Is this a mistake? (1 Viewer)

[wilked]

projecting Barber for 11 TD's will be quite damaging to their credibility if its not substantially reduced by the time the magazine is released.

Eh?

3) 10 of his 15 TD's last year came from inside the five yard line and Coughlin has publicly stated that he drafted Jacobs specifically to carry the ball in those situations. Even if Jacobs doesn't get it done, then he'll probably go with Ward as his next option.Any chance of Barber scoring 11 TD's in 2005 is extremely remote, borderline impossible.

I'm surprised Tiki got any scores last year at all considering Coughlin publicly stated that Ron Dayne was definitely going to get the goal-line carries. Oh wait, sometimes what coaches say they are going to do in May isn't what actually happens in September through December.Despite the common MISconception, Tiki is actually a decent performer on the goal-line as his solid ratio and 10 GL scores proves. IF the new guy shows promise in the NFL on the GL, he he will probably get most of those looks. But it is FAR from a foregone conclusion and in any case Tiki will very likely still get a few looks on the GL even if someone else is the primary option.

To call a projection of 11 TDs for a guy who scored 15 the previous year (when all the same indications about his GL opportunities were in place) "borderline impossible" seems inane to me.

This has been discussed ad nauseum, but even if Jacobs (hand picked by Coughlin, where as Dayne was not) fails, then the next in line for GL is Ward. Barber is a guaranteed 100% lock to score less than 11 TD's in 2005. Sig bets anyone?

Looks like you have Tiki for 3 TDs this year. I will take a sig bet on thathttp://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...dpost&p=2944579

In fact, to give you an offer you can't refuse, I will double your TD total, and make that the bet. Let me know what the sig will be

 

[Bri]

Chase, your post was "league-wide trend" but then you just brought up teams with very good TEs. Is it for all teams or just those? Seems to me like we have more good TEs than normally, a good era for them.Barber has caught alot with Shockey around so I'm not sure if that trend applies to him. What do you think about that?

 

[H.K.]

Looks like you have Tiki for 3 TDs this year. I will take a sig bet on that

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...dpost&p=2944579

In fact, to give you an offer you can't refuse, I will double your TD total, and make that the bet. Let me know what the sig will be

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times. I would not question a projection for him to score six, but an expectation of 11 is unrealistic.Sig bet is based on FBG's projection of 11, anyone interested?

 

[wilked]

Looks like you have Tiki for 3 TDs this year. I will take a sig bet on that

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...dpost&p=2944579

In fact, to give you an offer you can't refuse, I will double your TD total, and make that the bet. Let me know what the sig will be

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times. I would not question a projection for him to score six, but an expectation of 11 is unrealistic.Sig bet is based on FBG's projection of 11, anyone interested?

As confident as you sounded above, you sound less confident now. I am willing to use double your projected TD count as the sig bet. Or is it a statisitical impossibility that you would consider backing up your projected numbers, with excellent odds tacked on?

 

[H.K.]

Looks like you have Tiki for 3 TDs this year.  I will take a sig bet on that

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...dpost&p=2944579

In fact, to give you an offer you can't refuse, I will double your TD total, and make that the bet.  Let me know what the sig will be

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times. I would not question a projection for him to score six, but an expectation of 11 is unrealistic.Sig bet is based on FBG's projection of 11, anyone interested?

As confident as you sounded above, you sound less confident now. I am willing to use double your projected TD count as the sig bet. Or is it a statisitical impossibility that you would consider backing up your projected numbers, with excellent odds tacked on?

My confidence in my wager of 11 TDs is actually climbing because obviously you agree with me or you wouldn't be trying to change the terms. Thanks for your support!

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times.

Why do you insist on bringing up how many times he scored in 1997 & 1998? What does that really have to do with 2005? Do you REALLY think history is on your side with that?

 

[wilked]

Looks like you have Tiki for 3 TDs this year.  I will take a sig bet on that

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...dpost&p=2944579

In fact, to give you an offer you can't refuse, I will double your TD total, and make that the bet.  Let me know what the sig will be

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times. I would not question a projection for him to score six, but an expectation of 11 is unrealistic.Sig bet is based on FBG's projection of 11, anyone interested?

As confident as you sounded above, you sound less confident now. I am willing to use double your projected TD count as the sig bet. Or is it a statisitical impossibility that you would consider backing up your projected numbers, with excellent odds tacked on?

My confidence in my wager of 11 TDs is actually climbing because obviously you agree with me or you wouldn't be trying to change the terms. Thanks for your support!

I am still finalizing my numbers, but I will have my final TD total somewhere between 3 and 11, and it won't be on the lower end. I would argue that your projection of 3 is a lot less likely to happen than 11.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

 

[jurb26]

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times.

Why do you insist on bringing up how many times he scored in 1997 & 1998? What does that really have to do with 2005? Do you REALLY think history is on your side with that?

Why do you insist on ignoring 2001 and 2003?I agree, double digit TDs is not likely from Tiki this year.

 

[jurb26]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

I would rather see 7.5 personally. I have him projected for 6. 8.5 is not bad either though.

 

[H.K.]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number. wilked: Tiki's average TD's per season is 6.3, so I don't think him reaching that number is any stretch or beyond the realm of possibility. My personal projections represent what I believe to be a down year for him, similar to what he did in 2003 after his big year in 2002.

Knowledge: Yes, I bring up Tiki's past because he has never been a TD machine, and I think it is very relevant to the discussion, regardless of the change in staff and personnel.

 

[joffer]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number.

are you serious? Since when does a projection have to be without a shadow of a doubt? The only thing I have a problem with is you saying 11 is a statistical impossibility. I've got him down for 10 total myself, but I'm not foolish enough to say it's some kind of mortal lock.Edit: BTW, NONE of this is proving your point.

 

[jurb26]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number.

are you serious? Since when does a projection have to be without a shadow of a doubt? The only thing I have a problem with is you saying 11 is a statistical impossibility. I've got him down for 10 total myself, but I'm not foolish enough to say it's some kind of mortal lock.Edit: BTW, NONE of this is proving your point.

I think it has helped prove his point though. Even the guys who like Tiki for next year seem willing to admit that 11 TDs is more a max/ceiling he is capable of, not what is normal. Setting the O/U at 8.5 does help prove this.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number. wilked: Tiki's average TD's per season is 6.3, so I don't think him reaching that number is any stretch or beyond the realm of possibility. My personal projections represent what I believe to be a down year for him, similar to what he did in 2003 after his big year in 2002.

Knowledge: Yes, I bring up Tiki's past because he has never been a TD machine, and I think it is very relevant to the discussion, regardless of the change in staff and personnel.

I just took the 11 you didn't like and the 6 wilked was asking for and averaged. Just trying to help. Thought it was a fair number in the argument/wager you guys were discussing.I personally think it'll go over 8.5

 

[wilked]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number. wilked: Tiki's average TD's per season is 6.3, so I don't think him reaching that number is any stretch or beyond the realm of possibility. My personal projections represent what I believe to be a down year for him, similar to what he did in 2003 after his big year in 2002.

Knowledge: Yes, I bring up Tiki's past because he has never been a TD machine, and I think it is very relevant to the discussion, regardless of the change in staff and personnel.

Thank you for proving my point. Projecting Tiki's TD total at 3 TDs is ridiculous, and leaves you with little credibility in your arguments.

 

[joffer]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number.

are you serious? Since when does a projection have to be without a shadow of a doubt? The only thing I have a problem with is you saying 11 is a statistical impossibility. I've got him down for 10 total myself, but I'm not foolish enough to say it's some kind of mortal lock.Edit: BTW, NONE of this is proving your point.

I think it has helped prove his point though. Even the guys who like Tiki for next year seem willing to admit that 11 TDs is more a max/ceiling he is capable of, not what is normal. Setting the O/U at 8.5 does help prove this.

max/ceiling that he is capable of is a million miles away from statistical impossibility. it's not even in the same galaxy.

 

[jurb26]

Thank you for proving my point. Projecting Tiki's TD total at 3 TDs is ridiculous, and leaves you with little credibility in your arguments.

How is the projection of 3 any more rediculous than the projection of 11? Both are extremes IMO. 3 is about as low as I can see him, 11 is about asa high as I can see him.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Thank you for proving my point.  Projecting Tiki's TD total at 3 TDs is ridiculous, and leaves you with little credibility in your arguments.

How is the projection of 3 any more rediculous than the projection of 11? Both are extremes IMO. 3 is about as low as I can see him, 11 is about asa high as I can see him.

Agreed.......3 is ridiculous. After the year he had last year, he could have 3 after 2 games.

 

[wilked]

Thank you for proving my point.  Projecting Tiki's TD total at 3 TDs is ridiculous, and leaves you with little credibility in your arguments.

How is the projection of 3 any more rediculous than the projection of 11? Both are extremes IMO. 3 is about as low as I can see him, 11 is about asa high as I can see him.

Three posts above you say 8.5 is a good TD total to use. 11-8.5 = 2.5, 8.5 - 3 = 5.5The odds of season ending TDs being 3 or less < odds of season TD being 11 or more

 

[jurb26]

Thank you for proving my point.  Projecting Tiki's TD total at 3 TDs is ridiculous, and leaves you with little credibility in your arguments.

How is the projection of 3 any more rediculous than the projection of 11? Both are extremes IMO. 3 is about as low as I can see him, 11 is about asa high as I can see him.

Three posts above you say 8.5 is a good TD total to use. 11-8.5 = 2.5, 8.5 - 3 = 5.5The odds of season ending TDs being 3 or less < odds of season TD being 11 or more

No I don't, I said I thought the O/U should be at 7.5. My projection is 6.I think projecgting double digit TDs for Tiki is just as much of a stretch as projecting 3 though.

 

[wilked]

No I don't, I said I thought the O/U should be at 7.5. My projection is 6.

I think projecgting double digit TDs for Tiki is just as much of a stretch as projecting 3 though.

why would you set the over / under at 7.5 when you project 6? Why wouldn't it then be 6, unless you feel that your projection of 6 is on the low side? Am I missing something here?

 

[jurb26]

No I don't, I said I thought the O/U should be at 7.5.  My projection is 6.

I think projecgting double digit TDs for Tiki is just as much of a stretch as projecting 3 though.

why would you set the over / under at 7.5 when you project 6? Why wouldn't it then be 6, unless you feel that your projection of 6 is on the low side? Am I missing something here?

Yes I do think Mmy projection is lower than popular opinion.

 

[wilked]

No I don't, I said I thought the O/U should be at 7.5.  My projection is 6.

I think projecgting double digit TDs for Tiki is just as much of a stretch as projecting 3 though.

why would you set the over / under at 7.5 when you project 6? Why wouldn't it then be 6, unless you feel that your projection of 6 is on the low side? Am I missing something here?

Yes I do think Mmy projection is lower than popular opinion.

I would take a monetary bet, O/U set to 6, we will have a 3rd party hold the $$. Say $20?

 

[H.K.]

I think a fair over and under would be 8.5 overall Td's, as there would not be a tie.

OK, stuf like this continues to prove my point. 11 projected TD's for Tiki is way too high. Nobody is willing to say without a shadow of a doubt that he'll reach that number. wilked: Tiki's average TD's per season is 6.3, so I don't think him reaching that number is any stretch or beyond the realm of possibility. My personal projections represent what I believe to be a down year for him, similar to what he did in 2003 after his big year in 2002.

Knowledge: Yes, I bring up Tiki's past because he has never been a TD machine, and I think it is very relevant to the discussion, regardless of the change in staff and personnel.

Thank you for proving my point. Projecting Tiki's TD total at 3 TDs is ridiculous, and leaves you with little credibility in your arguments.

My point all along is that Tiki will not score 11 TD's. I never guaranteed he'd only score three, I guaranteed he will not score eleven. Up to this point, nobody will take the sig bet. In fact, everyone is trying to lower the bar for a bet because nobody would be foolish enough to take the 11...this does nothing but substantiate my argument. You may try all you want to alter the arrangement, but it only hurts your position.

The projections are flawed and need to be adjusted, just like the reception totals that initiated this discussion.

 

[wilked]

but it only hurts your position.

.

What's my position again?

 

[H.K.]

but it only hurts your position.

.

What's my position again?

You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.EDIT to add: I see you'll bet on six though....

 

[wilked]

but it only hurts your position.

.

What's my position again?

You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.

I already said my projections were less than 11 By the same logic, you think Tiki will score more than 3 TDs (Actually the proposed bet was 6, thus invalidating your posted projections

 

[H.K.]

but it only hurts your position.

.

What's my position again?

You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.

I already said my projections were less than 11 By the same logic, you think Tiki will score more than 3 TDs (Actually the proposed bet was 6, thus invalidating your posted projections

Three is less than eleven, which is why I am so confident he won't reach the number. Six is possible, eleven is not.Thanks for agreeing with me on the eleven, which again, is the entire issue at hand, not six or seven or eight point five.

 

[wilked]

HK's words: You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.Wilked proposed a bet to HK earlier with an O/U of 6, which was rejected by HK, even though it was double his projections.You are stumbling over your words here buddy

 

[bagger.]

I agree with H.K. that Jacobs should steal a bunch of goalline carries from Tiki this year.

But, with enough carries, Tiki could still have a decent chance at 8-10 total TDs so I'm not sure I'd agree that 11 is "impossible". Brian Westbrook scored 11 TDs in 2003 without getting a ton of goalline work.

This is eerily reminiscent to the discussion that Ron Dayne was going to somehow take away fantasy production from Tiki last year. And yet Tiki gave drafters tremendous value.I'll believe that Mike f'ing Cloud will steal production away from Tiki when I see it.

I love Tiki. No matter how well he does every year he is projected by the majority of people to produce lower than he will.

Keep up this talk, I'll gladly take him at a cheaper price than I should be able to.

 

[jurb26]

I agree with H.K. that Jacobs should steal a bunch of goalline carries from Tiki this year.

But, with enough carries, Tiki could still have a decent chance at 8-10 total TDs so I'm not sure I'd agree that 11 is "impossible". Brian Westbrook scored 11 TDs in 2003 without getting a ton of goalline work.

This is eerily reminiscent to the discussion that Ron Dayne was going to somehow take away fantasy production from Tiki last year. And yet Tiki gave drafters tremendous value.I'll believe that Mike f'ing Cloud will steal production away from Tiki when I see it.

I love Tiki. No matter how well he does every year he is projected by the majority of people to produce lower than he will.

Keep up this talk, I'll gladly take him at a cheaper price than I should be able to.

Yeah the value was great last year, but where was it the year before or in 2001?

 

[wilked]

I agree with H.K. that Jacobs should steal a bunch of goalline carries from Tiki this year.

But, with enough carries, Tiki could still have a decent chance at 8-10 total TDs so I'm not sure I'd agree that 11 is "impossible". Brian Westbrook scored 11 TDs in 2003 without getting a ton of goalline work.

This is eerily reminiscent to the discussion that Ron Dayne was going to somehow take away fantasy production from Tiki last year. And yet Tiki gave drafters tremendous value.I'll believe that Mike f'ing Cloud will steal production away from Tiki when I see it.

I love Tiki. No matter how well he does every year he is projected by the majority of people to produce lower than he will.

Keep up this talk, I'll gladly take him at a cheaper price than I should be able to.

Yeah the value was great last year, but where was it the year before or in 2001?

In 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th...what more do you want from the guy? He finished 2nd last year, but still gets no respect

 

[H.K.]

HK's words: You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.

Wilked proposed a bet to HK earlier with an O/U of 6, which was rejected by HK, even though it was double his projections.

You are stumbling over your words here buddy

Not at all, I am no sure why this is so hard for you to grasp, but I think six is possible, eleven is not.My stance all along has been that I am 100% positive that 11 TD's for Barber will not happen.

Whether or not he scores six is not my argument and I won't challenge a projection in the 6-8 range because he averages six a season anyway, so its a fifty/fifty proposition he gets that many. My projection shows half that number, which is roughly where he's been five out of his eight seasons, hardly a reach on my part.

 

[wilked]

HK's words: You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.

Wilked proposed a bet to HK earlier with an O/U of 6, which was rejected by HK, even though it was double his projections.

You are stumbling over your words here buddy

Not at all, I am no sure why this is so hard for you to grasp, but I think six is possible, eleven is not.My stance all along has been that I am 100% positive that 11 TD's for Barber will not happen.

Whether or not he scores six is not my argument and I won't challenge a projection in the 6-8 range because he averages six a season anyway, so its a fifty/fifty proposition he gets that many. My projection shows half that number, which is roughly where he's been five out of his eight seasons, hardly a reach on my part.

In other words, you acknowledge that your projection is too low, "or else you would bet on it."By the way, if you are 100% on that statement, give me 100:1 on it

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times.

Why do you insist on bringing up how many times he scored in 1997 & 1998? What does that really have to do with 2005? Do you REALLY think history is on your side with that?

Why do you insist on ignoring 2001 and 2003?I agree, double digit TDs is not likely from Tiki this year.

I'm not ignoring 2003. I'm ignoring just about everything before it. How is 2001 relevant? He didn't even have the most carries on his team that year.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Knowledge: Yes, I bring up Tiki's past because he has never been a TD machine, and I think it is very relevant to the discussion, regardless of the change in staff and personnel.

Okay I'm sorry but you have no argument. Please explain to us all what his 50 and 60 carries he amassed in 1996 and 1997 have to do with ANYTHING. Please explain what strong correlation they have to his 2005 performance.Let's see

200 carries 8 TDs

166 carries 4 TDs

300 carries 11 TDs

270 carries 2 TDs

320 carries 13 TDs

Hmm looks to me if he can get 300 carries in a season, 10 TDs is reasonable. Looks like his 2 TD season was an anamoly which may have been in part to the team completely quitting on Fassel (and his fumbles).

Do you think he is only going to get 200 carries on the season? If you downgrade his TDs based on that, makes worlds more sense than "he'll still be a 300 carry starter with only 3 total TDs".

 

[H.K.]

HK's words: You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.

Wilked proposed a bet to HK earlier with an O/U of 6, which was rejected by HK, even though it was double his projections.

You are stumbling over your words here buddy

Not at all, I am no sure why this is so hard for you to grasp, but I think six is possible, eleven is not.My stance all along has been that I am 100% positive that 11 TD's for Barber will not happen.

Whether or not he scores six is not my argument and I won't challenge a projection in the 6-8 range because he averages six a season anyway, so its a fifty/fifty proposition he gets that many. My projection shows half that number, which is roughly where he's been five out of his eight seasons, hardly a reach on my part.

In other words, you acknowledge that your projection is too low, "or else you would bet on it."By the way, if you are 100% on that statement, give me 100:1 on it

Why do you need 100:1 if you are full support of the 11 TD's? I should get the 100:1 if its such a "lock".My projection is low compared to other projections, but that has zero relevance to him scoring eleven.

OK, this has gotten very silly and I have work to do. You or anyone else can PM to set up a sig bet on the 11 TD's.

One thing is for sure, not one person has whole heartedly stepped up and backed the FBG projection so far.....so I think we'll see that number reduced in the near future as a result of this thread.

 

[wilked]

HK's words: You do not think Tiki will score 11 or more TD's, or else you would bet on it.

Wilked proposed a bet to HK earlier with an O/U of 6, which was rejected by HK, even though it was double his projections.

You are stumbling over your words here buddy

Not at all, I am no sure why this is so hard for you to grasp, but I think six is possible, eleven is not.My stance all along has been that I am 100% positive that 11 TD's for Barber will not happen.

Whether or not he scores six is not my argument and I won't challenge a projection in the 6-8 range because he averages six a season anyway, so its a fifty/fifty proposition he gets that many. My projection shows half that number, which is roughly where he's been five out of his eight seasons, hardly a reach on my part.

In other words, you acknowledge that your projection is too low, "or else you would bet on it."By the way, if you are 100% on that statement, give me 100:1 on it

Why do you need 100:1 if you are full support of the 11 TD's? I should get the 100:1 if its such a "lock".My projection is low compared to other projections, but that has zero relevance to him scoring eleven.

OK, this has gotten very silly and I have work to do. You or anyone else can PM to set up a sig bet on the 11 TD's.

One thing is for sure, not one person has whole heartedly stepped up and backed the FBG projection so far.....so I think we'll see that number reduced in the near future as a result of this thread.

You have backed down from the 3TD projection you set...now you are backing down from the 100% guarantee of Tiki scoring less than 11TDs... What else will you be backing down from?I will give you 100:1 that the sun will rise tomorrow, as I am 100% sure of that.

New bet: $50 bet, if Tiki scores less than 3 TDs, you win the money. If Tiki scores more than 11, I win. Caveat: He plays minimum 8 games. A 3rd party will hold the money for the season, returning it to us if he ends up in the middle.

Paypal will probably work best, let me know if you want to send the money differently.

 

[H.K.]

Knowledge: Yes, I bring up Tiki's past because he has never been a TD machine, and I think it is very relevant to the discussion, regardless of the change in staff and personnel.

Okay I'm sorry but you have no argument. Please explain to us all what his 50 and 60 carries he amassed in 1996 and 1997 have to do with ANYTHING. Please explain what strong correlation they have to his 2005 performance.Let's see

200 carries 8 TDs

166 carries 4 TDs

300 carries 11 TDs

270 carries 2 TDs

320 carries 13 TDs

Hmm looks to me if he can get 300 carries in a season, 10 TDs is reasonable. Looks like his 2 TD season was an anamoly which may have been in part to the team completely quitting on Fassel (and his fumbles).

Do you think he is only going to get 200 carries on the season? If you downgrade his TDs based on that, makes worlds more sense than "he'll still be a 300 carry starter with only 3 total TDs".

KRS -We've gone in circles over this and neither of us will change each other's minds. I respect your opinion, but I think Tiki is in for a season similar to the one he had in 2003, you feel differently, so I guess we'll see....interested in the sig bet on the 11 TD's?

 

[H.K.]

You have backed down from the 3TD projection you set...now you are backing down from the 100% guarantee of Tiki scoring less than 11TDs... What else will you be backing down from?

I will give you 100:1 that the sun will rise tomorrow, as I am 100% sure of that.

New bet: $50 bet, if Tiki scores less than 3 TDs, you win the money. If Tiki scores more than 11, I win. Caveat: He plays minimum 8 games. A 3rd party will hold the money for the season, returning it to us if he ends up in the middle.

Paypal will probably work best, let me know if you want to send the money differently.

I love it, you keep changing my proposition! No caveats, no insurance policies. It all factors into why I don't think he is scoring eleven this season.

Again, he won't score eleven, regardless of circumstance. That's the bet. Take it or leave it, like it or lump it, put up or shut up, etc., etc.

 

[bagger.]

I agree with H.K. that Jacobs should steal a bunch of goalline carries from Tiki this year.

But, with enough carries, Tiki could still have a decent chance at 8-10 total TDs so I'm not sure I'd agree that 11 is "impossible". Brian Westbrook scored 11 TDs in 2003 without getting a ton of goalline work.

This is eerily reminiscent to the discussion that Ron Dayne was going to somehow take away fantasy production from Tiki last year. And yet Tiki gave drafters tremendous value.I'll believe that Mike f'ing Cloud will steal production away from Tiki when I see it.

I love Tiki. No matter how well he does every year he is projected by the majority of people to produce lower than he will.

Keep up this talk, I'll gladly take him at a cheaper price than I should be able to.

Yeah the value was great last year, but where was it the year before or in 2001?

It was great then too. He was a top 15 back that was drafted in the 3rd and 4th rounds according to ADP.

 

[bagger.]

I agree with H.K. that Jacobs should steal a bunch of goalline carries from Tiki this year.

But, with enough carries, Tiki could still have a decent chance at 8-10 total TDs so I'm not sure I'd agree that 11 is "impossible". Brian Westbrook scored 11 TDs in 2003 without getting a ton of goalline work.

This is eerily reminiscent to the discussion that Ron Dayne was going to somehow take away fantasy production from Tiki last year. And yet Tiki gave drafters tremendous value.I'll believe that Mike f'ing Cloud will steal production away from Tiki when I see it.

I love Tiki. No matter how well he does every year he is projected by the majority of people to produce lower than he will.

Keep up this talk, I'll gladly take him at a cheaper price than I should be able to.

Yeah the value was great last year, but where was it the year before or in 2001?

In 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th...what more do you want from the guy? He finished 2nd last year, but still gets no respect

lol exactly.Tiki is a perennial top 15 / top 10 back and many "sharks" here think that last year was the first time he did anything.

this is why i love Tiki...every year there is some excuse why he won't perform, and yet he does.

 

[Snotbubbles]

Tiki Barber's Value over the years:Year Value Pos. Rank Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------1997 0 34 1271998 0 44 1791999 0 32 1322000 67 13 312001 33 14 372002 112 7 82003 44 15 342004 142 2 4

 

[wilked]

You have backed down from the 3TD projection you set...now you are backing down from the 100% guarantee of Tiki scoring less than 11TDs...  What else will you be backing down from?

I will give you 100:1 that the sun will rise tomorrow, as I am 100% sure of that. 

New bet: $50 bet, if Tiki scores less than 3 TDs, you win the money.  If Tiki scores more than 11, I win.  Caveat: He plays minimum 8 games.  A 3rd party will hold the money for the season, returning it to us if he ends up in the middle.

Paypal will probably work best, let me know if you want to send the money differently.

I love it, you keep changing my proposition! No caveats, no insurance policies. It all factors into why I don't think he is scoring eleven this season.

Again, he won't score eleven, regardless of circumstance. That's the bet. Take it or leave it, like it or lump it, put up or shut up, etc., etc.

You factored in that Tiki is going to lose time to injury this year? Tiki is one of the most durable backs in the league, budYou are continuing to lose credibility here.

Updated HK list

-Projects Tiki will score 3 TDs, but is unwilling to bet that he scores less than 6

-Projects Tiki at 3 TDs, but is unwilling to bet that it is more likely he scores 3 than 11

-Says Tiki will 100% not score 11 TDs this year (the same back who averaged 10 TDs over the past 3 years), but will not take a bet with odds on the 11 TDs

You don't think Tiki will score 11 TDs this year. We get it. You have done nothing to back up your own projection of 3 TDs.

 

[jurb26]

I agree with H.K. that Jacobs should steal a bunch of goalline carries from Tiki this year.

But, with enough carries, Tiki could still have a decent chance at 8-10 total TDs so I'm not sure I'd agree that 11 is "impossible". Brian Westbrook scored 11 TDs in 2003 without getting a ton of goalline work.

This is eerily reminiscent to the discussion that Ron Dayne was going to somehow take away fantasy production from Tiki last year. And yet Tiki gave drafters tremendous value.I'll believe that Mike f'ing Cloud will steal production away from Tiki when I see it.

I love Tiki. No matter how well he does every year he is projected by the majority of people to produce lower than he will.

Keep up this talk, I'll gladly take him at a cheaper price than I should be able to.

Yeah the value was great last year, but where was it the year before or in 2001?

In 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th...what more do you want from the guy? He finished 2nd last year, but still gets no respect

lol exactly.Tiki is a perennial top 15 / top 10 back and many "sharks" here think that last year was the first time he did anything.

this is why i love Tiki...every year there is some excuse why he won't perform, and yet he does.

Barber's rank over the years:
Year        Value        Pos. Rank    Overall Rank--------------------------------------------------1997           0            34            1271998           0            44            1791999           0            32            1322000          67            13             312001          33            14             372002         112             7              82003          44            15             342004         142             2              4http://www.profootballreference.com/players/BarbTi00.htmPS, the year before 2004 was 2003 not 2002. He finished 15th that year.

Bagger,

Yeah he is a perennial top 15 RB. He is NOT a perennial top 10 RB though which it seems a lot of people are trying to make him out to be.

 

[Marc Levin]

Looks like you have Tiki for 3 TDs this year.  I will take a sig bet on that

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...dpost&p=2944579

In fact, to give you an offer you can't refuse, I will double your TD total, and make that the bet.  Let me know what the sig will be

As far as my projection goes history is on my side because Tiki has had three seasons when he only scored three times, and two more when he scored four times. I would not question a projection for him to score six, but an expectation of 11 is unrealistic.Sig bet is based on FBG's projection of 11, anyone interested?

As confident as you sounded above, you sound less confident now. I am willing to use double your projected TD count as the sig bet. Or is it a statisitical impossibility that you would consider backing up your projected numbers, with excellent odds tacked on?

My confidence in my wager of 11 TDs is actually climbing because obviously you agree with me or you wouldn't be trying to change the terms. Thanks for your support!

I am still finalizing my numbers, but I will have my final TD total somewhere between 3 and 11, and it won't be on the lower end. I would argue that your projection of 3 is a lot less likely to happen than 11.

if you guys are really havng a problem here, lemmee negotiate - sig bet is both ways, he doesn't score 11 YDs wilked loses an dhas to wear h.k.'s sig, he scores over 6, H.K ALSO loses and has to wear wilked's sig.Otherwise, drop the sig bet line of this thread or take it to PM. Thanks.

 

[Marc Levin]

200 carries 8 TDs166 carries 4 TDs300 carries 11 TDs270 carries 2 TDs320 carries 13 TDs

Given his average TD to carry ratio, it sem s very clear to me you are on the right track - 270 'carries for only 2 TDs is an anomoly for any player, but seems to be a true anomoly in Tiki's career.I said it earlier, and I'll say it again 11 TDs is an optimistic, but not "statistically impossible" prediction, as 2002 and 2004 - and arguably 2000 - show.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

I don't think "statistical impossibility" means what H.K. thinks it means.

 

[wilked]

I don't think "statistical impossibility" means what H.K. thinks it means.

I don't think the word statistics is understood very well by HK in general.Fun debate though

 

[jurb26]

200 carries 8 TDs

166 carries 4 TDs

300 carries 11 TDs

270 carries 2 TDs

320 carries 13 TDs

Given his average TD to carry ratio, it sem s very clear to me you are on the right track - 270 'carries for only 2 TDs is an anomoly for any player, but seems to be a true anomoly in Tiki's career.I said it earlier, and I'll say it again 11 TDs is an optimistic, but not "statistically impossible" prediction, as 2002 and 2004 - and arguably 2000 - show.

According to those nubmers above. Tiki averages a TD every 73 carries. That doesn't strike me as very promising.