Player Spotlight: Priest Holmes (1 Viewer)

[ds857]

Priest's last great season was 2003 where he probably got around 370 fantasy points, not counting bonus pts for 100yd games or PPR. LT2 is being projected to get about 300 fantasy points this year. That year, Priest got almost 1500 rushing yds, 700 receiving yards and 27 TDsIf he drops 5 TDs to about 22 TDs thats another 30 pts less, and then if you drop his rushing yards and receiving yds combined by about 200-300 that could be 20-30 pts less. That makes LT2 and Priest almost equal (Priest is ahead by a little). So if they're similar, why would you take the risk at drafting Priest?Is there something wrong with my reasonining or projections?Is it because Priest has such a large upside? If he matched his 2003 season, he would be 70 pts better than LT, which is about 5 pts better a game. But that is ONLY if he matched that season, and from what it seems, it doesnt seem like he could match that season.

 

[Jackstraw]

Will Shields is currently back in KC getting an arthritic back condition looked at. For those of you not familiar with the KC line, Shields is the perennial pro bowl guard and the absolute glue that holds it together. He's started like 191 straight games. Not necessarily something to panic about but something to keep an eye on. If you hear nasty things about his back as training camp progresses you might begin to shave some off Priest's YPC number for your projections. Right now I have him at 4.8 but without shields that has to drop down to around 4.4-4.5 and probably costs him some TD's. Shields frequently has his ample bulk located on a couple of defenders as Priest is dancing into the endzone.

 

[David Yudkin]

Priest's last great season was 2003 where he probably got around 370 fantasy points, not counting bonus pts for 100yd games or PPR. LT2 is being projected to get about 300 fantasy points this year.

That year, Priest got almost 1500 rushing yds, 700 receiving yards and 27 TDs

If he drops 5 TDs to about 22 TDs thats another 30 pts less, and then if you drop his rushing yards and receiving yds combined by about 200-300 that could be 20-30 pts less. That makes LT2 and Priest almost equal (Priest is ahead by a little). So if they're similar, why would you take the risk at drafting Priest?

Is there something wrong with my reasonining or projections?

Is it because Priest has such a large upside? If he matched his 2003 season, he would be 70 pts better than LT, which is about 5 pts better a game. But that is ONLY if he matched that season, and from what it seems, it doesnt seem like he could match that season.

Holmes2004: 24.75 ppg

2003: 23.32 ppg

2002: 25.64 ppg

2001: 17.31 ppg

LT

2004: 18.00 ppg

2003: 21.50 ppg

2002: 19.19 ppg

2001: 13.75 ppg

Holmes has outscored LT by a fair margain in 3 of the past 4 years and even in LT's best season (2003).

Holmes offers a decided advantage in every game he plays over every other RB (unless you happen to thimk the KC running game will tank).

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Priest's last great season was 2003 where he probably got around 370 fantasy points, not counting bonus pts for 100yd games or PPR. LT2 is being projected to get about 300 fantasy points this year.

That year, Priest got almost 1500 rushing yds, 700 receiving yards and 27 TDs

If he drops 5 TDs to about 22 TDs thats another 30 pts less, and then if you drop his rushing yards and receiving yds combined by about 200-300 that could be 20-30 pts less. That makes LT2 and Priest almost equal (Priest is ahead by a little). So if they're similar, why would you take the risk at drafting Priest?

Is there something wrong with my reasonining or projections?

Is it because Priest has such a large upside? If he matched his 2003 season, he would be 70 pts better than LT, which is about 5 pts better a game. But that is ONLY if he matched that season, and from what it seems, it doesnt seem like he could match that season.

With both healthy, if you think that LT will even come close to sniffing Priest's numbers you're quite insane.In a ppg basis the last few years, the difference between Priest and LT is about the same as the difference between LT and Westbrook, or LT and Dunn.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours. Here's what I've come up with so far.It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points. Risk adjusted points is 290.3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT). Risk adjusted points is 295.On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.Now it get's interesting. Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick. It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers. Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ. However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

 

[David Yudkin]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours. Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points. Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT). Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting. Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick. It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers. Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ. However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far.

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time.

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

So now we're talking about Priest AND a lineman getting hurt. How is that any more like than say....LT getting hurt?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

So now we're talking about Priest AND a lineman getting hurt. How is that any more like than say....LT getting hurt?

The next argument will be about factoring in the risk of the KC bus overturning, injuring the entire team and why its better to take Shaun Alexander instead.

 

[borribel]

There are two things in FF you can't predict:

Touchdowns and Injuries. :graduate:

Can you name the Runningback with these Year-Games played:

98-15, 99-10, 00-13, 01-2, 02-16, 03-16, 04-14 ???

Yes, it's Fragile Fred. Who would've bet, that he stayed healthy in 02 and 03 after season 01?

Looking at Priest I see a good RB in a perfect system.

If you are not sure if he stays healthy, back him up with L.Johnson.

It's mentioned in this thread, that this combo will pay back.

Given the shaky WR-Squad (you can't call them good at all – except Gonzalez) and a questionable Defense (they must show that they improved) KC does the best and run them all the way down, so they score and control the clock. They could easily increase their 500 rushing plays. But in this case Holmes and Johnson will split the carries by a more equal margin (60:40).

But I don't believe they will do that (running opponents into the ground and splitting carries lesser than 70:30).

Holmes:

Rushing 280/1250/22

Receiving 65/585/2

 

[ds857]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours.  Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points.  Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT).  Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting.  Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick.  It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers.  Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ.  However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. 

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. 

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

quick question... why do people think that LJ can replicate last year's second half of the season numbers? Wasnt he the same player that was left for dead a couple of years ago and who Vermeil refused to play? I'm not sure about this comment, so I could be wrong, but I just remember something along those lineson a second note... if you draft priest and can only get 1 of the top 5WR in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which RB would you be targeting in the 2nd or 3rd round? Then I would think that you have to draft another WR in the 4th round (LJ in the 5th), so who would you be targeting in the 4th?

After the 5th round, who should you be targeting in the 6th and 7th rounds? I would assume a 3rd WR and a 3rd RB to fill in for bye weeks?

 

[David Yudkin]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours.  Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points.  Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT).  Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting.  Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick.  It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers.  Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ.  However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. 

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. 

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

quick question... why do people think that LJ can replicate last year's second half of the season numbers? Wasnt he the same player that was left for dead a couple of years ago and who Vermeil refused to play? I'm not sure about this comment, so I could be wrong, but I just remember something along those lineson a second note... if you draft priest and can only get 1 of the top 5WR in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which RB would you be targeting in the 2nd or 3rd round? Then I would think that you have to draft another WR in the 4th round (LJ in the 5th), so who would you be targeting in the 4th?

After the 5th round, who should you be targeting in the 6th and 7th rounds? I would assume a 3rd WR and a 3rd RB to fill in for bye weeks?

For starters, Johnson had all of 20 carries in 2003 and people wrote him off. I don't care at all what he did in such a small sample size, but for those that are interested, he had a 4.2 ypc and a TD.As I mentioned somewhere, some people (not you specifically) have made it a point to rank Willis McGahee in the Top 5 based on his performance at the end of last year. Others have done the same thing with Kevin Jones. On a per game basis, Johnson did better than BOTH of them, yet the others are highly touted and Johnson is destined to fail should he have to play.

As a theoretical question, how many games does a player have to play to be considered "proven?" I agree that it's probably more than Johnson played, but I would also argue that it's more than McGahee or Jones or Julius Jones or Steven Jackson--yet all those guys are suddenly uber studs while Johnson would be the second coming of Troy Hambrick.

As for the question, if the Top 5 WR were gone, I would seriously look at a QB over the RB that might be available. Guys that I have seen still there have been Jordan, Bell, and Jackson, and I think all of them have some question marks. Aside from all of them being unproven, Jordan might not get the workload or the goalline carries, who really knows what's going on in Denver, and I think Jackson will not get the workload and will split more time with Faulk than many are willing to consider. Depending upon the scoring system, if Culpepper or McNabb were there, I might take one of them. I also am in the minority in that I think Gonzalez is worth taking at this point, but many will feel he isn't.

 

[ds857]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours.  Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points.  Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT).  Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting.  Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick.  It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers.  Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ.  However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. 

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. 

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

quick question... why do people think that LJ can replicate last year's second half of the season numbers? Wasnt he the same player that was left for dead a couple of years ago and who Vermeil refused to play? I'm not sure about this comment, so I could be wrong, but I just remember something along those lineson a second note... if you draft priest and can only get 1 of the top 5WR in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which RB would you be targeting in the 2nd or 3rd round? Then I would think that you have to draft another WR in the 4th round (LJ in the 5th), so who would you be targeting in the 4th?

After the 5th round, who should you be targeting in the 6th and 7th rounds? I would assume a 3rd WR and a 3rd RB to fill in for bye weeks?

For starters, Johnson had all of 20 carries in 2003 and people wrote him off. I don't care at all what he did in such a small sample size, but for those that are interested, he had a 4.2 ypc and a TD.As I mentioned somewhere, some people (not you specifically) have made it a point to rank Willis McGahee in the Top 5 based on his performance at the end of last year. Others have done the same thing with Kevin Jones. On a per game basis, Johnson did better than BOTH of them, yet the others are highly touted and Johnson is destined to fail should he have to play.

As a theoretical question, how many games does a player have to play to be considered "proven?" I agree that it's probably more than Johnson played, but I would also argue that it's more than McGahee or Jones or Julius Jones or Steven Jackson--yet all those guys are suddenly uber studs while Johnson would be the second coming of Troy Hambrick.

As for the question, if the Top 5 WR were gone, I would seriously look at a QB over the RB that might be available. Guys that I have seen still there have been Jordan, Bell, and Jackson, and I think all of them have some question marks. Aside from all of them being unproven, Jordan might not get the workload or the goalline carries, who really knows what's going on in Denver, and I think Jackson will not get the workload and will split more time with Faulk than many are willing to consider. Depending upon the scoring system, if Culpepper or McNabb were there, I might take one of them. I also am in the minority in that I think Gonzalez is worth taking at this point, but many will feel he isn't.

so if you go QB or TE as the 3rd pick (Priest and a WR as your first and second), then you have to take an RB with your 4th. Can you really be satisfied with any of the RBs that will be left at the end of the 4th round? yes all the RBs you mentioned have question marks, but the RBs after them have even more questions. It seems like your strategy would be try to get at least one of the top tier players from each position and then build a team that way, rather than try to build depth from the get go... just trying to see your reasoning in picking a QB or TE

also if it were a 3WR league, and you go with your strategy, then i wont get to pick a 2nd or 3rd WR until the 6th and 7th rounds... does that change your strategy at all?

it seems like drafting priest just ties you into certain situations because you have to draft LJ in the 5th, whereas if you go with LT or SA, i think you have a lot more room to draft....

comments?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

it seems like drafting priest just ties you into certain situations because you have to draft LJ in the 5th, whereas if you go with LT or SA, i think you have a lot more room to draft....

comments?

A lot of people use this logic and the logic of "playing catchup", which I absolutely cannot stand. Due to the bust rate in fantasy football EVERYONE is playing catch up, some people just don't know it.If you draft Deshaun Foster in the 5th instead of LJ and Foster flops as many think he will, how are you any better off 'catch-up' wise than the guy who was "tied in" to drafting LJ? People draft to fill out their starters, yet by the time the season gets rolling those starters aren't filled out by those players anyway because a number of them inevitably bust. Locking up the single best situation (KC) that is eons ahead of the competition at the most crucial position (RB1) in fantasy football, to me is worth not having a guy who might be a serviceable starter somewhere else, but has just a big a chance (~70% of 5th/6th rounders the last 2 years were busts) of doing even less for you than LJ even when Priest is healthy.

There's a pretty good chance that by the end of the year that the KC starting RB position will have netted more total points than LT or SA PLUS the 5th rounder you grabbed instead of LJ, yet Priest/LJ will do it taking up only 1 starting spot as compared to two by the others.

 

[David Yudkin]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours.  Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points.  Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT).  Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting.  Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick.  It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers.  Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ.  However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. 

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. 

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

quick question... why do people think that LJ can replicate last year's second half of the season numbers? Wasnt he the same player that was left for dead a couple of years ago and who Vermeil refused to play? I'm not sure about this comment, so I could be wrong, but I just remember something along those lineson a second note... if you draft priest and can only get 1 of the top 5WR in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which RB would you be targeting in the 2nd or 3rd round? Then I would think that you have to draft another WR in the 4th round (LJ in the 5th), so who would you be targeting in the 4th?

After the 5th round, who should you be targeting in the 6th and 7th rounds? I would assume a 3rd WR and a 3rd RB to fill in for bye weeks?

For starters, Johnson had all of 20 carries in 2003 and people wrote him off. I don't care at all what he did in such a small sample size, but for those that are interested, he had a 4.2 ypc and a TD.As I mentioned somewhere, some people (not you specifically) have made it a point to rank Willis McGahee in the Top 5 based on his performance at the end of last year. Others have done the same thing with Kevin Jones. On a per game basis, Johnson did better than BOTH of them, yet the others are highly touted and Johnson is destined to fail should he have to play.

As a theoretical question, how many games does a player have to play to be considered "proven?" I agree that it's probably more than Johnson played, but I would also argue that it's more than McGahee or Jones or Julius Jones or Steven Jackson--yet all those guys are suddenly uber studs while Johnson would be the second coming of Troy Hambrick.

As for the question, if the Top 5 WR were gone, I would seriously look at a QB over the RB that might be available. Guys that I have seen still there have been Jordan, Bell, and Jackson, and I think all of them have some question marks. Aside from all of them being unproven, Jordan might not get the workload or the goalline carries, who really knows what's going on in Denver, and I think Jackson will not get the workload and will split more time with Faulk than many are willing to consider. Depending upon the scoring system, if Culpepper or McNabb were there, I might take one of them. I also am in the minority in that I think Gonzalez is worth taking at this point, but many will feel he isn't.

so if you go QB or TE as the 3rd pick (Priest and a WR as your first and second), then you have to take an RB with your 4th. Can you really be satisfied with any of the RBs that will be left at the end of the 4th round? yes all the RBs you mentioned have question marks, but the RBs after them have even more questions. It seems like your strategy would be try to get at least one of the top tier players from each position and then build a team that way, rather than try to build depth from the get go... just trying to see your reasoning in picking a QB or TE

also if it were a 3WR league, and you go with your strategy, then i wont get to pick a 2nd or 3rd WR until the 6th and 7th rounds... does that change your strategy at all?

it seems like drafting priest just ties you into certain situations because you have to draft LJ in the 5th, whereas if you go with LT or SA, i think you have a lot more room to draft....

comments?

I generally try to use a VBD approach and that's why I would look at QB or TE, but if you really wanted to WR/WR at 24/25, there WILL be 2 good ones to chose from if you add in Horn and Walker.And we were slotting LJ as the RB to take at 5.01, so you might look at the best full time playing RB to pair with him there.

Despite what people may think, there are other positions besides RB and there are also RB to be had later. Last year, 11 of the 32 starting RB were different by the end of the year than at the start of the year. Those guys were not drafted early and some even went undrafted.

As for the last paragraph, IMO, even if you lose a few points by having to "chase" others at other positions, KC RB outscore all other RBs by so much that it should not make any difference.

 

[ds857]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours.  Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points.  Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT).  Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting.  Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick.  It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers.  Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ.  However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. 

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. 

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

quick question... why do people think that LJ can replicate last year's second half of the season numbers? Wasnt he the same player that was left for dead a couple of years ago and who Vermeil refused to play? I'm not sure about this comment, so I could be wrong, but I just remember something along those lineson a second note... if you draft priest and can only get 1 of the top 5WR in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which RB would you be targeting in the 2nd or 3rd round? Then I would think that you have to draft another WR in the 4th round (LJ in the 5th), so who would you be targeting in the 4th?

After the 5th round, who should you be targeting in the 6th and 7th rounds? I would assume a 3rd WR and a 3rd RB to fill in for bye weeks?

For starters, Johnson had all of 20 carries in 2003 and people wrote him off. I don't care at all what he did in such a small sample size, but for those that are interested, he had a 4.2 ypc and a TD.As I mentioned somewhere, some people (not you specifically) have made it a point to rank Willis McGahee in the Top 5 based on his performance at the end of last year. Others have done the same thing with Kevin Jones. On a per game basis, Johnson did better than BOTH of them, yet the others are highly touted and Johnson is destined to fail should he have to play.

As a theoretical question, how many games does a player have to play to be considered "proven?" I agree that it's probably more than Johnson played, but I would also argue that it's more than McGahee or Jones or Julius Jones or Steven Jackson--yet all those guys are suddenly uber studs while Johnson would be the second coming of Troy Hambrick.

As for the question, if the Top 5 WR were gone, I would seriously look at a QB over the RB that might be available. Guys that I have seen still there have been Jordan, Bell, and Jackson, and I think all of them have some question marks. Aside from all of them being unproven, Jordan might not get the workload or the goalline carries, who really knows what's going on in Denver, and I think Jackson will not get the workload and will split more time with Faulk than many are willing to consider. Depending upon the scoring system, if Culpepper or McNabb were there, I might take one of them. I also am in the minority in that I think Gonzalez is worth taking at this point, but many will feel he isn't.

so if you go QB or TE as the 3rd pick (Priest and a WR as your first and second), then you have to take an RB with your 4th. Can you really be satisfied with any of the RBs that will be left at the end of the 4th round? yes all the RBs you mentioned have question marks, but the RBs after them have even more questions. It seems like your strategy would be try to get at least one of the top tier players from each position and then build a team that way, rather than try to build depth from the get go... just trying to see your reasoning in picking a QB or TE

also if it were a 3WR league, and you go with your strategy, then i wont get to pick a 2nd or 3rd WR until the 6th and 7th rounds... does that change your strategy at all?

it seems like drafting priest just ties you into certain situations because you have to draft LJ in the 5th, whereas if you go with LT or SA, i think you have a lot more room to draft....

comments?

I generally try to use a VBD approach and that's why I would look at QB or TE, but if you really wanted to WR/WR at 24/25, there WILL be 2 good ones to chose from if you add in Horn and Walker.And we were slotting LJ as the RB to take at 5.01, so you might look at the best full time playing RB to pair with him there.

Despite what people may think, there are other positions besides RB and there are also RB to be had later. Last year, 11 of the 32 starting RB were different by the end of the year than at the start of the year. Those guys were not drafted early and some even went undrafted.

As for the last paragraph, IMO, even if you lose a few points by having to "chase" others at other positions, KC RB outscore all other RBs by so much that it should not make any difference.

i understand that there were a lot of starting rbs at the end of the season that were different than at the beginning of the season. You mentioned that there were other RBs that can be had later on in the draft? Which ones do you think are worthwhile in picking up later on in the draft?Also, question for everyone, would you take the chance and NOT draft LJ in the 5th and try to get him in the 6th/7th?

Or is the value lost by taking LJ in the 5th so small that its not worth taking the risk in waiting to see if you can get LJ in the 6th/7th?

 

[Colin Dowling]

So, given I'm re-drafting from the 2 spot this year, I've been reading this and other Priest / SA / Deuce / Edge threads for hours.  Here's what I've come up with so far.

It's basically a numerical re-hash of Yudkin's point, I believe.

1. Assume LT is a LOCK for 300 fantasy points.

2. Assume SA, Deuce and Edge have a 80% chance of 300 points, a 20% chance of 250 points, and, most importantly, a 0% chance of 350 points.  Risk adjusted points is 290.

3. Be conservative and assume Priest has twice as much chance as SA et.al. of underperforming (therefore 40%) and coin toss chance of the other two scenarios (30% matching LT, 30% far exceeding LT).  Risk adjusted points is 295.

On this basis, Priest doesn't have incremental value over SA et.al. to warrant the risk.

Now it get's interesting.  Assume you have an 80% chance of getting LJ with your 5 pick.  It is very reasonable, IMHO, to assume that the combination of Priest and LJ will eliminate 80% of the probability of NOT exceeding LT's numbers.  Revised risk adjusted points (for the tandem) is 337.5 points.

Now, it WILL cost you value to spend your 5 pick on LJ.  However, that cost appears to be about 20 points of value based on the mocks and average projections I've looked at so far. 

So either you are able to get LJ and realize the tandem value, or you don't have to use your 5 pick on LJ and you still get equivalent points to SA et.al.

The scenario which is least desireable is a head to head league without a regular season points champion, but that is only true if you accept the proposition that Priest is more likely to be MIA at playoff time. 

Since the leagues that I'm in pay as much for regular season points championship as for the superbowl winner, I am leaning at this point to signing up for the Priest train.

Obviously, the percentage probabilities are debateable, but does anyone see any flaws in the logic?

I'll play devil's advocate as I have already given my opinion. Worst case scenario is Holmes gets banged up early and has some nagging injury in which he is a game time decision almost every week. So he might or might not play each week.Then phase two of the worse case scenario is a key cog in the line gets hurt and LJ does not play like he did at the end of last year. Injuries happen all the time, and this obviously could happen. However, I cancel this argument out for the most part, as this could happen to ANY stud RB . . . and with the KC tandem there would need to be multiple injuries for a disaster to strike.

Another viable option is to roll the dice and just take Holmes but NOT take Johnson. This would likely require investing in another early pick to get a stron RB2 and more RB depth to cover should Holmes get hurt. But as stated many times, I doubt whoever that other RB is could outscore LJ should Holmes get hurt, but there is less risk in that the mystery RB could be used in his own right and was not taking up a bench spot with Priest healthy.

I basically think you should get another decent RB or at least a guy who can be near a RB2 and use Priest/LJ as the RB1. As I outlined above, Priest, WR, WR, LJ, and another RB at the 4.12/5.01 turn would be a GREAT start.

quick question... why do people think that LJ can replicate last year's second half of the season numbers? Wasnt he the same player that was left for dead a couple of years ago and who Vermeil refused to play? I'm not sure about this comment, so I could be wrong, but I just remember something along those lineson a second note... if you draft priest and can only get 1 of the top 5WR in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which RB would you be targeting in the 2nd or 3rd round? Then I would think that you have to draft another WR in the 4th round (LJ in the 5th), so who would you be targeting in the 4th?

After the 5th round, who should you be targeting in the 6th and 7th rounds? I would assume a 3rd WR and a 3rd RB to fill in for bye weeks?

For starters, Johnson had all of 20 carries in 2003 and people wrote him off. I don't care at all what he did in such a small sample size, but for those that are interested, he had a 4.2 ypc and a TD.As I mentioned somewhere, some people (not you specifically) have made it a point to rank Willis McGahee in the Top 5 based on his performance at the end of last year. Others have done the same thing with Kevin Jones. On a per game basis, Johnson did better than BOTH of them, yet the others are highly touted and Johnson is destined to fail should he have to play.

As a theoretical question, how many games does a player have to play to be considered "proven?" I agree that it's probably more than Johnson played, but I would also argue that it's more than McGahee or Jones or Julius Jones or Steven Jackson--yet all those guys are suddenly uber studs while Johnson would be the second coming of Troy Hambrick.

As for the question, if the Top 5 WR were gone, I would seriously look at a QB over the RB that might be available. Guys that I have seen still there have been Jordan, Bell, and Jackson, and I think all of them have some question marks. Aside from all of them being unproven, Jordan might not get the workload or the goalline carries, who really knows what's going on in Denver, and I think Jackson will not get the workload and will split more time with Faulk than many are willing to consider. Depending upon the scoring system, if Culpepper or McNabb were there, I might take one of them. I also am in the minority in that I think Gonzalez is worth taking at this point, but many will feel he isn't.

so if you go QB or TE as the 3rd pick (Priest and a WR as your first and second), then you have to take an RB with your 4th. Can you really be satisfied with any of the RBs that will be left at the end of the 4th round? yes all the RBs you mentioned have question marks, but the RBs after them have even more questions. It seems like your strategy would be try to get at least one of the top tier players from each position and then build a team that way, rather than try to build depth from the get go... just trying to see your reasoning in picking a QB or TE

also if it were a 3WR league, and you go with your strategy, then i wont get to pick a 2nd or 3rd WR until the 6th and 7th rounds... does that change your strategy at all?

it seems like drafting priest just ties you into certain situations because you have to draft LJ in the 5th, whereas if you go with LT or SA, i think you have a lot more room to draft....

comments?

I generally try to use a VBD approach and that's why I would look at QB or TE, but if you really wanted to WR/WR at 24/25, there WILL be 2 good ones to chose from if you add in Horn and Walker.And we were slotting LJ as the RB to take at 5.01, so you might look at the best full time playing RB to pair with him there.

Despite what people may think, there are other positions besides RB and there are also RB to be had later. Last year, 11 of the 32 starting RB were different by the end of the year than at the start of the year. Those guys were not drafted early and some even went undrafted.

As for the last paragraph, IMO, even if you lose a few points by having to "chase" others at other positions, KC RB outscore all other RBs by so much that it should not make any difference.

i understand that there were a lot of starting rbs at the end of the season that were different than at the beginning of the season. You mentioned that there were other RBs that can be had later on in the draft? Which ones do you think are worthwhile in picking up later on in the draft?Also, question for everyone, would you take the chance and NOT draft LJ in the 5th and try to get him in the 6th/7th?

Or is the value lost by taking LJ in the 5th so small that its not worth taking the risk in waiting to see if you can get LJ in the 6th/7th?

I think Lee Suggs, Fred Taylor, and Kevan Barlow in the 5th/6th all have a chance to outperform guys taken in the 2nd/3rd. It is not unforeseeable that those guys would get 250 carries. Finding a back that gets that much action in the 5th or 6th round is great value.Colin

 

[Evilgrin 72]

As for the question, if the Top 5 WR were gone, I would seriously look at a QB over the RB that might be available. Guys that I have seen still there have been Jordan, Bell, and Jackson, and I think all of them have some question marks. Aside from all of them being unproven, Jordan might not get the workload or the goalline carries, who really knows what's going on in Denver, and I think Jackson will not get the workload and will split more time with Faulk than many are willing to consider. Depending upon the scoring system, if Culpepper or McNabb were there, I might take one of them. I also am in the minority in that I think Gonzalez is worth taking at this point, but many will feel he isn't.

I have spent most of the past 24 hours debating my 2.11 pick and have come to this EXACT same conclusion. I marked 23 players for selection at this pick (since obviously one or more will be there - my top 15 backs (LT2, Holmes, Alexander, McGahee, Edge, Deuce, Rudi, Dillon, Portis, C. Martin, K. Jones, J. Jones, D. Davis, T. Barber, J. Lewis in no particular order) the top 3 QB (Manning, McNabb, Culpepper) and the top 5 WR (Moss, Owens, C. Johnson, Harrison, and Holt) If I take Priest at #2, I will take one of the RBs if they are not all gone, then default to the WRs, then finally the QBs. Seeing as Ahman Green will go before pick 23, at least two of these players will be left, most likely McNabb and Chad Johnson.An added twist for me is that I traded 3.2, 4.11, and 6.11 for 3.9, 4.4, and 6.4 specidially so I can get LJ at 6.4 rather than going for him in rounds 4/5. Thus, I don't have that quick pick on the turn, so if I choose to go WR or QB, I won't have another crack at an RB until pick #33 at best, leaving me with a likely Arrington/C. Williams/W.Dunn type of choice at RB2. I would grab an RB and a WR2 at the 3/4 picks, get a QB at 5.2, Johnson at 6.4, a 4th back at 7.2 as a bye-week guy (Suggs/Foster/Bettis/Duckett, etc.), and grab WRs at 8.11 and 9.2. I think I could live with the aforementioned RBs as an RB2 if I had Holmes/LJ locked up. My team after 9 rounds would look something like :

K. Collins

Holmes

Arrington

L. Johnson

Suggs

C. Johnson

R. Wayne

E. Kennison

D. Stallworth

I think that's a lineup that can definitely compete considering you'll get big points from the KC running back, whoever it is - you've got two of the top 10 receivers, and a top 5 or 6 QB. Grab a decent backup QB in round 10 or 11 in case Collins falls apart (Griese, McNair) - get an upside RB like Mike Anderson in the 11th, the grab a D and a PK in the 12th/13th, get an upside WR in the 14th and your backup D/K in 15 and 16 and you finish with..

Collins

Griese

Holmes

Arrington

L. Johnson

Suggs

M. Anderson

C. Johnson

R. Wayne

E. Kennison

D. Stallworth

A. Randle-El

Janikowski

Feely

JETS

Seattle

Something like that - I think that team could win even with the LJ in the 6th pick. Any thoughts on the strategy?

In short - I think Priest goes #2 and no lower unless you are REALLY averse to risk/reward and take Alexander.

Holmes - 240 carries 1,125 yards 22 TD 40 rec. 440 yds 3 TD

 

[NYG Endzone]

Priest is back

It's time to ask whether Chiefs running back Priest Holmes is the greatest signing in the history of unrestricted free agency. The feeling here is he's No. 2 behind Reggie White, whom the Packers signed at the beginning of the free agency era.

And Holmes apparently is healthy and wants to play at least two more years.

In an interview with the Star Tribune at River Falls, Wis., this week, Holmes, a nine-year veteran, said: "I'm excited to still be playing, and I've always looked at a 10-year career as being a big victory for a running back. I've outlived a few years now where typically guys my age [31] fall off."

Holmes missed eight games last season because of a strained medial collateral ligament in his right knee. But he still rushed for 14 touchdowns. No other player in NFL history has scored more touchdowns (66) or rushing touchdowns (62) over a three-year period than Holmes scored from 2002 to 2004.

Holmes' backup, Larry Johnson, stepped in last year and rushed for 541 yards and nine touchdowns over the final six games. But if you fantasy football geeks are worried about Johnson, a former first-round draft pick, sharing the ball with Holmes this season, forget about it.



"We won't be splitting time," Holmes said. "They've put in things where he can be in the game at the same time. But it's going to be like it was before I got hurt."

http://www.startribune.com/stories/136/5558248.html

 

[Raiders Fan]

Priest is back

It's time to ask whether Chiefs running back Priest Holmes is the greatest signing in the history of unrestricted free agency. The feeling here is he's No. 2 behind Reggie White, whom the Packers signed at the beginning of the free agency era.

And Holmes apparently is healthy and wants to play at least two more years.

In an interview with the Star Tribune at River Falls, Wis., this week, Holmes, a nine-year veteran, said: "I'm excited to still be playing, and I've always looked at a 10-year career as being a big victory for a running back. I've outlived a few years now where typically guys my age [31] fall off."

Holmes missed eight games last season because of a strained medial collateral ligament in his right knee. But he still rushed for 14 touchdowns. No other player in NFL history has scored more touchdowns (66) or rushing touchdowns (62) over a three-year period than Holmes scored from 2002 to 2004.

Holmes' backup, Larry Johnson, stepped in last year and rushed for 541 yards and nine touchdowns over the final six games. But if you fantasy football geeks are worried about Johnson, a former first-round draft pick, sharing the ball with Holmes this season, forget about it.



"We won't be splitting time," Holmes said. "They've put in things where he can be in the game at the same time. But it's going to be like it was before I got hurt."

http://www.startribune.com/stories/136/5558248.html

UNTIL HE GETS HURT AGAIN!!! Nobody is arguing Priest isn't the man but like me are saying I don't think he will stay healthy all year.

 

[NYG Endzone]

HELLO RAIDERS FAN!!!! HOW ARE YOU!!!!!!Many people were speculating that LJ would cut into a healthy Priest's carries (at a higher percentage than the usual RB2 clip for the KC runners)

 

[Raiders Fan]

HELLO RAIDERS FAN!!!! HOW ARE YOU!!!!!!

Many people were speculating that LJ would cut into a healthy Priests carries (at a higher percentage than 2002-2003 KC)

Well they are new then.. Seriously most of the people I see doubting Holmes is the injury factor including me.. I took LJ for next year as I can see KC cuting bait next season for cap room.. Plus he would be turning 33..

 

[Joe Kidd]

For those who love Priest, would you take him #1 overall?  over LT2?

if he can really get you 100 pts over the next RB, why not roll the dice and take him #1?  why or why not?

or is LT2 just that safe of a pick that you have to take him #1?

I wouldn't hesitate to take Priest at 1.01 and LJ at 4.12

2 of your first 4 picks on 1 spot? That's insane.. Amazing the thinking.

Here is a team you could theoretically get using current ADP info:1.01 RB Priest Holmes

2.12 WR Chad Johnson

3.01 RB Curtis Martin

4.12 RB Larry Johnson

5.01 WR Anquan Boldin

6.12 WR Isaac Bruce

7.01 QB Jake Plummer

8.12 WR Charles Rogers

9.01 RB Mewelde Moore

10.12 QB Steve McNair

11.01 TE Jeb Putzier

12.12 DEF Tampa Bay

13.01 PK David Akers

I see nothing wrong with a team along these lines (you could even take other backup or part-time RB along the way as well. And I don't see this team "losing out" much by taking Priest and LJ.

would you grab 2 top 5/6 WR (if they drop to you) at the end of the 2nd and start of the 3rd knowing Priest's injury history and the fact that you have to grab LJ in the 5th? or would you have to go with one RB and one WR at the 2nd and 3rd because you took Priest? What if the league plays 2RB and 3WR, would that make a difference?

I have already been in several drafts this year and have seen two of the following available in many drafts: Holt, Harrison, CJ, Owens available at the 2.12/3.01 turn. Other guys that have been there have been Walker and Horn. I think taking two from the first group and am not so sure about Horn/Walker.A lot depends on how much you trust your drafting ability and your trust in getting another RB later on. IMO, you can get some decent POTENTIAL RB choices later in the draft, but there is certainly more risk involved in that approach.

I would take 2 WR there if available and try to get another RB the next pass by, although I wouldn't reach for someone that is not worthy of consideration. If you draft properly, the gains you get at other positions should offset the production you stand to lose at RB (if any).

So I can see going Priest-WR-WR-LJ-RB if that other RB spot is worth it. Guys that may be around there include Dunn, Taylor, Foster, CBrown, Benson, Staley, Barlow.

After reading this, it really got me thinking of going Priest-WR-WR-LJ-RB.My league is a little different from the above example: It's a 10 team; start 1QB, 2 RB, 3WR, K. FBG scoring except 3 pt for pass TD and 5 point bonuses for 100yd. rushing/receving and a 5 pt bonus for 300 yd passing.

I have the #2 pick in draft.

At 2.09 and 3.02 I expect that I can get 2 of the 4 Wr's (Holt, C. Johnson, Harrison, Owens )

My hesitation is that some good backs might slide to 2.09 (Barber, K. Jones, Rudi, C Mart)

My thinking is that in a 10 teamer if you go WR/WR at 2.09/3.02 that there will be less scarcity at the rb position at 5.02. Guys that might be available ( Cadillac, Arrington, Bennet, Dunn, Taylor)

Any opinions on this or has anyone tried this in a 10 team league?

 

[Raiders Fan]

Too risky to be a top pick..  Like Bonds in baseball age is a bad factor.  Especially to runningbacks.  For my case I will NEVER invest in a RB over 30 with a 1st rounder.  He turns 32 coming off another injury.  His YPC have dropped from 2001-2002.   Just too many negatives to take him as your top pick..  MOP you really pimping him hard.  I guess you bought him this year.  

My stats

225/1000/12    40/375/2

Of course I am expecting him to miss 6-8 games also this year.. Don't think he can take the pounding.  I guess I will never own him..

This guy is not DeShaun Foster for pete's sake. You people are gonna give him a 6-8 game layoff for injury? How many does Edge get? He missed half a season 3 years ago. How bout McGahee? ANy injury concerns there? McAllister? C.Brown? A.Green? LT? He did have a groin injury last year. Where do you draw the line?Doesn't anyone beside Yudkin and I see that Priest only becomes stronger with LJ behind him?(I knowthere are a lot) Even if Priest misses time, it would seem LJ has a great shot to still post quality numbers...he scored 2 TD in 5 str8 games last season...name another RB that did that..and as a back-up?

I understand the hate for KC and when you face Priest it's not fair...I really do. I wish it were not this way but facts are facts. He is 31...will turn 32 in October...as has been noted he does not have the ware and tear some people think in hear. Is Priest gonna play a lot longer? NO! He is not worth a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pick in a dynasty draft for sure...but in a re-draft? C'mon.

Edited to add: I have not made a pick up of him yet in any of my leagues...but I have a #1 pick in 1 legue, #2 in a dynasty league(I won't be taking him in that one)...and some that are yet to be determined.

I guess I expected him to perform a little better until he got hurt..

 

[Uncle Humuna]

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Too risky to be a top pick..  Like Bonds in baseball age is a bad factor.  Especially to runningbacks.  For my case I will NEVER invest in a RB over 30 with a 1st rounder.  He turns 32 coming off another injury.  His YPC have dropped from 2001-2002.   Just too many negatives to take him as your top pick..  MOP you really pimping him hard.  I guess you bought him this year.  

My stats

225/1000/12    40/375/2

Of course I am expecting him to miss 6-8 games also this year.. Don't think he can take the pounding.  I guess I will never own him..

This guy is not DeShaun Foster for pete's sake. You people are gonna give him a 6-8 game layoff for injury? How many does Edge get? He missed half a season 3 years ago. How bout McGahee? ANy injury concerns there? McAllister? C.Brown? A.Green? LT? He did have a groin injury last year. Where do you draw the line?Doesn't anyone beside Yudkin and I see that Priest only becomes stronger with LJ behind him?(I knowthere are a lot) Even if Priest misses time, it would seem LJ has a great shot to still post quality numbers...he scored 2 TD in 5 str8 games last season...name another RB that did that..and as a back-up?

I understand the hate for KC and when you face Priest it's not fair...I really do. I wish it were not this way but facts are facts. He is 31...will turn 32 in October...as has been noted he does not have the ware and tear some people think in hear. Is Priest gonna play a lot longer? NO! He is not worth a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pick in a dynasty draft for sure...but in a re-draft? C'mon.

Edited to add: I have not made a pick up of him yet in any of my leagues...but I have a #1 pick in 1 legue, #2 in a dynasty league(I won't be taking him in that one)...and some that are yet to be determined.

I guess I expected him to perform a little better until he got hurt..

Fair enough...btw I took LT2 and SA in both those leagues...picked up LJ when I had the chance in the 5th and 6th...glad I did.