HUGE props to Yudkin! (1 Viewer)

[Judge Smails]

I was sitting in the dreaded 3 slot (OK, maybe not that dreaded). Knew that LT was going one, and after the #2 owner came to his senses and declared he was drafting SA instead of Peyton, I was torn between Priest/LJ and Edge. After reading Yudkin's post and analyzing the Priest/LJ combo, I took Priest #3 and LJ in the 5th round. Don't get me wrong, made a lot of other good picks, but without a doubt LJ just carried my squad in the playoffs. There was a lot of debate back and forth on the benefits/pitfalls of taking the combo, even it meant a 5th round pick (12 team redraft) for LJ. Believers took a lot of abuse the first 5-6 weeks, but many of us are holding the trophy now. Yudkin's analysis was spot on - muchas gracias David!

 

[joey]

I was sitting in the dreaded 3 slot (OK, maybe not that dreaded). Knew that LT was going one, and after the #2 owner came to his senses and declared he was drafting SA instead of Peyton, I was torn between Priest/LJ and Edge. After reading Yudkin's post and analyzing the Priest/LJ combo, I took Priest #3 and LJ in the 5th round. Don't get me wrong, made a lot of other good picks, but without a doubt LJ just carried my squad in the playoffs.

There was a lot of debate back and forth on the benefits/pitfalls of taking the combo, even it meant a 5th round pick (12 team redraft) for LJ. Believers took a lot of abuse the first 5-6 weeks, but many of us are holding the trophy now. Yudkin's analysis was spot on - muchas gracias David!

I did exactly the same thing in 2 of the leagues I'm in and I won it all inone league and came in 2nd in the other. In the 3rd league I'm in, the

guy who drafted Priest didn't handcuff him with LJ (he was finally taken

in the early 7th round by another team *right before* I was going to grab

him) and that guy missed the playoffs after starting the season VERY strong

with Hasselbeck/Priest/TJones/CJohnson/THolt/JSmith as his core team. A simple

handcuff in the 5th or 6th would've cost him Hasselbeck or JSmith but would've

won him the title. btw, the team that won it all in my 3rd league was the guy who

drafted LJ in the 7th.

I firmly supported the Priest /LJ Handcuff Theory and the $$$ in my pocket

is proof enough.

 

[Fantasy Man]

Far fewer Priest/LJ combo drafters would have won championships (myself included) if Priest didn't get hurt and they continued to split time.It ended up being a great draft strategy only because one of them got hurt.

 

[David Yudkin]

 

[nerangers]

Far fewer Priest/LJ combo drafters would have won championships (myself included) if Priest didn't get hurt and they continued to split time.

It ended up being a great draft strategy only because one of them got hurt.

Not so sure about that...even splitting time, they were both getting chances at TDs. That combo was worthy of playing both.

 

[Da Guru]

I was sitting in the dreaded 3 slot (OK, maybe not that dreaded). Knew that LT was going one, and after the #2 owner came to his senses and declared he was drafting SA instead of Peyton, I was torn between Priest/LJ and Edge. After reading Yudkin's post and analyzing the Priest/LJ combo, I took Priest #3 and LJ in the 5th round. Don't get me wrong, made a lot of other good picks, but without a doubt LJ just carried my squad in the playoffs.

There was a lot of debate back and forth on the benefits/pitfalls of taking the combo, even it meant a 5th round pick (12 team redraft) for LJ. Believers took a lot of abuse the first 5-6 weeks, but many of us are holding the trophy now. Yudkin's analysis was spot on - muchas gracias David!

Would you feel the same if someone scooped LJ in front of you?

 

[iSnitch]

David seems to spend most of his time lurking in the shadows of fbg's...but every now and then he pops out of the sewers to hurl some statistics at you and scurries back into the darkness.

 

[Solidsteel Rats]

I was sitting in the dreaded 3 slot (OK, maybe not that dreaded).  Knew that LT was going one, and after the #2 owner came to his senses and declared he was drafting SA instead of Peyton, I was torn between Priest/LJ and Edge.  After reading Yudkin's post and analyzing the Priest/LJ combo, I took Priest #3 and LJ in the 5th round.  Don't get me wrong, made a lot of other good picks, but without a doubt LJ just carried my squad in the playoffs. 

There was a lot of debate back and forth on the benefits/pitfalls of taking the combo, even it meant a 5th round pick (12 team redraft) for LJ.  Believers took a lot of abuse the first 5-6 weeks, but many of us are holding the trophy now.  Yudkin's analysis was spot on - muchas gracias David!

Would you feel the same if someone scooped LJ in front of you?

I was a believer that Priest would get hurt and took LJ before the Priest owner..results I'm the champ with the $$$.

 

[Wu-banger]

I was sitting in the dreaded 3 slot (OK, maybe not that dreaded). Knew that LT was going one, and after the #2 owner came to his senses and declared he was drafting SA instead of Peyton, I was torn between Priest/LJ and Edge. After reading Yudkin's post and analyzing the Priest/LJ combo, I took Priest #3 and LJ in the 5th round. Don't get me wrong, made a lot of other good picks, but without a doubt LJ just carried my squad in the playoffs.

There was a lot of debate back and forth on the benefits/pitfalls of taking the combo, even it meant a 5th round pick (12 team redraft) for LJ. Believers took a lot of abuse the first 5-6 weeks, but many of us are holding the trophy now. Yudkin's analysis was spot on - muchas gracias David!

so in hindsight the correct moved would have been taking Edge in with the 3rd pick and then LJ... would have made for a much nicer season.I am/was on the "Avoid Priest, take LJ " bandwagon before the season and it paid$$$$ off big time in every league I could pull it off.

 

[jetpack]

Went Holmes in 1st, LJ in 5th. Sandwitched in Harrison, Holt and the abysmal Andre Johnson. Lost in the championship game (third championship game in six years) only because I didn't go with my gut and start Parker at Cleveland but went with Dunn instead. Still made a nice profit this year so I'm happy. I'm one very satisfied footballguys customer.

 

[Da Guru]

I was sitting in the dreaded 3 slot (OK, maybe not that dreaded).  Knew that LT was going one, and after the #2 owner came to his senses and declared he was drafting SA instead of Peyton, I was torn between Priest/LJ and Edge.  After reading Yudkin's post and analyzing the Priest/LJ combo, I took Priest #3 and LJ in the 5th round.   Don't get me wrong, made a lot of other good picks, but without a doubt LJ just carried my squad in the playoffs. 

There was a lot of debate back and forth on the benefits/pitfalls of taking the combo, even it meant a 5th round pick (12 team redraft) for LJ.  Believers took a lot of abuse the first 5-6 weeks, but many of us are holding the trophy now.  Yudkin's analysis was spot on - muchas gracias David!

Would you feel the same if someone scooped LJ in front of you?

I was a believer that Priest would get hurt and took LJ before the Priest owner..results I'm the champ with the $$$. As did I!!

 

[GuppiesDraftManningNumberOne]

Yes, that strategy was much better than taking Edge/LJ or Portis/LJ or Tiki/LJ

 

[Judge Smails]

Yes, that strategy was much better than taking Edge/LJ or Portis/LJ or Tiki/LJ

Sure Ms. Cleo, that would have been better. Though, even though a lot of smack was spitted about scooping LJ before the Priest owner, didn't hear a lot of people having the nads to do it before round 5. And sort of laughable that people are talking about the strategy only worked because Priest got injured. Wasn't the whole theory that the KC backfield would get 27+ TD's, and there was a high likelihood that Priest would get injured at some point? And please send league signup info if you have a money league and got LJ in the 7th-11th round like some of these short bus leagues..

 

[Snotbubbles]

I had the 1.03. 1.01 was LT. 1.02 was Peyton. I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th. Easily won my league. If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

 

[David Yudkin]

I had the 1.03. 1.01 was LT. 1.02 was Peyton. I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th. Easily won my league.

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

I'll have more to say about this in a later thread, but for those that felt LJ was a good pickup in the 4th or 5th would have been disappointed had Holmes stayed healthier for another month of the season.

 

[P Boy]

I'll take my lumps. I am a dynasty Holmes/Johnson owner, and at the beginning the split between the 2 guys was really hurting my production and I got off to a terrible start. However, after things shook out & Holmes started getting his solid numbers until he got hurt, and then Johnson's huge numbers after the injury, my season turned around.Good call on the advice, David. I was wrong in my assessment.

 

[stevejohnson]

LJ went in the second round of my keeper league. The Holmes owner didn't even get a sniff at that "combo". I guess that's what happens when you play in a league where people know what they are doing....

 

[TommyGilmore]

so in hindsight the correct moved would have been taking Edge in with the 3rd pick and then LJ... would have made for a much nicer season.

Exactly. Seems like everyone looked at this from the "Should I draft LJ with Priest?" standpoint, when in fact they should have looked at it as, "Should I draft Priest with LJ?".The people who drafted the Priest/LJ combo were much worse off than those who drafted Edge/LJ, Alexander/LJ, LT/LJ, etc.

 

[Gravity]

From what I recall, everyone and his little sister was saying if you grab Holmes you need to grab LJ in the 4th or 5th. Yudkin's proposal was that starting both of them was a viable strategy (and thus the 4th or 5th round pick on a backup RB was worth it).And that turned out to be incorrect. Starting both Priest and LJ hurt owners every week but the 1st.Not bashing Yudkin as I liked his thinking - just pointing out what occurred.

 

[redman]

You'll never be able to eat dinner at a restaurant unmolested by autograph seekers again.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

 

[redman]

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

Paging George Jefferson . . .

 

[David Yudkin]

From what I recall, everyone and his little sister was saying if you grab Holmes you need to grab LJ in the 4th or 5th. Yudkin's proposal was that starting both of them was a viable strategy (and thus the 4th or 5th round pick on a backup RB was worth it).

And that turned out to be incorrect. Starting both Priest and LJ hurt owners every week but the 1st.

Not bashing Yudkin as I liked his thinking - just pointing out what occurred.

IIRC, starting Holmes and LJ became more of an afterthought after it became evident that neither one would be getting a huge majority.The Holmes/LJ strategy, as I saw it, was a program in and of itself. The logic was to lock up the Chiefs ground game, which if you got both of them you effectively did.

I outlined numerous times the potential outcomes based on a breakdown of different carry percentages and injuries.

It's easy to reflect now that picking up a stud early and pairing him with LJ in the 4th or 5th was a good move, but if Holmes lasted longer than he did these same people would be arguing that Johnson was a wasted pick.

The whole mantra to Holmes/Johnson was that you pretty much locked up a lot of fantasy points that were going to be generated from one NFL franchise. Thus the insurance end of the proposition. As long as one or the other was a go to guy, your teams would score in buckets.

If both shared the workload, I mentioned that you might need to start both guys to get the same total as the two of them, but it was still worth considering. But I also said that the guy getting the large majority was the guy to keep starting.

I also advised to follow things closely and decide for yourself how the team was using them and adjust accordingly.

I don't think the strategy was a home run, but I don't think it was a disaster either.

 

[Family Matters]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

 

[David Yudkin]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

Since this thread started on giving props to, well, me, I don't want to hijack it.However, I cannot agree with your assessment on stockpiling later round RB in the hopes that some of them turn into something.

Looking at Weeks 15 & 16 this year (when the majority of leagues have their fantasy playoffs), there were 15 RB that scored 10 or more points in one of those games THAT WERE NOT STARTERS ON OPENING DAY (standard scoring). For those that missed it . . . that was F-I-F-T-E-E-N running backs.

So maybe it was a coincidence this year . . . IN 2004 THERE WERE S-I-X-T-E-E-N running backs that scored at least 10 points either of those 2 playoff weeks tthat were not originally starters on opening day.

THAT'S why people stockpile RB or search for help later on. That's almost half the NFL teams that were redistributing the RB workload to another RB at the end of the season. It's all about scoring in the fantasy playoffs. What good did Edge do me in the title game this year? Not much.

 

[Judge Smails]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

Good point. I did have to scramble after Westbrook went down, Moats gave me a couple of good weeks, but every other back I lined up for the playoff run (Rhodes, Henry, M. Barber, etc) gave me squat. Relying on backups, even with projected good matchups, is pretty iffy. This was an interesting year. Quarterbacks didn't win any SuperBowls. I felt comfortable with a Jake Delhomme led QBBC squad against Manning, Palmer, etc. IMHO, QB's were almost a non-factor this year. As long as you had a serviceable top 12 type guy you were generally OK. Nobody threw for 50 TD's this year. RB's were a different story. Huge drop-off in production after SA, LJ, Tiki, LT (though obvious injury hurt him late), then to Portis/Edge. Guys afterwards were very hit and miss, low TD #'s. WR's were huge this year, if you were right on Steve Smith, Santana Moss, Fitz, Boldin, etc you were well on your way, and if mired with the likes of Andre Johnson, Drew Bennett, Randy Moss, etc you were in big trouble.Overall, RB's still proved most vital, especialy come playoff time. Guys with studs like SA, LJ or Tiki won the majority of Superbowls I'd be willing to bet..

 

[squistion]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Well, yes, it was pretty much a pick that was dependent on an injury to Holmes, although as I recall the way David analyzed it, worst case scenario was that LJ would probably put up numbers that would equal a mediocre #2 pick.I grabbed LJ at 7.2 (I have SA) based on that, after the Holmes owner passed and figured that even if I got nothing out of it, the upside would be worth it, as it turned out to be. It is one of those picks that either make you look like a genius or an idiot depending on how things turn out.

 

[Family Matters]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

Since this thread started on giving props to, well, me, I don't want to hijack it.However, I cannot agree with your assessment on stockpiling later round RB in the hopes that some of them turn into something.

Looking at Weeks 15 & 16 this year (when the majority of leagues have their fantasy playoffs), there were 15 RB that scored 10 or more points in one of those games THAT WERE NOT STARTERS ON OPENING DAY (standard scoring). For those that missed it . . . that was F-I-F-T-E-E-N running backs.

So maybe it was a coincidence this year . . . IN 2004 THERE WERE S-I-X-T-E-E-N running backs that scored at least 10 points either of those 2 playoff weeks tthat were not originally starters on opening day.

THAT'S why people stockpile RB or search for help later on. That's almost half the NFL teams that were redistributing the RB workload to another RB at the end of the season. It's all about scoring in the fantasy playoffs. What good did Edge do me in the title game this year? Not much.

And that's fine so long as you make the playoffs to begin with. I rarely see a team make the playoffs using the stud WR strategy. It requires getting lucky for your picks to pay off. If you've waited until week 16 to utilize those picks, I doubt you're in the playoffs anyway. Maybe a start 1 RB league you could pull this off but in start 2, too much chance for my blood.Edit: want to add props to Yuds. Your analysis on the Holmes/LJ combo was dead on. It was one of the best posted discussions of the season.

 

[ericttspikes]

I didn't believe in the Priest/LJ handcuff. If anybody thought Priest wouldn't make it through another season, he was a wasted 1st round pick. I snagged LJ in 3 out of my 4 drafts in RD 4, snipping the Priest owner in every one. Priest went RD 1 in all. As someone pointed out, that may be percieved as a huge gamble, and questionable pick, or just plain stoopid. But LJ had some decent point totals even with Priest in there early, not as huge, but certainly better than many full time RBs out there not named Tomlinson or Alexander. I think he would of surpased many backs who went round 4 or later even if he played second fiddle all year. He probably would of even bestted a bunch of backs taken ahead of him like Kevin Jones, Julius Jones, McGahee and Jamal Lewis to name a few. My theory was that in RD 4 LJ was a steal regardless of Priest, and the upside was HUGE if/when Priest went down.The fact that Priest has only played 1 full season in the previous 3 sealed it for me. Go WR early, let the RB lemmings have their fun and grab LJ. I was kind of suprised Priest went down so early, and really thought he would have troubles with the hip, not the freaky spine problem. So yes, LJ owners got lucky, but they also got a big time payout for laying their stones on the table and reaching for him so early. FF is about gambling, and LJ was one that paid up big time.

 

[ericttspikes]

I had the 1.03. 1.01 was LT. 1.02 was Peyton. I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th. Easily won my league.

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

I agree to a point, but a TON of "sure thing" picks bust every year. I personally don't believe there is a proven strategy. I don't believe in the take RBs at any cost strategy. I usually just grade talent and take the best player. As stated, a part time LJ in my opinion was as valuble to me in the 4th than almost any other back I had graded, with an upside with no equal. I took Portis in 02 in the 5th with the same rationale. As Joe pointed out, gambles like that can mean the difference in winning your league, it also makes it more fun IMO than drafting with the herd.

 

[Family Matters]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

I agree to a point, but a TON of "sure thing" picks bust every year. I personally don't believe there is a proven strategy. I don't believe in the take RBs at any cost strategy. I usually just grade talent and take the best player. As stated, a part time LJ in my opinion was as valuble to me in the 4th than almost any other back I had graded, with an upside with no equal. I took Portis in 02 in the 5th with the same rationale. As Joe pointed out, gambles like that can mean the difference in winning your league, it also makes it more fun IMO than drafting with the herd.

Interesting comments. To say a "ton" of sure picks bust every year is probably stretching reality a bit. It does happen every year but it is usually a minority of good players, not eactly what I would label as a "ton". Just makes it seem like it's a majority of players that bust. When coupled with the next comment of "I don't believe there is a proven strategy", you get the impression even more so. I think there are many that would disagree with you on that. Drafting good RB's has always been a key to winning consistently. It doesn't pan out in every league but it sure does in most of them. Personally it has helped me to 9 championships so far. Any other strategies I've tried have yet to yield a championship. So I for one would say yes there is a proven startegy for winning.

 

[Mathematics]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

Great post Joe. One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods. We see guys post how they will make the "shark" play and go stud WR and grab back up RB's waiting for the injury to propell them to the championship. I have won all my championships beating guys that "gamble". I still am amazed how many use this approach.

I agree to a point, but a TON of "sure thing" picks bust every year. I personally don't believe there is a proven strategy. I don't believe in the take RBs at any cost strategy. I usually just grade talent and take the best player. As stated, a part time LJ in my opinion was as valuble to me in the 4th than almost any other back I had graded, with an upside with no equal. I took Portis in 02 in the 5th with the same rationale. As Joe pointed out, gambles like that can mean the difference in winning your league, it also makes it more fun IMO than drafting with the herd.

There are many strategies to win a fantasy championship. Some stockpile rb's, some take stud rb's and so on. I took LJ in the 5th in my main league after taking Edge, Dillon and Cadillac (in the 1st, 2nd and 4th rds). I still thought Preist would get injured and saw LJ as my ticket to the title in a league where I have gotten to the playoffs with good rb's, but never won the title game because I didn't have the best rb. We all knew LJ would be a top 5 rb if Priest got injured and some of us wanted to take this risk and win the championship this way. When I took LJ, I thought I either made the best pick ever or just wasted a 5th round pick. Some gambles pay off bigtime, but i made sure I protected myself with other starting rb's. I think LJ in the 5th was more valuable (even if Priest didn't get injured) than Barlow, Foster, C Brown, Bennett, Arrington, Bell, etc. These were the starting rb's taken around the time LJ was grabbed. I took my chances with LJ over those bums and it won me a couple leagues.

 

[ericttspikes]

I agree to a point, but a TON of "sure thing" picks bust every year. I personally don't believe there is a proven strategy. I don't believe in the take RBs at any cost strategy. I usually just grade talent and take the best player. As stated, a part time LJ in my opinion was as valuble to me in the 4th than almost any other back I had graded, with an upside with no equal. I took Portis in 02 in the 5th with the same rationale. As Joe pointed out, gambles like that can mean the difference in winning your league, it also makes it more fun IMO than drafting with the herd.

Interesting comments. To say a "ton" of sure picks bust every year is probably stretching reality a bit. It does happen every year but it is usually a minority of good players, not eactly what I would label as a "ton". Just makes it seem like it's a majority of players that bust. When coupled with the next comment of "I don't believe there is a proven strategy", you get the impression even more so. I think there are many that would disagree with you on that. Drafting good RB's has always been a key to winning consistently. It doesn't pan out in every league but it sure does in most of them. Personally it has helped me to 9 championships so far. Any other strategies I've tried have yet to yield a championship. So I for one would say yes there is a proven startegy for winning.

Fair enough, you have a system that works. I find luck and injuries play too much into FF for me to believe in systems.Here's a look at part of the top 300. I count 20 out of the top 31 here to be busts or at the very least very dissapointing for a 1-3 rounder, that is a lot IMO.

LaDainian Tomlinson SD/10

Shaun Alexander Sea/8

Priest Holmes KC/5

Edgerrin James Ind/8

Deuce McAllister NO/10

Willis McGahee Buf/9

Domanick Davis Hou/3

Peyton Manning Ind/8

Randy Moss Oak/5

Kevin Jones Det/3

Julius Jones Dal/9

Tiki Barber NYG/5

Clinton Portis Was/3

Corey Dillon NE/7

Daunte Culpepper Min/5

Steven Jackson StL/9

Brian Westbrook Phi/6

Rudi Johnson Cin/10

Torry Holt StL/9

Ahman Green GB/6

Marvin Harrison Ind/8

Jamal Lewis Bal/3

Chad Johnson Cin/10

Curtis Martin NYJ/8

Terrell Owens Phi/6

Joe Horn NO/10

Lamont Jordan Oak/5

Javon Walker GB/6

Andre Johnson Hou/3

Tony Gonzalez KC/5

Drew Bennett Ten/10

 

[Family Matters]

I agree to a point, but a TON of "sure thing" picks bust every year. I personally don't believe there is a proven strategy. I don't believe in the take RBs at any cost strategy. I usually just grade talent and take the best player. As stated, a part time LJ in my opinion was as valuble to me in the 4th than almost any other back I had graded, with an upside with no equal. I took Portis in 02 in the 5th with the same rationale. As Joe pointed out, gambles like that can mean the difference in winning your league, it also makes it more fun IMO than drafting with the herd.

Interesting comments. To say a "ton" of sure picks bust every year is probably stretching reality a bit. It does happen every year but it is usually a minority of good players, not eactly what I would label as a "ton". Just makes it seem like it's a majority of players that bust. When coupled with the next comment of "I don't believe there is a proven strategy", you get the impression even more so. I think there are many that would disagree with you on that. Drafting good RB's has always been a key to winning consistently. It doesn't pan out in every league but it sure does in most of them. Personally it has helped me to 9 championships so far. Any other strategies I've tried have yet to yield a championship. So I for one would say yes there is a proven startegy for winning.

Fair enough, you have a system that works. I find luck and injuries play too much into FF for me to believe in systems.Here's a look at part of the top 300. I count 20 out of the top 31 here to be busts or at the very least very dissapointing for a 1-3 rounder, that is a lot IMO.

LaDainian Tomlinson SD/10

Shaun Alexander Sea/8

Priest Holmes KC/5

Edgerrin James Ind/8

Deuce McAllister NO/10

Willis McGahee Buf/9

Domanick Davis Hou/3

Peyton Manning Ind/8

Randy Moss Oak/5

Kevin Jones Det/3

Julius Jones Dal/9

Tiki Barber NYG/5

Clinton Portis Was/3

Corey Dillon NE/7

Daunte Culpepper Min/5

Steven Jackson StL/9

Brian Westbrook Phi/6

Rudi Johnson Cin/10

Torry Holt StL/9

Ahman Green GB/6

Marvin Harrison Ind/8

Jamal Lewis Bal/3

Chad Johnson Cin/10

Curtis Martin NYJ/8

Terrell Owens Phi/6

Joe Horn NO/10

Lamont Jordan Oak/5

Javon Walker GB/6

Andre Johnson Hou/3

Tony Gonzalez KC/5

Drew Bennett Ten/10

Let's assume that we are in agreement on your list. Wouldn't everyone in the league be subjected to the same issues with these players? IOW-it all works out in the end because your draft is 16-20 rounds and you draft the entire draft, not just a few rounds. In doing so you are prepared for the unexpected and make the needed adjustments to overcome injuries. That's all part of your "system" or "strategy". Does that make sense? I think we are saying the same thing in many ways just going about it differently. Also, let's not confuse the anomalies with the routine. Most years you will not see that many injuries to your top players. Sometimes it happens however.

 

[Marc Levin]

stand up and be counted, buddy - you deserve it.Your call that drafting the Priest/LJ combo def, sent many a fbguy to their SB.

And NOT drafting LJ after taking Priest lost a lot of fbguys' seasons.

 

[ericttspikes]

Let's assume that we are in agreement on your list. Wouldn't everyone in the league be subjected to the same issues with these players? IOW-it all works out in the end because your draft is 16-20 rounds and you draft the entire draft, not just a few rounds. In doing so you are prepared for the unexpected and make the needed adjustments to overcome injuries. That's all part of your "system" or "strategy". Does that make sense? I think we are saying the same thing in many ways just going about it differently.

Also, let's not confuse the anomalies with the routine. Most years you will not see that many injuries to your top players. Sometimes it happens however.

Maybe we are saying the same thing. I think I was mainly responding to this point:"One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods."

You seem to imply that taking LJ at anywhere between round 4-7 was going against proven strategy when I think it was a sound pick regardless of Priest.

I also wasn't sure what you meant about "gamble on injury" vs. proven methods. I always draft with injuries in mind, especially since I play in several leagues with 24+ deep rosters and no free agency. The NFL season is long, and this is a brutal sport. Injuries have to be taken into consideration. Evaluating the talent of back-ups is a huge part of my draft, and I guess if I had a strategy, that is a big part of it.

Considering the starters previous history, age, the talent of the player waiting in the wings and the overall offensive tendencies of teams does dictate how early I grab back-ups. In the case of LJ; I had him pegged as round 4 talent which I believe he would of been even with a full year of Priest. Instead he ended up being worth a top 3 pick. Going into the season, there wasn't another player who had a better risk/reward value and I didn't really consider him that huge of a gamble or a crazy pick. Others of couse did.

 

[TommyGilmore]

stand up and be counted, buddy - you deserve it.

I respectfully disagree.Yudkin's Theory was that both Priest and LJ would be stud (or near-stud) fantasy RBs, but that didn't quite happen. Through Week 8 (when both players were playing), they averaged a combined 23.4 points per game. Decent numbers, yes -- but not stud numbers. (LT averaged nearly that many all by himself).

People who drafted and started Priest and LJ (as their top 2 RBs) probably didn't win too many games through Week 5.

So, while I think Yudkin deserves praise for rating LJ so highly, I'd say that the rest of his Theory needs a little more work.

 

[ericttspikes]

stand up and be counted, buddy - you deserve it.

I respectfully disagree.Yudkin's Theory was that both Priest and LJ would be stud (or near-stud) fantasy RBs, but that didn't quite happen. Through Week 8 (when both players were playing), they averaged a combined 23.4 points per game. Decent numbers, yes -- both not stud numbers. (LT averaged nearly that many all by himself).

People who drafted and started Priest and LJ (as their top 2 RBs) probably didn't win too many games through Week 5.

So, while I think Yudkin deserves praise for rating LJ so highly, I'd say that the rest of his Theory needs a little more work.

I agree. In the one league I didn't get LJ, the Priest owner nabbed him in round 5. I really thought this group of guys would let him slide. His team ended up 7-10 and out of the playoffs, primarily because of his slow start with the dual KC backfield. Only when LJ was the starter was he able to string together some wins and some nice scoring weeks. Priest in round 1 was the risky move IMO.

 

[Family Matters]

Let's assume that we are in agreement on your list. Wouldn't everyone in the league be subjected to the same issues with these players? IOW-it all works out in the end because your draft is 16-20 rounds and you draft the entire draft, not just a few rounds. In doing so you are prepared for the unexpected and make the needed adjustments to overcome injuries. That's all part of your "system" or "strategy". Does that make sense? I think we are saying the same thing in many ways just going about it differently.

Also, let's not confuse the anomalies with the routine. Most years you will not see that many injuries to your top players. Sometimes it happens however.

Maybe we are saying the same thing. I think I was mainly responding to this point:"One of things that amazes me about experienced players is their willingness to gamble on the injury strategy rather than the proven methods."

You seem to imply that taking LJ at anywhere between round 4-7 was going against proven strategy when I think it was a sound pick regardless of Priest.

I also wasn't sure what you meant about "gamble on injury" vs. proven methods. I always draft with injuries in mind, especially since I play in several leagues with 24+ deep rosters and no free agency. The NFL season is long, and this is a brutal sport. Injuries have to be taken into consideration. Evaluating the talent of back-ups is a huge part of my draft, and I guess if I had a strategy, that is a big part of it.

Considering the starters previous history, age, the talent of the player waiting in the wings and the overall offensive tendencies of teams does dictate how early I grab back-ups. In the case of LJ; I had him pegged as round 4 talent which I believe he would of been even with a full year of Priest. Instead he ended up being worth a top 3 pick. Going into the season, there wasn't another player who had a better risk/reward value and I didn't really consider him that huge of a gamble or a crazy pick. Others of couse did.

Glad we clarified. In discussing the LJ strategy that Yudkin posted last summer, I was in full agreement. As for the injury strategy, I am talking about players that draft mainly back up RB's in hopes of getting a good starter. They usually do not draft one and gamble that one of their back ups becomes the starter. Not the best way to go IMO. LJ was fairly predictable compared to praying for blind luck.

 

[Family Matters]

stand up and be counted, buddy - you deserve it.

I respectfully disagree.Yudkin's Theory was that both Priest and LJ would be stud (or near-stud) fantasy RBs, but that didn't quite happen. Through Week 8 (when both players were playing), they averaged a combined 23.4 points per game. Decent numbers, yes -- both not stud numbers. (LT averaged nearly that many all by himself).

People who drafted and started Priest and LJ (as their top 2 RBs) probably didn't win too many games through Week 5.

So, while I think Yudkin deserves praise for rating LJ so highly, I'd say that the rest of his Theory needs a little more work.

But that isn't what Yuds was suggesting. He was merely saying that getting LJ was a good idea regardless because he puts up better numbers as the KC back up than 10+ starters did. So why not take him as insurance to Holmes and have someone you can use along the way as well? He was more than insurance. Considering what we all knew the upside would be if Holmes went down, he was a fairly good value in the 5th or even the 4th round.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

this is one of the first times I've seen your name in a thread title when you weren't being bashed for something you said.congrats!

 

[David Yudkin]

stand up and be counted, buddy - you deserve it.

I respectfully disagree.Yudkin's Theory was that both Priest and LJ would be stud (or near-stud) fantasy RBs, but that didn't quite happen. Through Week 8 (when both players were playing), they averaged a combined 23.4 points per game. Decent numbers, yes -- both not stud numbers. (LT averaged nearly that many all by himself).

People who drafted and started Priest and LJ (as their top 2 RBs) probably didn't win too many games through Week 5.

So, while I think Yudkin deserves praise for rating LJ so highly, I'd say that the rest of his Theory needs a little more work.

I agree. In the one league I didn't get LJ, the Priest owner nabbed him in round 5. I really thought this group of guys would let him slide. His team ended up 7-10 and out of the playoffs, primarily because of his slow start with the dual KC backfield. Only when LJ was the starter was he able to string together some wins and some nice scoring weeks. Priest in round 1 was the risky move IMO.

I don't really feel like draining the boards of much more Holmes/Johnson banter, but Holmes was the #7 RB at the time he got hurt. To say that a team struggled because of Holmes IMO is a reach, as the fantasy team likely had 17 other players that were more of an issue than Holmes was.Teams that took Manning, McAllister, or Lewis were behind the 8-Ball most of the year, so Holmes was nowhere near that level of disaster.

 

[Gravity]

I don't really feel like draining the boards of much more Holmes/Johnson banter, but Holmes was the #7 RB at the time he got hurt. To say that a team struggled because of Holmes IMO is a reach, as the fantasy team likely had 17 other players that were more of an issue than Holmes was.

Teams that took Manning, McAllister, or Lewis were behind the 8-Ball most of the year, so Holmes was nowhere near that level of disaster.

Right, but the suggestion was to START BOTH which did cause teams to be hurt.The real strategy was to grab LJ early - not play them both.

That is what you were preaching pre-season. Again, just calling a spade a spade. I liked the idea but it was wrong.

 

[Family Matters]

I don't really feel like draining the boards of much more Holmes/Johnson banter, but Holmes was the #7 RB at the time he got hurt.  To say that a team struggled because of Holmes IMO is a reach, as the fantasy team likely had 17 other players that were more of an issue than Holmes was.

Teams that took Manning, McAllister, or Lewis were behind the 8-Ball most of the year, so Holmes was nowhere near that level of disaster.

Right, but the suggestion was to START BOTH which did cause teams to be hurt.The real strategy was to grab LJ early - not play them both.

That is what you were preaching pre-season. Again, just calling a spade a spade. I liked the idea but it was wrong.

I said this earlier as well but I thought his suggestion was that you should draft both to protect yourself and oh BTW-LJ is scoring in the top 20 too as a back up which was better than 12 other backs on the remaining teams. So yes you could start LJ but was more of a "flex" option rather than this should be your RB2. Besides, he wouldn't suggest that you ride LJ as your RB2 for the very reason that he was a high injury risk. The last part of the equation had to due with value and upside. Getting a RB2 caliber player in the 4/5th was good value. The upside (being the starter if Holmes went down) made him a steal.

 

[David Yudkin]

I don't really feel like draining the boards of much more Holmes/Johnson banter, but Holmes was the #7 RB at the time he got hurt.  To say that a team struggled because of Holmes IMO is a reach, as the fantasy team likely had 17 other players that were more of an issue than Holmes was.

Teams that took Manning, McAllister, or Lewis were behind the 8-Ball most of the year, so Holmes was nowhere near that level of disaster.

Right, but the suggestion was to START BOTH which did cause teams to be hurt.The real strategy was to grab LJ early - not play them both.

That is what you were preaching pre-season. Again, just calling a spade a spade. I liked the idea but it was wrong.

The suggestions were . . .ITEM 1: Draft both guys to lock up the Chiefs running game, as one guy getting the huge majority of the workload was a fantasy god.

ITEM 2: Play the guy with 70%+ of the workload.

ITEM 3: If both guys played 50/50 or 60/40 they were both worth starting

ITEM 4: Monitor the situation, as the guy in the 25-30% category could still be worth starting as a flex.

I don't ever recall ever suggesting that starting the two of them was the best or foolproof option. With th ings in flux and going well early on, starting them both might have worked some weeks (and not others).

I went over just about every combination possible in terms of workload breakdowns and injuries (in addition to other changes in offensive philosophy).

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

I don't really feel like draining the boards of much more Holmes/Johnson banter, but Holmes was the #7 RB at the time he got hurt.  To say that a team struggled because of Holmes IMO is a reach, as the fantasy team likely had 17 other players that were more of an issue than Holmes was.

Teams that took Manning, McAllister, or Lewis were behind the 8-Ball most of the year, so Holmes was nowhere near that level of disaster.

Right, but the suggestion was to START BOTH which did cause teams to be hurt.The real strategy was to grab LJ early - not play them both.

That is what you were preaching pre-season. Again, just calling a spade a spade. I liked the idea but it was wrong.

The suggestions were . . .ITEM 1: Draft both guys to lock up the Chiefs running game, as one guy getting the huge majority of the workload was a fantasy god.

ITEM 2: Play the guy with 70%+ of the workload.

ITEM 3: If both guys played 50/50 or 60/40 they were both worth starting

ITEM 4: Monitor the situation, as the guy in the 25-30% category could still be worth starting as a flex.

I don't ever recall ever suggesting that starting the two of them was the best or foolproof option. With th ings in flux and going well early on, starting them both might have worked some weeks (and not others).

I went over just about every combination possible in terms of workload breakdowns and injuries (in addition to other changes in offensive philosophy).

Exactly as I understood it in the preseason.

 

[Family Matters]

I don't really feel like draining the boards of much more Holmes/Johnson banter, but Holmes was the #7 RB at the time he got hurt.  To say that a team struggled because of Holmes IMO is a reach, as the fantasy team likely had 17 other players that were more of an issue than Holmes was.

Teams that took Manning, McAllister, or Lewis were behind the 8-Ball most of the year, so Holmes was nowhere near that level of disaster.

Right, but the suggestion was to START BOTH which did cause teams to be hurt.The real strategy was to grab LJ early - not play them both.

That is what you were preaching pre-season. Again, just calling a spade a spade. I liked the idea but it was wrong.

The suggestions were . . .ITEM 1: Draft both guys to lock up the Chiefs running game, as one guy getting the huge majority of the workload was a fantasy god.

ITEM 2: Play the guy with 70%+ of the workload.

ITEM 3: If both guys played 50/50 or 60/40 they were both worth starting

ITEM 4: Monitor the situation, as the guy in the 25-30% category could still be worth starting as a flex.

I don't ever recall ever suggesting that starting the two of them was the best or foolproof option. With th ings in flux and going well early on, starting them both might have worked some weeks (and not others).

I went over just about every combination possible in terms of workload breakdowns and injuries (in addition to other changes in offensive philosophy).

It's sad when people don't take the time to know what thry're talking about. Now you feel compelled to respond to bad info. C'mon folks, know what your talking about before you throw people under the bus.

 

[Gravity]

It's sad when people don't take the time to know what thry're talking about. Now you feel compelled to respond to bad info.

C'mon folks, know what your talking about before you throw people under the bus.

FM that was totally uncalled for and frankly that condescending manner is beneath you. DY is a big boy I don't think he needs a "protector" here.Have a bit tougher skin - I'm not throwing anyone under a bus. But I am trying to clear up one matter - this aint "bad info" bro.

Many people suggested taking BOTH Priest and LJ was a good idea.

Yudkins out-of-the-box original thinking - that I think no one else suggested - was that starting both was a very viable strategy. I like that idea a lot. In fact, someone in my league who owned both actually started both for several weeks. And he hurt because of it.

That strategy was wrong (at least for the 7 weeks it lasted).

** So please know what you are talking about before throwing others under the bus...

Quote David Yudkins:

"However, Johnson's preseason performance has prompted some to think that Holmes will not get as big a workload as in previous seasons.

To summarize the outcomes in the different ratios . . .

70% Holmes/30% LJ = Holmes still likely the #1 RB and LJ a borderline RB2

60% Holmes/40% LJ = Holmes likely Top 3 RB and LC a borderline RB1

50% Holmes/50% LJ = Both RB likely Top 10 RB

That's what I came up with looking at this about 87 ways. Johnson could very well be a decent RB2 or RB3 EVEN IF HOLMES DOESN'T GET HURT, so that's what you are paying for with your pick. Of course, should Holmes ever get hurt and miss time, LJ would be a total BEAST. "

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...opic=181249&hl=

** AND MORE

Family Matters Quote (after Game 1):

"This also means Yudkin was right in his LJ analysis. Using him as a RB2 is not a bad deal it would seem. Kudos to Yudkin for his vision in seeing what was to come. "

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...ic=181760&st=35

Basically preaching the start both combo. Again, until Priest got injured it was a BAD play.

---

Apology not necesarry - just don't be so holier-than-thou next time...

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I had the 1.03.  1.01 was LT.  1.02 was Peyton.  I took Alexander at the 1.03 and LJ in the 5th.  Easily won my league. 

If you found weight in Yudkins Priest/LJ thread, then true shark play was to not draft Priest and still go hard after LJ, because in the 4th and 5th LJ would still represent value over guys still available like Barlow, Mewelde Moore, and the 2nd and 3rd tier RBs and QBs.

Good discussion. My .02In reality, this is all about speculating on injuries. And that's a risky proposition.

Everyone in the world knew LJ was the best #2 RB in the league. Fantastic talent in a great offense if he could just see the field.

LJ's value this year was what it was based entirely on Holmes being injured. If Holmes is healthy all season, Johnson in the 5th is a marginal pick at best. As it turned out, Johnson in the 5th is a league winner because of the injury.

But anytime you're basing a strategy on the foundation of predicting injury, it's a risky call. But in most serious leagues, it's the risky call that pans out that wins the league. The folks who took him early (which we advocated) took a calculated gamble based on the injury history of Holmes and the potential reward if Johnson were to see the field. In this case it panned out.

J

With that said Joe, you're kind of leaving out the point of having both. If you didn't have LJ.........you have Holmes.Let's be truthful, looking back in all my leagues, I can say I blew at least 1 pick between the rounds 1 thru 5. Whether it was due to injury or just a bad pick like Michael Clayton.

So, if Holmes were healthy all year and you called that 5th round pick a bust, big deal. Because on the flip side.....if Holmes is healthy all year, you're getting a monster. And what did happen, if Holmes does go down (and let's tell it like it is, we're not all geniuses, the odds were higher on Holmes going down this season than let's say a younger back) you have a guy like Larry Johnson with fresh legs able to run the table.

In the value article Mr. Dodds asked me and other FBG's to write prior to the season, Larry Johnson was the first pick on my computer screen. His name screamed value. He did it the year before and he did it again this year. As you said, it's those kinds of picks that win championships.

If Priest is out, Johnson will be a top 2 pick for next year.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

It's sad when people don't take the time to know what thry're talking about. Now you feel compelled to respond to bad info.

C'mon folks, know what your talking about before you throw people under the bus.

FM that was totally uncalled for and frankly that condescending manner is beneath you. DY is a big boy I don't think he needs a "protector" here.Have a bit tougher skin - I'm not throwing anyone under a bus. But I am trying to clear up one matter - this aint "bad info" bro.

Many people suggested taking BOTH Priest and LJ was a good idea.

Yudkins out-of-the-box original thinking - that I think no one else suggested - was that starting both was a very viable strategy. I like that idea a lot. In fact, someone in my league who owned both actually started both for several weeks. And he hurt because of it.

That strategy was wrong (at least for the 7 weeks it lasted).

** So please know what you are talking about before throwing others under the bus...

Quote David Yudkins:

"However, Johnson's preseason performance has prompted some to think that Holmes will not get as big a workload as in previous seasons.

To summarize the outcomes in the different ratios . . .

70% Holmes/30% LJ = Holmes still likely the #1 RB and LJ a borderline RB2

60% Holmes/40% LJ = Holmes likely Top 3 RB and LC a borderline RB1

50% Holmes/50% LJ = Both RB likely Top 10 RB

That's what I came up with looking at this about 87 ways. Johnson could very well be a decent RB2 or RB3 EVEN IF HOLMES DOESN'T GET HURT, so that's what you are paying for with your pick. Of course, should Holmes ever get hurt and miss time, LJ would be a total BEAST. "

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...opic=181249&hl=

** AND MORE

Family Matters Quote (after Game 1):

"This also means Yudkin was right in his LJ analysis. Using him as a RB2 is not a bad deal it would seem. Kudos to Yudkin for his vision in seeing what was to come. "

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...ic=181760&st=35

Basically preaching the start both combo. Again, until Priest got injured it was a BAD play.

---

Apology not necesarry - just don't be so holier-than-thou next time...

I agree with this. Without going back and looking, I remember reading that thread. Part of it came after a week where both of those guys had decent yardage and a Td.I know I posted in there and I was one of the few that didn't like the strategy on a weekly basis. I was one of the biggest proponents of drafting both.......or just drafting Johnson as Priest Holmes was in my FBG Value list as Unvaluable compared to his draft value of like 1.4 I believe but I don't like starting 2 Rb's from the same team on a weekly basis no matter who it is.

Obviously there are certain circumstances in a given year where if you did draft both, and there were bye weeks and injury to other Rb's on your team you would be forced to start both........my point was when you aren't on a bye week and have other options at RB, say like a WArrick Dunn who you could have gotten in the 4th round to go with your RB1.