Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
RB Willis McGahee is STILL Overrated (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe T
- Start date
bagger.
The One Play Quiz
about 2 PPG on average over the past 5 years.significant enough i think. the rule of multiples applies here. if you can extract an extra "insignificant" 1 or 2 PPG from every draft pick, you have all of a sudden built a team that will be outscoring opponents by 10+ PPG.
bagger.
The One Play Quiz
While you can certainly debate it, it is interesting to note that all of the above have had at least 1 top 5 finish within the past 2 years
again it comes down to pure speculation over past performance. while aaron is correct that all projections are "speculation" at least ranking these guys over mcgahee has some substance behind it.i have mcgahee ranked higher than lewis and portis, but considering lewis will not even be allowed to play football until 8/1 and portis' TD production plummeted in his first year in WAS (as well as receiving yards, rushing yards, and YPC) i think that is warranted.
ranking mcgahee over barber or davis is not. again they may finish pretty close, but wasting a first round pick on mcgahee over barber or davis is a very dangerous proposition. the amount of points that mcgahee may finish ahead of barber or davis is not worth the amount of points that he may not.
but that's just my humble opinion.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
I would much rather slot Tiki Barber at the #5 than McGahee. If there's one thing we know it that it's much easier to predict yardage totals than TD totals.
Noahs Troopers
Footballguy
Wow, I just wasted a good 20 minutes scanning through this rubbish. JoeT and Wilked hate McGahee is all I learned. Why don't you two just start your "I hate McGahee" fan club and spare the rest of us from this dribble. 
nice alias ARUD.
Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll
Footballguy
Earlier in the thread, it was < 12 TD's. To clarify, it appears the more recent Rudnicki posts have moved to "12 TD's, and over"? (I don't want to go back and check the tape)And is there money on this, or what?
Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll
Footballguy
good question about Losman. I agree that's a big wild card for the Bills this year. Obviously, if Losman is turning the ball over with any regularity or does a terrible job of converting 3rd downs, that's going to hurt McGahee's numbers b/c he won't get as many opportunities. But, Bledsoe was a struggling QB and the team still did reasonably well last year running the ball. The better Losman does, I think the better McGahee does b/c that will mean the offense is sustaining drives and reaching the red zone more frequently. However, I'm on record as saying I don't think Losman finishes the season healthy. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Holcomb lead the team in passing this year, and I think he can move the ball with the Bills WRs and a healthy McGahee drawing 8 in the box. I don't think McGahee's numbers rely as heavily on Losman as some think.I'm glad you agree with him surpassing 12 TDs, but I think your receiving numbers are a little lower than I'd project (250-300 seems more likely to me). I don't think last year was the most accurate indicator of his pass-catching abilities. If they are behind in more games this year, he'll catch more passes, IMO. I could also see him getting 325 carries at a 4.25 YPC pace for nearly 1400 yards rushing, but 1300 seems like a perfectly reasonable estimate.
agreed. but, J.Jones has seen the team bring in two pretty solid RBs that could steal carries from him, and he now has Bledsoe at QB who doesn't do a good job of throwing to his RBs. There is also a big question mark at RT, isn't there? He also missed half the season b/c he was injured and had his head coach openly question his toughness.btw, aren't you from Dallas anyway? hmmm.....If you do that, then you have to adjust everyone's numbers up. Didn't we prove that only one or two backs played in all 16 games.You are probably just adjusting McGahee's totals up, but not everyone elses. Project J. Jones over 16 games while you bumping up numbers.
I originally said: if you set the O/U for TDs at 12, I'd bet the over for McGahee but not for any other RB ranked outside of the top-4.Wilked took the bet for $20. If he reaches 12 total TDs, it's a push. If he plays in fewer than 12 games, the bet is cancelled.
(for the record, it's total TDs...not just rushing.)
Last edited by a moderator:
bagger.
The One Play Quiz
you hit the nail on the head regarding the passing estimate. i have him approximately matching his from last year. if he vaults that up to 400 yards instead of 200 and adds a TD or two there, he could be right there for the #5 RB.i don't have an issue ranking him that high as others do...my beef is more taking him that high over more proven players...you are just taking too much of a risk IMO.
Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll
Footballguy
So, what's it gonna be? What did you try to say?I might take Manning #4, actually...I would rather :stds:
i can't keep up with what smilies go to what board.
wilked
Footballguy
Conceivably? YesTake RBa and RBb
RBa punches it in 1st time every time from the 5 or closer. His team gets there about once per game, and he gets 16 cracks at the end zone, scoring each time, for 100%.
RBb needs 3 carries to get in the end zone, but he always gets in. His team has 1st and goal from the 5 or closer once per game, and his stats show 48 rushes within the 5 for 16 TDs. Identical results, different stats.
One could make a case that RBs with fewer goalline carries have a higher 'TD conversion' percentage than those with high goalline carries. That trend may hold true. However, I think RBa will always be a 90+% goalline rusher regardless of attempts, and likewise RBb will be a 33% guy, regardless of attempts
In the early going, McGahee's ADP is about 1.05, but I just don't see how it's justified.By the numbers, McGahee had 1128 yards on 284 carries, along with 13 TDs, and 22 catches for 169 yards - good for about 10th overall among RBs in non-PPR leagues. The impetus for ranking McGahee at 1.05 appears to be that McGahee put these numbers up over only 11 games. This is a classic mistake.McGahee averaged nearly 26 carries/game last season. It"s certain that he will not got that many carries this season, since 26 carries per game comes to a nearly unprecedented 416 carries per season. It"s far more likely that the coachin staff rode McGahee hard b/c he did not play much in the first 1/3 of the season. It"s far more likely that McGahee is going to get about 330 carries, simliar to the workload that Travis Henry got.McGahee wasn't impressive on a per carry basis either - he ran for 4.0 ypc, which is ok, but not special. On 330 carries, that works out to 1320 yards. But the real appeal of McGahee is that TDs, right? 13 TDs in 11 games means the potential for 18 TDs in 16 games, no? Well, McGahee scored once ever 22 carries last season, which would work out to about 15 TDs on the 330 carries we're assuming. But that's deceptive too. With JP Losman taking over at QB, are the Bills going to get in the red zone as frequently as they did last season? Will McGahee be in a position to cash in 15 times? I don't think so. Losman isn't going toreplace Bledsoe's production ant throw for nearly 3000 yards. He's most likely going to throw more INTs than TDs, and he'll definitely throw INTs more frequently than the one in 28 attempts that Bledose managed. He's unlikely to sustain as many drives as Bledsoe. And that means fewer TD opportunities for McGahee.McGahee managed to do something relatively unlikely last year - he was a top fantasy performer on a team that was ranked in the bottom third in offense, even though he is not a receiving threat. Since I expect Buffalo to remain in the bottom third in offense, and since I expect that McGahee will still not catch the ball much, I think that gambling on McGhaee scoring double-digit touchdowns to justify his 1.05 is a poor gamble. It's the classic blunder of thinking that high TDs in one season tend to repeat, when in fact, TDs is the stat that is least correlated with past performance and which fluctuates far more than yards. McGhaee is talented, and could be a top-5 back once the Buffalo offense gets its act together, but it won't happen this year.
you could probably find a lot of the arguments for and against McGahee's ranking in these threads:
McGahee #1
McGahee #2
McGahee #3
McGahee #4
McGahee #5
McGahee #1
McGahee #2
McGahee #3
McGahee #4
McGahee #5
plenty of people seem to think he's overrated too.
I'm pretty tired of arguing it though. I really don't think we need a new thread about him every couple weeks since they'll all inevitably involve rehasing the same arguments over and over again.can't we just have 1 ***OFFICIAL WILLIS MCGAHEE IS OVERRATED THREAD***?In fact, maybe I should just start merging them all together.any thoughts on that idea?
done.as the most recent, this will now be the official thread for discussing how overrated McGahee is for the rest of this offseason.
I prefer to debate the what if he got hurt, how angry this place would be, notion.Aaron grabs Bri throws him out of the ring, Piledrives Lhucks, Shick!(in his zebra suit) tries to break it up but gets thrown to the ground and Aaron cracks a chair on Bueno's back, flexes and growls "who's next?" Sorry I'm just so sick of McGahee, yeah that probably is a good idea although when ya think about it, no one will read thru the 17 pages it would probably be when merged. Quite a prob ya got there. hmmm
Sorry I'm just so sick of McGahee, yeah that probably is a good idea although when ya think about it, no one will read thru the 17 pages it would probably be when merged. Quite a prob ya got there. hmmm
(most) people arguing against him aren't pointing to him being a great injury risk. they are suggesting that the Bills offense will struggle with an inexperienced QB under center, that he will have a hard time matching last year's goalline rushes and TD totals as a result, and that he won't get enough receiving yardage to make up for the low YPC they expect from him.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
Getting back on topic, here is more fuel that McGahee is overated.The Buffalo defense was so good that it gave the team exceptional field position on a regular basis. In the 12 games McGahee started, their average field position was their own 40 yard line. 34 times the Bills took possession of the ball in opponent's territory. 22 other drives started with less than 60 yards to go to the end zone.And for those that don't thins strength of schedule matters, McGahee played all teams that were ranked 10th or better against the run or 20th or worse against the run.In his 8 games against 20th or worse rush defenses, he averaged 18.7 fantasy ppg. In his 4 games against 10th or better run defenses, he averaged 12.7 fantasy ppg--basically 50% lower.Add all this together, and I don't see the Bills defense being able to repeat their turnover magic and continue to shorten the field for the offense. And I also don't see McGahee getting a slate of cake walk run defenses.And please, no Yudkin = McGahee hater comments . . .
those are good points David. I'd agree that McGahee faced some pretty weak run defenses last year, and benefitted from the great field position provided by the defense and special teams.However, there remains a decent chance that the SOS in 2005 will not be much stronger, and that the defense and special teams will continue to put the offense in favorable positions. Even if they regress a bit, they should still be pretty strong.
#1 The Bills may be inconsistent on offense with a new QB, but I think bottom 33% is a bit pessimistic. They have a lot of talent at the RB and WR positions and a solid coaching staff. Losman is inexperienced and will undoubtedly make some mistakes, but he'll also make a lot of plays with his feet that Bledsoe couldn't dream of. The Bills also have a very capable veteran backup in place at the position who they can turn to if necessary. Having a 2nd year QB take over the team didn't seem to hurt Robert Smith in 2000 (#7 ranked RB) or Rudi Johnson in 2004 (#8 ranked RB).#2 McGahee didn't catch a lot of balls last year but that doesn't mean he's incapable of doing so. Bledsoe just didn't throw his way very often. He has soft hands and is an excellent blocker so it's not like they are going to take him out on 3rd downs. The Bills also led very often in most of the games he played in last year so his rushes were up and catches were down. If they trail more often this year, you're obviously going to see him get more involved in the passing game. I think there's a very good chance McGahee puts up 300 to 400 receiving yards this year, which should be plenty.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
mcgahee supposedly has lost some of his burst & explosiveness. he looked liked he had regained a lot of what he had in 2004.it typically takes 2+ years for a RB to get all the way back from the joint rewiring through proprioception (so the rerouting nerve networks can "remind" the brain and nervous system to move the knee "like b4")... mcgahee is about at that point.his last year at miami he shattered the season TD record preViously held by edge by something like 50% (18? to close to 30)...that RB was one of the best i ever saw in terms of his combo of size, power, speed, quickness (different things... he had both), feet, elusiveness, vision, instincts, open field creativity, ability to string moves together, contact balance, tackle breaking skills, ect. the whole package.jim brown-like but faster & more elusive?imo, he is absolutely, without question... the real deal... a MONSTER.and i don't use those kind of descriptives and superlatives lightly.he could very possibly overtake LT & priest in the next season or two... based on talent.
Last edited by a moderator:
So he's 1.01 on your dynasty board?As a rule I don't argue with people about 1.01 - when you put someone there, you're saying that you don't really worry about his negatives, and you're overwhelmed by his positives. That's an absolute statement, not one of relative values, so there's really not much to discuss.
The (Grid)Iron Giant
Footballguy
And yet, with a stiff caffeinated beverage in hand, I just spent the morning doing so. I laughed, I cried, I went to the restroom, I laughed and cried some more (not in the restroom).Willis is the prototypical case for why we can dance in circles for 12 pages and still not get anywhere; there are valid arguments on both sides of the debate. Seems to me if we all knew that Losman wasn't gonna crap the bed that we'd have a tough time not putting McGahee in the top 10 RBs, but none of us have a clue how the offense will perform under the kid, and I for one hate gambling on a RB with a green QB that can't take pressure off my back unless he steals carries by running the ball. :X
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I personally think the Bills won't hesitate to go with Kelly Holcomb is Losman is ineffective. It's not as though they're going to run with Losman for the entire season regardless of his level of play. Why does everyone take that as an absolute? There are very few, if any, QBs that are above benching at a certain level of play.And yet, with a stiff caffeinated beverage in hand, I just spent the morning doing so. I laughed, I cried, I went to the restroom, I laughed and cried some more (not in the restroom).Willis is the prototypical case for why we can dance in circles for 12 pages and still not get anywhere; there are valid arguments on both sides of the debate. Seems to me if we all knew that Losman wasn't gonna crap the bed that we'd have a tough time not putting McGahee in the top 10 RBs, but none of us have a clue how the offense will perform under the kid, and I for one hate gambling on a RB with a green QB that can't take pressure off my back unless he steals carries by running the ball. :X
Joe T
Footballguy
Do you think 'upgrading' to Holcomb boosts McGahee's value? If they have to go to a back up QB... well they are going to be pretty bad off. I don't think that scenario works out well for McGahee.btw - will someone combine all the Stephen Jackson threads into one so that I can post my analysis on him in the ***Official Steven Jackson*** thread. I like Jackson a lot this year... and I know he is a much, much better value pick than McGahee.I personally think the Bills won't hesitate to go with Kelly Holcomb is Losman is ineffective. It's not as though they're going to run with Losman for the entire season regardless of his level of play. Why does everyone take that as an absolute? There are very few, if any, QBs that are above benching at a certain level of play.And yet, with a stiff caffeinated beverage in hand, I just spent the morning doing so. I laughed, I cried, I went to the restroom, I laughed and cried some more (not in the restroom).Willis is the prototypical case for why we can dance in circles for 12 pages and still not get anywhere; there are valid arguments on both sides of the debate. Seems to me if we all knew that Losman wasn't gonna crap the bed that we'd have a tough time not putting McGahee in the top 10 RBs, but none of us have a clue how the offense will perform under the kid, and I for one hate gambling on a RB with a green QB that can't take pressure off my back unless he steals carries by running the ball. :X
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Hey Joe,As you know by now, I'm on your side of the McGahee debate. While it wouldn't shock me to see him finish among the top 5 or 6 backs, I don't understand why he's a consensus pick to do so and see plenty of risk in that projection.Do you think 'upgrading' to Holcomb boosts McGahee's value? If they have to go to a back up QB... well they are going to be pretty bad off. I don't think that scenario works out well for McGahee.btw - will someone combine all the Stephen Jackson threads into one so that I can post my analysis on him in the ***Official Steven Jackson*** thread. I like Jackson a lot this year... and I know he is a much, much better value pick than McGahee.I personally think the Bills won't hesitate to go with Kelly Holcomb is Losman is ineffective. It's not as though they're going to run with Losman for the entire season regardless of his level of play. Why does everyone take that as an absolute? There are very few, if any, QBs that are above benching at a certain level of play.And yet, with a stiff caffeinated beverage in hand, I just spent the morning doing so. I laughed, I cried, I went to the restroom, I laughed and cried some more (not in the restroom).Willis is the prototypical case for why we can dance in circles for 12 pages and still not get anywhere; there are valid arguments on both sides of the debate. Seems to me if we all knew that Losman wasn't gonna crap the bed that we'd have a tough time not putting McGahee in the top 10 RBs, but none of us have a clue how the offense will perform under the kid, and I for one hate gambling on a RB with a green QB that can't take pressure off my back unless he steals carries by running the ball. :X
As to Holcomb vs. Losman...my point is, I don't see the QB debate as being a relevant reason to downgrade McGahee (there are other valid reasons) because a) he did just fine with Bledsoe at the helm a year ago, and b) if Losman is REALLY bad (i.e., worse than Bledsoe by a margin) they will go with Holcomb and IMHO I don't see why he couldn't at least match what Bledsoe did a year ago.
My $0.02
wannabee
Footballguy
I do not see Holcomb as THAT bad of an option. If her can put up numbers in Cleveland, think what he can do with decent receivers. Evans and Mounds are TO and Moss campared to the Brownie receivers. How many Browns receivers would start, or even make the team, on other teams?Edited to add that I am a McGahee apologist.
Last edited by a moderator:
Footballhead
WWPRD?
Ya'll talking as though Bledsoe is a superb QB. Go back read the stats from last year...when your QB throws for 100-150+ yds and your team still scores high, you know its your RB carrying your team. JP or Kelly is an improvement over Beldsoe, IMO.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I would argue that the Bills defense carried the team.
