LHUCKS Top 5 Undervalued ADP 76-125 (1 Viewer)

[LHUCKS]

Note: ADPs obtained from the leading fantasy league website.

Reggie Wayne - ADP #77 - This is mostly about how awesome Luck and the Colts offense has looked in the preseason. Additionally, Wayne has little competition for balls and is still capable. 1200/10 would not be surprising. Not a sexy pick, but a pick that should provide a fair amount of value.

Cedric Benson - ADP #102 - Many may not realize that Benson has been one of the most consistent RBs over the past four years with four consecutive 1000 yard rushing seasons despite playing in Cincinnati. Plug him into the most explosive offenses in football and I think the upside is obvious. Over the next few weeks you're going to see this ADP move as high as the 6th round IMO.

Ryan Williams - ADP #108 - I've always been a huge Williams fan. When I watched this guy in college my instinct was this guy is a future NFL stud. Fast forward to now where Williams looked great in his most recent preseason action. Wells continues to nurse injuries, like a broken record throughout his career. Williams is worth a shot in the middle rounds. The blocking will suck, but Williams may be one of those talents where it may not matter. If you have room to take a shot on a high upside RB, this is your guy.

Darrius Heyward Bay - ADP #111 - Over the last four games DHB averaged over 100 yards per game...he and Palmer started to click. That kind of upside alone justifies taking DHB this late in the draft. One of the best WR risk/reward situations in this year's draft IMHO.

Greg Little - ADP #124 - 60 receptions in his rookie year. Little isn't perfect but to catch 60 balls in a subpar offense as a rookie should not be overlooked. Also remember that with a shortened prep time in 2011 due to the holdout the Browns should be much more prepared in 2012. The Browns and Little have nowhere to go but up and I see a relatively high floor for Little this late in the draft.

 

[sho nuff]

Actually agree with these...though, Benson in the 6th seems just too high if he creeps there. GB will never be a running team and 10-15 carries is about all he will get (Green will eat into that as they work him in).

And I do enjoy the old school Batman reference in the titles (if that is what you were going for).

 

[Zeff]

I don't know that they match my "top 5" in that range, but all five here are awesome choices. Good show.

 

[rascal]

Where do you have them ranked at their positions? ADP is sketchy due to league starting requirements.

 

[Clifford]

Good list

 

[LHUCKS]

Where do you have them ranked at their positions? ADP is sketchy due to league starting requirements.

good question, I'm at work but I'll get to this.

 

[Captain Hook]

Very HUCKS - actually I have liked all three of these

BUT realize that your "leading fantasy website" has a myriad of leagues and some shall we say not too astute owners, so your ADP will be slightly off real $ leagues

But they are close - in 12 team PPR league with 1-2-3-1-Flex

Wayne went at 6.07 - excellent value for a WR3

Benson was drafted at 9.06 - another excellent value and I agree with you that his ADP will climb. Sure his touches will be limited by the Packers style of play but he will get scoring opportunities and I don't think Starks or Green will impact his usage as long as he is effective/healthy

Williams drafted at 8.05

Little drafted at 9.05

DHB (and it is BEY) went at 10.03

 

[LHUCKS]

BUT realize that your "leading fantasy website" has a myriad of leagues and some shall we say not too astute owners, so your ADP will be slightly off real $ leagues

agreed. I looked at 4 different sources of ADP and came to the conclusion that CBS was the best. It's not perfect but it's the best we have to go by.If somebody provided an FFPC ADP(which last year didn't exist) I would be more than happy to use that list in a separate evaluation.

 

[Captain Hook]

BUT realize that your "leading fantasy website" has a myriad of leagues and some shall we say not too astute owners, so your ADP will be slightly off real $ leagues

agreed. I looked at 5 different sources of ADP and came to the conclusion that CBS was the best. It's not perfect but it's the best we have to go by.If somebody provided an FFPC ADP(which last year didn't exist) I would be more than happy to use that list in a separate evaluation.

You can certainly use the ADP from the three "Exposed" FBGPC drafts which Clayton posted for comparison ..... not so sure the other ADP he posted can/should be used.

 

[LHUCKS]

But they are close - in 12 team PPR league with 1-2-3-1-FlexWayne went at 6.07 - excellent value for a WR3Benson was drafted at 9.06 - another excellent value and I agree with you that his ADP will climb. Sure his touches will be limited by the Packers style of play but he will get scoring opportunities and I don't think Starks or Green will impact his usage as long as he is effective/healthyWilliams drafted at 8.05Little drafted at 9.05DHB (and it is BEY) went at 10.03

yep, so pretty close

 

[12punch]

I'm not buyin' any of these except wayne.

ryan williams -- I have zero insight on this guy, but I'm not crazy about his situation, and he's just a scratch ticket to me, whereas there are a bunch of guys getting drafted around there that I do have opinions on.

they say all these fliers cost nothing, on shows liek the audible, but roster spots are worth a lot to me.

ced benson - see above.

wasn't on the starks train, and I'm not hopping on this one after they just picked up some guy on the street holding a 'will work for food' sign.

kevin smith put in a few good games last year, but I don't have room for all these random lottery tickets.

people were pimping starks pretty hard in this forum, and now I see some blurb that he's on teh roster bubble.

heyward-bey -- I already debunked those 4 games last year a couple months ago.

crappy situation, but I'd take moore over him, if it came down to that, although moore's health is worrying me.

little - seems like a mediocre receiver in a crappy situation, and he's not the default option anymore.

lance moore is probably around 120, for example -- compare the situations.

 

[LHUCKS]

BUT realize that your "leading fantasy website" has a myriad of leagues and some shall we say not too astute owners, so your ADP will be slightly off real $ leagues

agreed. I looked at 5 different sources of ADP and came to the conclusion that CBS was the best. It's not perfect but it's the best we have to go by.If somebody provided an FFPC ADP(which last year didn't exist) I would be more than happy to use that list in a separate evaluation.

You can certainly use the ADP from the three "Exposed" FBGPC drafts which Clayton posted for comparison ..... not so sure the other ADP he posted can/should be used.

The problem with FFPC is that it's a fairly non-standard format. I think the CBS ADP better represents standard format.

 

[LHUCKS]

ryan williams -- I have zero insight on this guy, but I'm not crazy about his situation, and he's just a scratch ticket to me, whereas there are a bunch of guys getting drafted around there that I do have opinions on.they say all these fliers cost nothing, on shows liek the audible, but roster spots are worth a lot to me.

I think the gamble is overstated with Williams. But I do agree that in formats where it costs too much to take risks, Williams might not be your guy. However, I think we're talking about 1600 total yards upside here.

ced benson - see above.wasn't on the starks train, and I'm not hopping on this one after they just picked up some guy on the street holding a 'will work for food' sign.kevin smith put in a few good games last year, but I don't have room for all these random lottery tickets.people were pimping starks pretty hard in this forum, and now I see some blurb that he's on teh roster bubble.

But we're talking about Benson, not Starks. I was never a Starks fan.

heyward-bey -- I already debunked those 4 games last year a couple months ago. crappy situation, but I'd take moore over him, if it came down to that, although moore's health is worrying me.

link to "debunk" please, I'd like to see the arguments. I watched those games.(I watch most games)

little - seems like a mediocre receiver in a crappy situation, and he's not the default option anymore.lance moore is probably around 120, for example -- compare the situations.

Lance Moore is a great PPR pick this year IMHO...not arguing with you there. I like Little's upside and 60 balls is impressive for a rookie in that situation. Little is talented.

 

[12punch]

I would never be able to find it, but I'll try to recap later when I get home, if I remember.

in a nutshell, he just happened to benefit from a confluence of favorable circumstance, imo.

little caught 60 balls, and probably dropped 20 others, because somebody had to catch balls.

what did he do with them -- what ypc can we expect, what targets and td's can we expect now that they have other options and another rookie qb, etc.

this isn't a second year receiver with matt ryan throwing to him.

 

[Pipes]

Nice list Hucks. Others in this range I really like are...

Pierre Garcon (80) I think he and RGIII click this year

Robert Meachem (92) No more Vincent Jackson in SD and I think Meachem will be the biggest beneficiary of those targets

Jermaine Gresham (103) 2nd more talented target in Cincy. I think Dalton gets better and Gresham benefits from that.

 

[Zeff]

I think whatever you saw from Little last year, you need to evaluate with an eye on the fact that he was a little more raw than most rookies. Remember, he missed the entire 2010 college season, so what he did accomplish...which wasn't all that bad, really...was done as a rook, PLUS with a year's worth of rust. And this, from a guy who was considered a project anyway.

I don't put too much stock in his 11 drops (11 is the number, BTW, just so readers who don't know aren't putting too much stock in that "20" guess, which would make things a lot worse), given all that info above.

What's important is that it looks like he's going to be the #1 option again. Based on projection from last year, and from what we're seeing so far in pre-season. 11 drops in 115 targets isn't what you dream of, but it's not going to cost him his job any time soon. And coming out of camp, he's looking more polished than this time last year.

If he can build upon his 115 targets...and the Browns can get into the red zone more often (which they ought to, with an actual rushing attack)...he should push 1k for the first time, and should see a spike in TD's. Nothing huge, but the pieces are all in place for a natural year-two progression.

I see very little downside, given the price.

 

[sho nuff]

Benson was drafted at 9.06 - another excellent value and I agree with you that his ADP will climb. Sure his touches will be limited by the Packers style of play but he will get scoring opportunities and I don't think Starks or Green will impact his usage as long as he is effective/healthy

I think the upside of Green and his ability to catch out of the backfield will impact things a bit.

 

[Shutout]

Wayne is a good one.

Just a quick view of the list but a few I like:

nate washington (139) Might be one of the best picks all year.

Ed Dickson (234) Yeah, I'd take that.

 

[sho nuff]

Nice list Hucks. Others in this range I really like are...Pierre Garcon (80) I think he and RGIII click this yearRobert Meachem (92) No more Vincent Jackson in SD and I think Meachem will be the biggest beneficiary of those targetsJermaine Gresham (103) 2nd more talented target in Cincy. I think Dalton gets better and Gresham benefits from that.

I agree on two of the 3.Meachem is one I just don't like. Guy just has never lived up to the hype. I did not like him coming out of UT...and was so boom or bust (and usually bust). Could have been just the situation with so many mouths to feed there...but right now, Gates is the one I like in SD...have not looked at his ADP yet but would love to have him this year after people go for Graham and Gronk early...if you can get him in the 5th...IMO that is a great pick.I love Garcon...and has looked great with RGIII as you have said.

 

[davearm]

There are a few messy RB situations that I'm staying far away from this year, at current ADPs. Green Bay and Arizona are two of them.

Washington, New England, Pittsburgh, Carolina are some others. Just landmines all over the place, and you have to use a pick in the top 10 or 11 rounds on any of the dudes in these RBBCs.

I think DHB will continue to be what he's always been -- inconsistent and unreliable. Moore is the only OAK WR I am interested in.

I'm trying really really hard to like Greg Little. Should be a lot of balls in the air for him to catch.

I hope you're right on Wayne because I like the guy. I'm just having a hard time seeing his numbers improving much, if at all, from last year.

 

[LHUCKS]

There are a few messy RB situations that I'm staying far away from this year, at current ADPs. Green Bay and Arizona are two of them.

regardless of ADP?

 

[LHUCKS]

Wayne is a good one. Just a quick view of the list but a few I like:nate washington (139) Might be one of the best picks all year.

love me some Nate Washington

 

[Rick James]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

 

[rascal]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

 

[David Yudkin]

There are a few messy RB situations that I'm staying far away from this year, at current ADPs. Green Bay and Arizona are two of them.Washington, New England, Pittsburgh, Carolina are some others. Just landmines all over the place, and you have to use a pick in the top 10 or 11 rounds on any of the dudes in these RBBCs.

I have picked up both Ridley and Vereen in a couple of leagues, and IMO they are available at a built in discount. I don't really expect the workload or fantasy production to be split 50/50 between those to, so I expect that one guy or the other will get more of the work and put up BJGE numbers. NE also seems to get their RBs nicked up some, so if either guy got hurt I suspect the healthier one would get borderline RB1 production. NE over the years has had a lot of easy RB TD. I don't worry that much about Woodhead, as I don't think he will vulture many touches . . . they certainly didn't utilized him very much last year.

 

[LHUCKS]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

TD leagues also.

 

[Rick James]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?

 

[rascal]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?

Packers should have about 425 rushing attempts this year. I think its plausible he gets 60%, so possibly.

 

[smackdaddies]

I love me some cedric benson in non ppr leagues at his current cost. Definitely fades at the ppr level

From one homers perspective (and may be modified tonight)

Benson appears to be a 1st and 2nd down player for the packers. Not great on pass blocking (but not terrible on blitz blocking)and definitely not a receiving threat. To me, this limits him to about 200 carries at most. However.....

Kuhn is not back to himself. Benson could well pick up some short yard td carries until KKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNN gets back.

A number of packers have discussed getting the run game back into gear. It wasn't that long ago that Ryan Grant was a 1,000 yard rusher - Benson has the skill to be that again. Benson is definitely a one back guy, a power runner, not a zone or one cut like Grant, so that is a different style. Interestingly enough, Green is a one back guy - running without a full back - so the Pack as a whole may be working that angle. Last year they ran a lot of two back (power I, wishbone, reverse wishbone)

The rest of the Pack RB are iffy, to say the least. Starks is hurt (again) and there is talk of him being cut. Seine is good on blocking, but has shown not much running. Green is clearly liked by the Pack, but he is still coming off that knee injury. Tyler has been ok, but clearly if he makes the team it is as a backup/special teams effort. Kuhn has been injured and the Pack have been very reticent about discussing this.

I can see Benson getting 260 carries. I think 200 might be a better bet, but until Green is in full time shape, Benson could be hitting 15-20 carries a game.

 

[LHUCKS]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?

Packers should have about 425 rushing attempts this year. I think its plausible he gets 60%, so possibly.

Rascal is killing it here.

 

[rascal]

I feel dirty.

 

[smackdaddies]

pretty good write up of the packers rb situation here

 

[David Yudkin]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?

Packers should have about 425 rushing attempts this year. I think its plausible he gets 60%, so possibly.

Rascal is killing it here.

GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I don't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.

 

[LHUCKS]

GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I don't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.

I would not be surprised at all if Benson's YPC skyrocketed up to 4.4. IMHO, 3.6 is the floor for Benson in Green Bay, not the ceiling.Running in Green Bay is a lot different than Cincinnati.

 

[smackdaddies]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?

Packers should have about 425 rushing attempts this year. I think its plausible he gets 60%, so possibly.

Rascal is killing it here.

GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I don't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.

Is that by choice (declining rushing) or because of lack of talent? - 2 years ago grant went down and last year he did not appear to really get it back, certainly not at first. That left the pack with a full back as their most talented player in the backfield. I think if Benson (and later Green) have the ability, you will see the Packers rushes grow closer to 3 years ago. If they don't, you could see the rushing total for the team go below 300.

 

[smackdaddies]

GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I don't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.

I would not be surprised at all if Benson's YPC skyrocketed up to 4.4. IMHO, 3.6 is the floor for Benson in Green Bay, not the ceiling.Running in Green Bay is a lot different than Cincinnati.

My issue with that is Benson has never been a back to get a lot of carries out of the Shotgun - which is where most of the Packs 1 back plays have come from the past two years. I am not sure it works that well for him, and his ypc from that formation is also lower than his usual average.For me it is all about value at his current adp, with a big plus being in non ppr leagues.

 

[LHUCKS]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

 

[LHUCKS]

GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I don't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.

I would not be surprised at all if Benson's YPC skyrocketed up to 4.4. IMHO, 3.6 is the floor for Benson in Green Bay, not the ceiling.Running in Green Bay is a lot different than Cincinnati.

My issue with that is Benson has never been a back to get a lot of carries out of the Shotgun - which is where most of the Packs 1 back plays have come from the past two years. I am not sure it works that well for him, and his ypc from that formation is also lower than his usual average.

yeah, I'm not sure either...I still expect a YPC higher than 3.7.

 

[smackdaddies]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

 

[LHUCKS]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

nope, never played in the scheme

 

[smackdaddies]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

nope, never played in the scheme

pretty sure Jay Gruden ran it last year

 

[LHUCKS]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

nope, never played in the scheme

pretty sure Jay Gruden ran it last year

"He's trying to learn a different language," McCarthy saidWatching the Bengals last year it sure didn't feel like the classic West Coast verstion that Green Bay plays. To be honest the term has been so bastardized, who knows what the current definition is.

My ultimate point is that he's learning a new playbook.

 

[smackdaddies]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

nope, never played in the scheme

pretty sure Jay Gruden ran it last year

"He's trying to learn a different language," McCarthy said

So I was right, you just can't admit it?

 

[LHUCKS]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

nope, never played in the scheme

pretty sure Jay Gruden ran it last year

"He's trying to learn a different language," McCarthy said

So I was right, you just can't admit it?

Per Rotoworld "Benson has never played in a West Coast scheme before"So I was right and you're looking to argue for the sake of arguing?

I think we were probably both right and it depends on how you define West Coast...the Packers play what I consider to be the classic West Coast.

 

[rascal]

What about BJGE?

 

[smackdaddies]

The biggest concern for Benson is learning the West Coast playbook. It may take him several weeks into the season to fully grasp the offense.

didn't the bungels play the wc offense last season?

nope, never played in the scheme

pretty sure Jay Gruden ran it last year

"He's trying to learn a different language," McCarthy said

So I was right, you just can't admit it?

Per Rotoworld "Benson has never played in a West Coast scheme before"So I was right and you're looking to argue for the sake of arguing?

I think we were probably both right and it depends on how you define West Coast...the Packers play what I consider to be the classic West Coast.

pretty backhanded way of saying I was right, but for the sake of peace and harmony on the boards, I accept your acknowledgment that I was right and you were wrong

 

[smackdaddies]

What about BJGE?

At an adp of 53, I would say BGE is undervalued also

 

[LHUCKS]

What about BJGE?

Meh, not interested at that cost.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.

300*3.8=1140

ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?

Packers should have about 425 rushing attempts this year. I think its plausible he gets 60%, so possibly.

Rascal is killing it here.

GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I don't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.

Is that by choice (declining rushing) or because of lack of talent? - 2 years ago grant went down and last year he did not appear to really get it back, certainly not at first. That left the pack with a full back as their most talented player in the backfield. I think if Benson (and later Green) have the ability, you will see the Packers rushes grow closer to 3 years ago. If they don't, you could see the rushing total for the team go below 300.

I'm not at all sure that Benson is even a significant upgrade over Starks or the recent, used up version of Ryan Grant. He's able to give you bulk carries at or under 4 YPC, but he's not a good player at this point. I don't see any way GB slants the offense back toward running more based on adding Cedric Benson, and he's never been any good as a receiver. If he were still dirt cheap, I might be willing to roll the dice, but there are other guys I like way more in the 8th - 10th range where he is currently going.