJ owner would have traded him for the guys you list.
C
CrossEyed
Guest
I got him in the 11th round. I can't even believe I let him go that long. But now I'll be riding him, LT2 and Fitz to a championship. 
Last edited:
TommyGilmore
Footballguy
Would you have traded Gates for LJ straight up (3 weeks ago)?
suspected
Footballguy
No, not 3 weeks ago. But last Friday I did offer Gates for LJ straight up and was rejected. At that time Holmes was doubtful for week 9 but still expected to return by the mainstream media. There were internet/FBG rumors that Priest was done, but no media reports that I was aware of.
Edit to add that the LJ owner has never made a trade in 6years so I wasn't too surprised.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinger Ray
Footballguy
IN!
FFFIEND
Footballguy
He was worth taking in my 14 team league. I took him at 4.14 and my team had to survive with other options until last week. Now I can use the unholy forces of LJ and LT on my opponents who passed on LJ. Muwhahahahaha!!!!edit add: There is no way I would give you LJ for any of that crew you just listed. Now that Holmes is down. LJ is the 2nd best fantasy player right behind LT.
Last edited by a moderator:
TommyGilmore
Footballguy
Willie Parker is also outperforming his ADP, but no one here at FBGuys ever said you should spend a 5th round pick on him.Besides, Johnson wasn't outperforming his ADP after Week 4. He could have been acquired quite cheaply at that time. Those who spent a 5th round pick on LJ probably could have acquired him in Week 4/5 for a player they drafted in rounds 7-10.
That's great that you feel you got value by drafting him at 4.11. But I would have much rather spent that 4th round pick on a WR (Boldin/DJax/SSmith/Driver) and then taken my chances on Johnson in the 6th or 7th round.
CalBear
Footballguy
You really are stretching your point, which was wrong to begin with.
Larry Johnson performed as the #15 RB so far in a backup role. That means that, even ignoring the Priest Holmes situation, he was worth a second-round selection based solely on his performance with Priest in the lineup. From here out, he is likely going to produce as a top-5 RB, and therefore is worth a high first-round selection.
Here is the entire list of fifth-round selections from Antsports:
Michael Clayton
Trent Green
Fred Taylor
Ronnie Brown
Kerry Collins
Donald Driver
Jerry Porter
Laverneus Coles
Larry Fitzgerald
Brett Favre
Kevan Barlow
Larry Johnson has outperformed every one of these players, with Priest Holmes still in the lineup. There isn't a single player on that list that anyone would have traded LJ for.
I wasn't a big fan of drafting LJ in the fifth round before the season, but to try to claim that he wasn't worth that selection, looking at his performance so far and his potential for the second half of the season, is simply absurd.
Larry Johnson performed as the #15 RB so far in a backup role. That means that, even ignoring the Priest Holmes situation, he was worth a second-round selection based solely on his performance with Priest in the lineup. From here out, he is likely going to produce as a top-5 RB, and therefore is worth a high first-round selection.
Here is the entire list of fifth-round selections from Antsports:
Michael Clayton
Trent Green
Fred Taylor
Ronnie Brown
Kerry Collins
Donald Driver
Jerry Porter
Laverneus Coles
Larry Fitzgerald
Brett Favre
Kevan Barlow
Larry Johnson has outperformed every one of these players, with Priest Holmes still in the lineup. There isn't a single player on that list that anyone would have traded LJ for.
I wasn't a big fan of drafting LJ in the fifth round before the season, but to try to claim that he wasn't worth that selection, looking at his performance so far and his potential for the second half of the season, is simply absurd.
schooner44
Footballguy
I didn't draft either but in my main league the owner who drafted LJ, drafted him at 4.06 in a 12 man team and he did not have Priest.
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
I took him in the 2nd round of a keeper league where you keep 5.. I told the Priest owner in round 1 you better take LJ or you won't get another shot at him... he passed and I took him round 2.. 
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
Sig. bets are useless unless the loser Ponies Up and does it. Are you sure you didn't accept the bet Pony?I'll say this though, sig. bets are usually more effective when before the bet happens, the sig. has been created.
Yeah, I'm sure.You've seen me eat crow many times before, and I have no problem taking my medicine when I'm wrong. The Fanatic had plenty of opportunity to take my offered bet & decided not to until after we had clearly ceased the discussion. I wasn't anywhere around when he made his "acceptance".
I heard no word from him outside of this thread until he decided to PM me relentlessly yesterday throwing numerous personal slurs around. I don't expect any less from him. If I had made the bet, I'd accept the loss - shoot, I might even cave on this one even though no bet was made if he'd act like a decent human being just for the fun of it - but I'm not going to give in when no bet was made given the number & vitriol of his PMs to me. Reading his PMs, I'd have expected that he's a middle school kid with anger management issues who isn't being monitored in computer class.
fatness
Footballguy
14-team dynasty league: drafted him 2.0212-team redraft league: drafted him 5.0112-team redraft league: drafted him 5.0612-team redraft league: he went at 5.05, I wanted him at 5.0812-team keeper league: drafted him 7.02Did not draft Holmes in any league.
Last edited by a moderator:
TommyGilmore
Footballguy
In one of my leagues, he was the #32 RB after Week 4; in another league, he was #30.I drafted LJ in the 8th round in a 10-team league and I couldn't give him away after Week 4. Meanwhile, I traded for him in a 12-team league and all it cost me was a couple WR3s.Like I said: if someone drafted him high, and it worked for you, that's great. But I don't think that risk was worth it. In most leagues, you didn't need to spend so much to get him.
Last edited by a moderator:
TommyGilmore
Footballguy
Wow, what a flip-flop from what you said earlier this year:
CalBear
Footballguy
As I said in this very thread, I didn't like the idea of drafting Johnson in the fifth. If there's a similar situation next year with Anderson/Bell, I still won't like it.But unlike you, I'm not going to try to argue with reality. He was well worth the draft position, even before Holmes went down, based on the actual production he had on the field. He has equalled or outperformed nearly all of the running backs taken after him, and many of the backs selected earlier, even if you take the intellectually dishonest position of comparing to his low point of the season (there's nothing significant about week 4).
Last edited by a moderator:
TheFanatic
Footballguy
First of all, I sent three PM's to this guy. The first one was a link to this thread asking him how he liked his crow. Full of Vitrol.
He responded by saying that he had big brass pair of something or other and called me a wuss for not accepting the sig bet. But I'm being the jerk?!?!?! It was on at that point. I responded with a quote from one of my posts that showed clearly where I accepted the bet and mocked his reading comprehension abilities as well as the way in which he was handling the loss. The last one I sent was a PM stating that if he can't change his sig, I'll change mine and show the FBG board what kind of man Pony Boy really as well as to point out that I called him a punchline on these boards early onin this thread and how much I appreciate him proving the point. 3 PM's is incessant? Not only do you need to work on your reading comprehension, but your vocabulary is a little soft too...And I love the line about not being anywhere near the thread when I accepted the bet. Pony Boy posted this at 7:39 on July 11th:
Again, I'm the jerk here? Love the weak attempts at a dig on me.
Not more than 40 minutes later at 8:20 that same day I posted this:
Long gone? 40 minutes? Hmmmmm
I'm not buying it.And I'm pretty sure you accepted the bet in the post before mine. But I love the ploy. Throw down a bet, and when it's accepted you never post in the thread again and feign ignorance of the bet being accepted. BravoI guess you really live up to your name, at least the second half of it.
I really don't care what you are or aren't buying. Please stop PMing me. Your stalking is disconcerting.Long gone? 40 minutes? Hmmmmm
TheFanatic
Footballguy
That's fine. I'll just keep this lovely sig that makes you look like the spineless tool that you are. You lost the sig bet and now you are backing out. It's as simple as that. And when I pointed it out YOU started the verbal warfare and I finished it. I'm sorry that my barbs hit close to home, but I can understand how that could happen. You can't honor a bet like a man and you can't take a shot like a man. Sure you can give them, you just can't take them. Like I said in one of those PM's, I'm sure your dad is really proud of the "man" you've grown up to beI really don't care what you are or aren't buying. Please stop PMing me. Your stalking is disconcerting.Long gone? 40 minutes? Hmmmmm
And I'm pretty sure you accepted the bet in the post before mine. But I love the ploy. Throw down a bet, and when it's accepted you never post in the thread again and feign ignorance of the bet being accepted. Bravo
I guess you really live up to your name, at least the second half of it.
Oh, and here's another one genius, if you don't like getting PM's from me stop your whining about it and block them you tard. Here's a hint because I know you need it: PM Buddies/Block List (look in your controls 
)What's the over/under on this thread getting locked? I'm thinking soon, but my new sig will last forever. Have a great life Pony.....Er......I guess I should just say BOY because the second half of your nick is much more appropriate to who you are.
Note to Joe, I know I'm not being excellent to BOY here, but I think I'm at least a little justified. Brutha backed out on a bet and yanked his own chain and dissed me in the process. Suspend me from the site for a little while, I'm fine with that. Sometimes you just gotta stand up for what you believe in. This is one of those times.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
That's fine. I'll just keep this lovely sig that makes you look like the spineless tool that you are. You lost the sig bet and now you are backing out. It's as simple as that. And when I pointed it out YOU started the verbal warfare and I finished it. I'm sorry that my barbs hit close to home, but I can understand how that could happen. You can't honor a bet like a man and you can't take a shot like a man. Sure you can give them, you just can't take them. Like I said in one of those PM's, I'm sure your dad is really proud of the "man" you've grown up to beI really don't care what you are or aren't buying. Please stop PMing me. Your stalking is disconcerting.Long gone? 40 minutes? Hmmmmm
And I'm pretty sure you accepted the bet in the post before mine. But I love the ploy. Throw down a bet, and when it's accepted you never post in the thread again and feign ignorance of the bet being accepted. Bravo
I guess you really live up to your name, at least the second half of it.
What's the over/under on this thread getting locked? I'm thinking soon, but my new sig will last forever. Have a great life Pony.....Er......I guess I should just say BOY because the second half of your nick is much more appropriate to who you are.
Note to Joe, I know I'm not being excellent to BOY here, but I think I'm at least a little justified. Brutha backed out on a bet and yanked his own chain and dissed me in the process. Suspend me from the site for a little while, I'm fine with that. Sometimes you just gotta stand up for what you believe in. This is one of those times.
Taking a shot at a guy's relationship with his Dad over fantasy football? Pathetic. Good call on Priest but very disappointing sportsmanship.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
When the guy backed out of a bet it's obvious that his father didn't raise someone who became a man. Like I said, the latter half of this guy's nick is quite appropriate....That's fine. I'll just keep this lovely sig that makes you look like the spineless tool that you are. You lost the sig bet and now you are backing out. It's as simple as that. And when I pointed it out YOU started the verbal warfare and I finished it. I'm sorry that my barbs hit close to home, but I can understand how that could happen. You can't honor a bet like a man and you can't take a shot like a man. Sure you can give them, you just can't take them. Like I said in one of those PM's, I'm sure your dad is really proud of the "man" you've grown up to beI really don't care what you are or aren't buying. Please stop PMing me. Your stalking is disconcerting.Long gone? 40 minutes? Hmmmmm
And I'm pretty sure you accepted the bet in the post before mine. But I love the ploy. Throw down a bet, and when it's accepted you never post in the thread again and feign ignorance of the bet being accepted. Bravo
I guess you really live up to your name, at least the second half of it.
What's the over/under on this thread getting locked? I'm thinking soon, but my new sig will last forever. Have a great life Pony.....Er......I guess I should just say BOY because the second half of your nick is much more appropriate to who you are.
Note to Joe, I know I'm not being excellent to BOY here, but I think I'm at least a little justified. Brutha backed out on a bet and yanked his own chain and dissed me in the process. Suspend me from the site for a little while, I'm fine with that. Sometimes you just gotta stand up for what you believe in. This is one of those times.
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
OUCH!!!
Raiders Fan
The Black Hole
I read all the posts in this thread and he accepted your bet.. I am shocked you are arguing it.. I don't see how you have any leg to stand on.. I know your very active on the boards so just cause you left doesn't mean you wouldn't have checked in later to see.I really don't care what you are or aren't buying. Please stop PMing me. Your stalking is disconcerting.Long gone? 40 minutes? Hmmmmm
And I'm pretty sure you accepted the bet in the post before mine. But I love the ploy. Throw down a bet, and when it's accepted you never post in the thread again and feign ignorance of the bet being accepted. Bravo
I guess you really live up to your name, at least the second half of it.
Try out this scenarioThat's fine. I'll just keep this lovely sig that makes you look like the spineless tool that you are. You lost the sig bet and now you are backing out. It's as simple as that. And when I pointed it out YOU started the verbal warfare and I finished it. I'm sorry that my barbs hit close to home, but I can understand how that could happen. You can't honor a bet like a man and you can't take a shot like a man. Sure you can give them, you just can't take them. Like I said in one of those PM's, I'm sure your dad is really proud of the "man" you've grown up to be
Oh, and here's another one genius, if you don't like getting PM's from me stop your whining about it and block them you tard. Here's a hint because I know you need it: PM Buddies/Block List (look in your controls
What's the over/under on this thread getting locked? I'm thinking soon, but my new sig will last forever. Have a great life Pony.....Er......I guess I should just say BOY because the second half of your nick is much more appropriate to who you are.
Note to Joe, I know I'm not being excellent to BOY here, but I think I'm at least a little justified. Brutha backed out on a bet and yanked his own chain and dissed me in the process. Suspend me from the site for a little while, I'm fine with that. Sometimes you just gotta stand up for what you believe in. This is one of those times.
B & TF are in a bar, TF calling people idiots like he did earlier in this thread for liking Holmes to finish top 5 & loudly challenging all comers to bet him $100 that Holmes won't finish top 5 in a standard scoring system.PB walks up & says: I'll do it if you'll give RBs points for receptions.
TF: Hey, that's no fair. No way man.
PB: Well, that's the bet I'm offering, loud mouth. Take it or leave it.
TF: No way, I said it was unfair. My conditions or nothing, idiot.
PB: Okay, then we don't have a bet. BTW, Holmes actually gets hurt in a ppr league because it helps some other RBs more.
PB then walks out of the bar. PB & TF don't see each other anywhere for another 2 months.
TF shows up on PB's 2 months later after Holmes gets hurt and is put on IR.
TF: (Using a lot of langauage that I can't post here) Hey, man, 40 minutes after you walked out of the bar I took your bet. You owe me $100. Pay up. (Significant more language that I can't post here).
The he shows up another 6 times that day on PB's door using the same or worse language & name calling, expecting to be paid $100.
************************************************
So, do you pay this guy - who has obviously decided to now become a foul mouthed & offensive stalker - his $100?
If this board thinks I'm a welcher in this situation, I'll concede and let him give me a sig.
That doesn't mean anything about what you think, TF. You have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt exactly what you are. I'm quite frankly amazed that you're even posting here after all of your crap that you're spewing here on the board, much less the profane & insulting things that you repeatedly PMed me.
I called someone a dunce, and I got banned for 1 week. If something that banal got me a timeout for a week, I find it absolutely amazing that you have the ability to spout your fantastic yarn & your abusive crap here, but it's not my board. You can bray all you want for all I care. It doesn't hurt me a bit that you're such a brave internet hard ###. You & I both know the truth. That's all I care about.
Last edited by a moderator:
hxperson
Footballguy
That's fine. I'll just keep this lovely sig that makes you look like the spineless tool that you are. You lost the sig bet and now you are backing out. It's as simple as that. And when I pointed it out YOU started the verbal warfare and I finished it. I'm sorry that my barbs hit close to home, but I can understand how that could happen. You can't honor a bet like a man and you can't take a shot like a man. Sure you can give them, you just can't take them. Like I said in one of those PM's, I'm sure your dad is really proud of the "man" you've grown up to be
Oh, and here's another one genius, if you don't like getting PM's from me stop your whining about it and block them you tard. Here's a hint because I know you need it: PM Buddies/Block List (look in your controls
What's the over/under on this thread getting locked? I'm thinking soon, but my new sig will last forever. Have a great life Pony.....Er......I guess I should just say BOY because the second half of your nick is much more appropriate to who you are.
Note to Joe, I know I'm not being excellent to BOY here, but I think I'm at least a little justified. Brutha backed out on a bet and yanked his own chain and dissed me in the process. Suspend me from the site for a little while, I'm fine with that. Sometimes you just gotta stand up for what you believe in. This is one of those times.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
I have 3 issues with this load that BOY is putting out here
I guess lying and casting aspersions about someone’s integrity are not at all beneath him. I love how no one, not a single person, has come on here and said that you are justified, BOY. They have a term for people who think the rest of the world is nuts and that s/he is the only sane one – Paranoid Schizophrenia. But you’re right, we both know the truth as does the rest of the board…..
First, the problem with this statement is that you don’t leave this bar. You are in this bar every single day like I am. To try to push that you never went back into the thread is a little hard to believe. Second, BOY accepted the bet in his last post with the rules I stipulated, so I don’t want to hear this garbage about the bet not being accepted. You accepted the bet and less than an hour later I agreed.
Third, not in my PM’s nor in this thread did I ever use any foul language. The digs may have been close to home, but in now way did I use any language that can’t be posted here. I took shots, but I didn’t take any profane shots. As honorable and upstanding as BOY is,
I guess lying and casting aspersions about someone’s integrity are not at all beneath him. I love how no one, not a single person, has come on here and said that you are justified, BOY. They have a term for people who think the rest of the world is nuts and that s/he is the only sane one – Paranoid Schizophrenia. But you’re right, we both know the truth as does the rest of the board…..
