What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Shaun Alexander vs. Priest Holmes (1 Viewer)

lebowski

Footballguy
I did a search for this topic so I hope I'm not repeating anything...sorry if I am.I have been reading an awful lot about Alexander and Holmes this year. Both seem like they could be legitamate #2 picks in any redraft, but I am curious what people on this board have to say about the positive and negatives of both players. Here are some of the things I see...Alexander: Will probably never be the #1 fantasy back, but is steady as they come. I think he is a lock for top 5 this year. He doesn't seem to have many injury concerns, but did get dinged up a little last year. Prime of career. One negative is still will the team hold him. I project 1550ru. and 14 TD with 200 rec. and 2 TD.Holmes: Could easily be the #1 player is fantasy football again. Age and injuries are his big issues. This tends to scare me away from a player like Holmes. Could win you the league, but could also lose it. Early reports are saying he is healthy. Other questions about Holmes are...With the success of Larry Johnson last year will he be on the field less or will he not play a full season if they clinch or are out of the playoffs?What do you guys think?...and no I don't have the number two pick in the draft.

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
IMO-both are good and solid picks. Holmes does come with risk which makes Alexander a safer pick. Not sure you can go wrong either way buy you may want to consider this. If you take Holmes you may want to get LJ as well. However you will have to take him by early round 5 or someone else will grab him.I would take Holmes over Alexander. I feel Holmes will be the #1 again and that LJ will have little to no impact unless Holmes is injured. I still expect LJ to get 100 carries but it won't be at the expense of Holmes.

 

tommyGunZ

Footballguy
Holmes is far and away the #1 player in FF when he's healthy.Unless you're into predicting injuries, I'd take Holmes over SA. Too much potential to pass up.Without injuries the past 2 years, we'd be discussing how huge the dropoff is from Holmes to LT2, and how much more valuable the #1 pick is compared to #2.Use Holmes' injuries to your advantage - grab him at 2 or 3 and never look back.

 

AhrnCityPahnder

Yinz-o-riffic
I'd take SA without thinking about it. But, I'm not into risk with an early first round pick. I don't think Holmes has another 25TD season in him, and I'll take the stability of SA. The later rounds are where you're going to seperate yourself from those in your league.

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
Holmes is far and away the #1 player in FF when he's healthy.

Unless you're into predicting injuries, I'd take Holmes over SA. Too much potential to pass up.

Without injuries the past 2 years, we'd be discussing how huge the dropoff is from Holmes to LT2, and how much more valuable the #1 pick is compared to #2.

Use Holmes' injuries to your advantage - grab him at 2 or 3 and never look back.
I like your thinking. I feel that way and have kept/drafted Holmes every chance I've had. I'll either be sitting good or be behind before we get half way through the season.
 

Wingnut

** Inactive **
I think Alexander IS solid acorss the board, but he does have some weeks where he doesnt do much (see weeks 2, 7, 12, 15 last year). Also, with the #2 WR up in the air in Seattle this year, the pasing game could fall a bit, which could cut into his numbers a bit....Overall, a safe top 3 pick that is unarguable.Priest, when healthy, rarely fails to produce silly numbers. He didnt lay ANY eggs until he got hurt, scoring (or having 100+ yds) in every game he played in. He had a season ending injury on 2002, played a full seaosn in 2003, then had season ending injury in 2004. If you believe in trends, this will be a season without a big injury from Priest ;) The thing about Priest is this: If you draft him, you pretty much want to lock up LJ as well, but at what cost? Thats where you have to decide if you want to spend a high pick to insure him - but if you do, youre almost guaranteed gaudy stats week in and week out from your RB1 whether or not Priest goes down. On the other hand, if you draft Alexander and he goes down, his backup probably wont produce at the same level, but you didnt draft Morris anyway. Where the Priest owner takes Priests backup, the Alexander owner would draft a starting RB.So you have to ask yourself - is drafting Holmes, and then taking LJ where youd otherwise take a STARTING RB worth it? Lets look at 2 scenarios:Scenario 1: You draft Alexander in the 1st with a top 3 draft slot, then say Curtis Martin in the 2nd. Lets also say youre taking your next RB in round 4 or 5. You dont have Holmes, so you dont need LJ. Lets say you get Dunn late in the 4th. You have a nice stable of RBs so far, and decent insurance if one of your starters goes down. Back to this scenario in a minute.Scenario 2: You draft Holmes at that same slot, then get Martin in the 2nd. Now it comes time to draft your RB3 in the 4th/5th turn, and you take LJ. Your RB stable at this point is good, but you only have insurance for Priest. is this a bad thing? maybe not. What this scenario does is makes you draft RB 4 a bit earlier than you would otherwise, due to having to insure both starting RBs. I for one usually have 4 RBs by round 7 or 8 anyway, so it wouldnt change my thinking much. Now, in scenario 1, Lets say Alexander goes down. You plug in Dunn and he does what he usually does, and is quite serviceable. But your starting Rbs are Martin and Dunn. Doesnt exactly set the world on fire.In scenario 2, lets say Preist goes down. You plug in LJ, and your starters are LJ and Martin. Which tandem would you rather have at RB at this point? No brainer.Now the flip side to both scenarios is if RB2 goes down (and RB1 stays healthy). In scenario 1, you can plug Dunn in and again hes quite serviceable. In scenario 2, if your RB2 goes down, you have to have an option aother than LJ, and heres where the true dilemma lies.If you take Priest and then LJ, I think it forces you to take RB4 a little sooner than you might if you drafted Alexander. But to me the reward is greater with the Priest/LJ combo. Where Id usually take WR2 or WR3 in round 6 or 7, Id take my RB4 and wouldnt be losing too much value by waiting one extra round to take my next WR. Now about the situation of Priest not playing if theyre out of contention, I dont think he sits. This may be his last year, and when he leaves, its LJ's job. Barring injury (or clinching early, which I dont see happenning), Priest will play. If KC is out of contention, they already know what they have in LJ, and if Preist looks like he may retire after this year, why risk the future RB in meaningless games? I think Vermeil will ride Priest as long as he can, so I dont worry much about Priest being held out of playing. I DO think that if KC has a game in hand, Priest WILL come out and LJ will get playing time. So that in itself presents a unique situation: You could actually use LJ as a starter for a bye week, and he has just as much of a chance to play and score as alot of other RBs (remember the game last year vs Atlanta where Priest had 4 TDs by halftime, and Blaylock had 4 TDs in the 2nd half? This was before Johnson became the #2 RB. Those numbers could have easily been LJs, and it wouldnt surprise me if this kind of thing happened a couple of times in 05).Now if Seattle clinches a spot early, I could see Holmgren holding Alexander out until the playoffs. He doesnt have an LJ waiting in the wings, so he has to protect his bread and butter for playoff time.Bottom line, I think drafting the Priest/LJ combo cant be beat, as long as you draft smart and make sure you have enough RBs in case of injuries. As I said before, I dont think too much value is lost if you have to take your RB4 in lieu of a WR once rounds 6-7 come around. The dropoff at WR at that point isnt much.BTW, I have pick 3 and know for a fact that LT and Manning are going 1-2, and Im taking Priest with the above strategy in mind.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

lebowski

Footballguy
I think Alexander IS solid acorss the board, but he does have some weeks where he doesnt do much (see weeks 2, 7, 12, 15 last year). Also, with the #2 WR up in the air in Seattle this year, the pasing game could fall a bit, which could cut into his numbers a bit....Overall, a safe top 3 pick that is unarguable.

Priest, when healthy, rarely fails to produce silly numbers. He didnt lay ANY eggs until he got hurt, scoring (or having 100+ yds) in every game he played in. He had a season ending injury on 2002, played a full seaosn in 2003, then had season ending injury in 2004. If you believe in trends, this will be a season without a big injury from Priest ;)

The thing about Priest is this: If you draft him, you pretty much want to lock up LJ as well, but at what cost? Thats where you have to decide if you want to spend a high pick to insure him - but if you do, youre almost guaranteed gaudy stats week in and week out from your RB1 whether or not Priest goes down. On the other hand, if you draft Alexander and he goes down, his backup probably wont produce at the same level, but you didnt draft Morris anyway. Where the Priest owner takes Priests backup, the Alexander owner would draft a starting RB.

So you have to ask yourself - is drafting Holmes, and then taking LJ where youd otherwise take a STARTING RB worth it? Lets look at 2 scenarios:

Scenario 1: You draft Alexander in the 1st with a top 3 draft slot, then say Curtis Martin in the 2nd. Lets also say youre taking your next RB in round 4 or 5. You dont have Holmes, so you dont need LJ. Lets say you get Dunn late in the 4th. You have a nice stable of RBs so far, and decent insurance if one of your starters goes down. Back to this scenario in a minute.

Scenario 2: You draft Holmes at that same slot, then get Martin in the 2nd. Now it comes time to draft your RB3 in the 4th/5th turn, and you take LJ. Your RB stable at this point is good, but you only have insurance for Priest. is this a bad thing? maybe not. What this scenario does is makes you draft RB 4 a bit earlier than you would otherwise, due to having to insure both starting RBs. I for one usually have 4 RBs by round 7 or 8 anyway, so it wouldnt change my thinking much.

Now, in scenario 1, Lets say Alexander goes down. You plug in Dunn and he does what he usually does, and is quite serviceable. But your starting Rbs are Martin and Dunn. Doesnt exactly set the world on fire.

In scenario 2, lets say Preist goes down. You plug in LJ, and your starters are LJ and Martin. Which tandem would you rather have at RB at this point? No brainer.

Now the flip side to both scenarios is if RB2 goes down (and RB1 stays healthy). In scenario 1, you can plug Dunn in and again hes quite serviceable. In scenario 2, if your RB2 goes down, you have to have an option aother than LJ, and heres where the true dilemma lies.

If you take Priest and then LJ, I think it forces you to take RB4 a little sooner than you might if you drafted Alexander. But to me the reward is greater with the Priest/LJ combo. Where Id usually take WR2 or WR3 in round 6 or 7, Id take my RB4 and wouldnt be losing too much value by waiting one extra round to take my next WR.

Now about the situation of Priest not playing if theyre out of contention, I dont think he sits. This may be his last year, and when he leaves, its LJ's job. Barring injury (or clinching early, which I dont see happenning), Priest will play. If KC is out of contention, they already know what they have in LJ, and if Preist looks like he may retire after this year, why risk the future RB in meaningless games? I think Vermeil will ride Priest as long as he can, so I dont worry much about Priest being held out of playing. I DO think that if KC has a game in hand, Priest WILL come out and LJ will get playing time. So that in itself presents a unique situation: You could actually use LJ as a starter for a bye week, and he has just as much of a chance to play and score as alot of other RBs (remember the game last year vs Atlanta where Priest had 4 TDs by halftime, and Blaylock had 4 TDs in the 2nd half? This was before Johnson became the #2 RB. Those numbers could have easily been LJs, and it wouldnt surprise me if this kind of thing happened a couple of times in 05).

Now if Seattle clinches a spot early, I could see Holmgren holding Alexander out until the playoffs. He doesnt have an LJ waiting in the wings, so he has to protect his bread and butter for playoff time.

Bottom line, I think drafting the Priest/LJ combo cant be beat, as long as you draft smart and make sure you have enough RBs in case of injuries. As I said before, I dont think too much value is lost if you have to take your RB4 in lieu of a WR once rounds 6-7 come around. The dropoff at WR at that point isnt much.

BTW, I have pick 3 and know for a fact that LT and Manning are going 1-2, and Im taking Priest with the above strategy in mind.
Wow...great analysis. BWT I also have #3 and I could see having to choose between the Alexander and Holmes as well. The biggest problem with taking Holmes is locking up LJ in 4/5 round. I would probably draft Holmes 1st, RB 2nd, WR 3, RB 4th, and LJ 5th...then pick up 2-3 QB's right by each other. What this seems to hurt the most is your #2 reciever. I am also pretty big on getting a good TE (Gonzo won a lot of games for me last year) and I don't see that as an option with this strategy. :confused:
 

bueno

In a class by himself
Has Alexander signed yet?Given that he is unhappy and may not report and that Holmes is over 30 and an injury risk, I'd take LT2

 

Wingnut

** Inactive **
Wow...great analysis. BWT I also have #3 and I could see having to choose between the Alexander and Holmes as well. The biggest problem with taking Holmes is locking up LJ in 4/5 round. I would probably draft Holmes 1st, RB 2nd, WR 3, RB 4th, and LJ 5th...then pick up 2-3 QB's right by each other. What this seems to hurt the most is your #2 reciever. I am also pretty big on getting a good TE (Gonzo won a lot of games for me last year) and I don't see that as an option with this strategy. :confused:
Thnaks...BUt Ive got a question: Why would you take 2-3 QBs right by each other? At pick 3, you only have 5 picks in between at the swing. Any QB you get in 6 you could probably get in 7, especially if drafters 1 and 2 already have a starting QB. You could use one of those picks on a TE (round 6 could net you a top 5-6 TE maybe. Not a top 2 or 3, but a top 5-6 isnt out of the question). Any time you draft a top TE, youre gonna have a little less at one position (in this case WR2), but a top 2-3 TE is just as good as a good WR2. Actually, outscoring your opponents at that position could be worth it. Myself, Ive had Gonzo a few times, and I had Priest AND Gonzo 2 years ago...Ive done well with a STUD TE and Ive done well with a middle of the pack TE. I think Priest outweighs the need to draft a top TE, Ill settle for a McMichael/Clark.The whole LJ situation DOES throw a wrench into conventional drafting, but if you do alot of mocks and try alot of different scenarios, I guarantee youll eventually come up with a roster you could live with, and youd have the KC running game locked.

 

Wingnut

** Inactive **
Has Alexander signed yet?

Given that he is unhappy and may not report and that Holmes is over 30 and an injury risk, I'd take LT2
We're talking at pick 2 or 3 assuming LT is off the board.
 

lebowski

Footballguy
Wow...great analysis. BWT I also have #3 and I could see having to choose between the Alexander and Holmes as well. The biggest problem with taking Holmes is locking up LJ in 4/5 round. I would probably draft Holmes 1st, RB 2nd, WR 3, RB 4th, and LJ 5th...then pick up 2-3 QB's right by each other. What this seems to hurt the most is your #2 reciever. I am also pretty big on getting a good TE (Gonzo won a lot of games for me last year) and I don't see that as an option with this strategy. :confused:
Thnaks...BUt Ive got a question: Why would you take 2-3 QBs right by each other? At pick 3, you only have 5 picks in between at the swing. Any QB you get in 6 you could probably get in 7, especially if drafters 1 and 2 already have a starting QB. You could use one of those picks on a TE (round 6 could net you a top 5-6 TE maybe. Not a top 2 or 3, but a top 5-6 isnt out of the question). Any time you draft a top TE, youre gonna have a little less at one position (in this case WR2), but a top 2-3 TE is just as good as a good WR2. Actually, outscoring your opponents at that position could be worth it. Myself, Ive had Gonzo a few times, and I had Priest AND Gonzo 2 years ago...Ive done well with a STUD TE and Ive done well with a middle of the pack TE. I think Priest outweighs the need to draft a top TE, Ill settle for a McMichael/Clark.The whole LJ situation DOES throw a wrench into conventional drafting, but if you do alot of mocks and try alot of different scenarios, I guarantee youll eventually come up with a roster you could live with, and youd have the KC running game locked.
People in my league are QB fanatics. I got screwed last year at QB so I want to take a couple in the same tier to make sure one of them works out. Around round 7 and 8 people start taking their QB #2 so I like to beat them to the punch.
 

Chase Stuart

Footballguy
I did a search for this topic so I hope I'm not repeating anything...sorry if I am.

I have been reading an awful lot about Alexander and Holmes this year. Both seem like they could be legitamate #2 picks in any redraft, but I am curious what people on this board have to say about the positive and negatives of both players. Here are some of the things I see...

Alexander: Will probably never be the #1 fantasy back, but is steady as they come.
Alexander was the #1 fantasy back last year.
 

lebowski

Footballguy
I did a search for this topic so I hope I'm not repeating anything...sorry if I am.

I have been reading an awful lot about Alexander and Holmes this year. Both seem like they could be legitamate #2 picks in any redraft, but I am curious what people on this board have to say about the positive and negatives of both players. Here are some of the things I see...

Alexander: Will probably never be the #1 fantasy back, but is steady as they come.
Alexander was the #1 fantasy back last year.
My bad...I just don't see it happening again. Probably only because LT and Holmes had injury issues last year.
 

slayer666

Footballguy
Shaun AlexanderSeason ending injuries for Priest in two of the past three seasons is enough reason for me to select Shaun Alexander @ 1.02. He is a safer choice. When you are waiting 20+ picks for your next selection safer is better. Especially when you consider the fact that Alexander has only scored 6 less touchdowns than Priest over the past four seasons combined. Another plus with Alexander is you don't have to worry about the pesky early round handcuff (LJ), which will enable you to build a stronger overall roster. :banned:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most people hated Alexander until this year when everything seemed to right for him. All his supporters tried to use this as retroactive justification for having been burnt by taking him #1/#2 overall the last few years. Good luck with that again in 2005.

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
I think Alexander IS solid acorss the board, but he does have some weeks where he doesnt do much (see weeks 2, 7, 12, 15 last year). Also, with the #2 WR up in the air in Seattle this year, the pasing game could fall a bit, which could cut into his numbers a bit....Overall, a safe top 3 pick that is unarguable.

Priest, when healthy, rarely fails to produce silly numbers. He didnt lay ANY eggs until he got hurt, scoring (or having 100+ yds) in every game he played in. He had a season ending injury on 2002, played a full seaosn in 2003, then had season ending injury in 2004. If you believe in trends, this will be a season without a big injury from Priest ;)

The thing about Priest is this: If you draft him, you pretty much want to lock up LJ as well, but at what cost? Thats where you have to decide if you want to spend a high pick to insure him - but if you do, youre almost guaranteed gaudy stats week in and week out from your RB1 whether or not Priest goes down. On the other hand, if you draft Alexander and he goes down, his backup probably wont produce at the same level, but you didnt draft Morris anyway. Where the Priest owner takes Priests backup, the Alexander owner would draft a starting RB.

So you have to ask yourself - is drafting Holmes, and then taking LJ where youd otherwise take a STARTING RB worth it? Lets look at 2 scenarios:

Scenario 1: You draft Alexander in the 1st with a top 3 draft slot, then say Curtis Martin in the 2nd. Lets also say youre taking your next RB in round 4 or 5. You dont have Holmes, so you dont need LJ. Lets say you get Dunn late in the 4th. You have a nice stable of RBs so far, and decent insurance if one of your starters goes down. Back to this scenario in a minute.

Scenario 2: You draft Holmes at that same slot, then get Martin in the 2nd. Now it comes time to draft your RB3 in the 4th/5th turn, and you take LJ. Your RB stable at this point is good, but you only have insurance for Priest. is this a bad thing? maybe not. What this scenario does is makes you draft RB 4 a bit earlier than you would otherwise, due to having to insure both starting RBs. I for one usually have 4 RBs by round 7 or 8 anyway, so it wouldnt change my thinking much.

Now, in scenario 1, Lets say Alexander goes down. You plug in Dunn and he does what he usually does, and is quite serviceable. But your starting Rbs are Martin and Dunn. Doesnt exactly set the world on fire.

In scenario 2, lets say Preist goes down. You plug in LJ, and your starters are LJ and Martin. Which tandem would you rather have at RB at this point? No brainer.

Now the flip side to both scenarios is if RB2 goes down (and RB1 stays healthy). In scenario 1, you can plug Dunn in and again hes quite serviceable. In scenario 2, if your RB2 goes down, you have to have an option aother than LJ, and heres where the true dilemma lies.

If you take Priest and then LJ, I think it forces you to take RB4 a little sooner than you might if you drafted Alexander. But to me the reward is greater with the Priest/LJ combo. Where Id usually take WR2 or WR3 in round 6 or 7, Id take my RB4 and wouldnt be losing too much value by waiting one extra round to take my next WR.

Now about the situation of Priest not playing if theyre out of contention, I dont think he sits. This may be his last year, and when he leaves, its LJ's job. Barring injury (or clinching early, which I dont see happenning), Priest will play. If KC is out of contention, they already know what they have in LJ, and if Preist looks like he may retire after this year, why risk the future RB in meaningless games? I think Vermeil will ride Priest as long as he can, so I dont worry much about Priest being held out of playing. I DO think that if KC has a game in hand, Priest WILL come out and LJ will get playing time. So that in itself presents a unique situation: You could actually use LJ as a starter for a bye week, and he has just as much of a chance to play and score as alot of other RBs (remember the game last year vs Atlanta where Priest had 4 TDs by halftime, and Blaylock had 4 TDs in the 2nd half? This was before Johnson became the #2 RB. Those numbers could have easily been LJs, and it wouldnt surprise me if this kind of thing happened a couple of times in 05).

Now if Seattle clinches a spot early, I could see Holmgren holding Alexander out until the playoffs. He doesnt have an LJ waiting in the wings, so he has to protect his bread and butter for playoff time.

Bottom line, I think drafting the Priest/LJ combo cant be beat, as long as you draft smart and make sure you have enough RBs in case of injuries. As I said before, I dont think too much value is lost if you have to take your RB4 in lieu of a WR once rounds 6-7 come around. The dropoff at WR at that point isnt much.

BTW, I have pick 3 and know for a fact that LT and Manning are going 1-2, and Im taking Priest with the above strategy in mind.
Excellent post Wingnut. I wanted to add the point that in larger leagues 12+ LJ is going in the 4th. Keep that in mind. In a 12 team draft I did last week LJ went in the 4th. I was hoping to get hi early 5th to back up Holmes but insread settled with Staley. From my perspective, LJ really isn't worth being drafted as early as he is except for the Holmes owner. Even then it's an expensive proposition. For the Holmes owner you feel like you've locked up what is sure to be the #1 scoring RB start in FF.

For the guys that don't own Holmes, you have effectively placed your season in jeapordy becuase unless gets hury early, you've wasted a roster spot on a back up that will yield you few points. To draft LJ in the 4th/5th, you give up a starting RB, WR, QB or TE. Let's say you are going to draft a WR1 in the 4th. You have already lost the WR battle to most every team by drafting LJ. Because he's not a starter you lose that battle to every team in the league. Why would you knowingly screw yourself that way? Or if you didn't draft your starting RB2 yet becuase you felt LJ will eventually take over due to injury then you have just put control of your team in someone else's hands and taken it out of yours. It really isn't the best plan to have.

 

tommyGunZ

Footballguy
i agree FM, i understand non-Priest owners taking a stab ~ the 6th, but in rounds 4 and 5 you're still drafting top 40-60 players. If you use a 4th or 5th on LJ, you're turning down a starter for a chance at a productive RB for likely only a few weeks.I don't even think LJ is worth a 5th rounder to teams that already own Priest. Too much value still available at that point to take a backup.

 

Just Win Baby

Footballguy
...In scenario 2, if your RB2 goes down, you have to have an option aother than LJ, and heres where the true dilemma lies...
Excellent post.However, I think there is one aspect to the Priest/Martin scenario that you didn't mention. As a Martin owner, you could draft Blaylock late. He may be no LJ on the Jets, but he may well be as serviceable as Dunn if he became a full time starter if Martin were to miss games.Adding Blaylock to your Priest/Martin scenario makes it the preferable route IMO (if it wasn't already).I realize that Martin wasn't necessarily crucial to your examples. Substitute another back in that spot and perhaps there is no Blaylock equivalent.
 

tommyGunZ

Footballguy
...In scenario 2, if your RB2 goes down, you have to have an option aother than LJ, and heres where the true dilemma lies...
Excellent post.However, I think there is one aspect to the Priest/Martin scenario that you didn't mention. As a Martin owner, you could draft Blaylock late. He may be no LJ on the Jets, but he may well be as serviceable as Dunn if he became a full time starter if Martin were to miss games.

Adding Blaylock to your Priest/Martin scenario makes it the preferable route IMO (if it wasn't already).

I realize that Martin wasn't necessarily crucial to your examples. Substitute another back in that spot and perhaps there is no Blaylock equivalent.
:goodposting: I'm high on Priest this year; I think owners who are fortunate enough to have the second or third pick are getting a rare opportunity to draft the consesus best player in fantasy football at a discount because he's been injured the past 2 years.

But there is a cost assumed by Priest owners that must be quantified - having the most expensive backup in the league hurts his value. LJ in the 5th/6th or MoMo in the 16th is definitely advantage SA.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

CalBear

Footballguy
Most people hated Alexander until this year when everything seemed to right for him. All his supporters tried to use this as retroactive justification for having been burnt by taking him #1/#2 overall the last few years. Good luck with that again in 2005.
Really, people hated Alexander when he was the #4, #5, and #6 RB in 2001, 2002, and 2003?Now he's done something LT has never done; finished as the #1 RB. (LT has never even finished as #2). If you want to keep hatin', go right ahead. I'll take four years of top-6 RB production, thanks. (Neither Holmes nor LT2 has managed that, either).

 
People are criticizing Priest at 1.02 because you have to invest a high pick on LJ, but there is another, related problem: you might not get LJ.Consider that in most 12-teamers, the Priest owner might plan to get LJ at 5.02 or 5.03. But the LT owner might easily choose to take him at 5.01, feeling that he is a lock for the playoffs, and can afford the lack of production in the regular season.In fact, although I'm not the LT owner, I did just trade up to one spot ahead of the Priest ownerr to draft LJ at 6.07 (10-teamer, so this is the equivalent of 5.09 in a 12-teamer).Were I a Priest owner who didn't get LJ, I would be in a minor panic--I figure there's at least a 30% chance that my anchor will be gone by the playoffs.

 

Wingnut

** Inactive **
Doing many mocks from the #3 spot, and taking Priest and LJ, one of the best lineups I came up with includes:Palmer, Griese, GarciaPreist, Westbrook, Bettis, LJC Johnson (Holt was available there as well), Lelie, Stallworth, Colbert, McCariensD Clark (McMichael was available there as well), TroupeCarolina, DetroitElam, PetersonIf one of those last 3 WRs pans out Im looking pretty good. I could have drafted Brooks over Palmer but I think Palmer will have a better year, even in that division, and I like the Johnson/Palmer tandem. I took CJ over Holt with the idea of trying to pair Palmer with him. Took a flier on garcia with the hopes that he starts at somepoint and someone might need a QB...Im sold on the Priest/LJ combo.

 

The Football Freak

Footballguy
How would you rank Priest if LJ was to be another players keeper? I have the third pick in my main league and I just know LT2 and SA are going to be off the board by my pick. I would really prefer the second or fourth pick this year so that I don't have to take that gamble on Priest with no safety net. I would hate to take Deuce with the third...

 

IanTucker

Footballguy
What is strange to me is that despite the fears of Alexander not playing and Holmes age/injury concerns they are pretty consistently ranked 2nd and 3rd.What sense does that make? If you really think those concerns are valid you would drop them out of the top 10, yet no one does.To rank Holmes 3rd is ridiculous. You won't take him with the 1st pick because of fears about him yet you WILL with the 3rd pick?I see no reason to think he'll get injured again beyond the possibility of ANY running back getting injured, and he didn't look to be slowing down last year....incredibly he finished as 12th ranked running back and played only 8 games! Alexander is a scoring machine and will play this year. Alexander and Tomlinson are fairly even. Holmes is WAY beyond both.

 

Dolfan

Footballguy
I guess I'm in the minority here..My problem with Priest is not that he is "injury prone" or age -- I think people forget how little he was used early in his career -- he has the less miles on him than a lot of RBs 3-4 years younger than him!My problem is the direction of the Kansas City Chiefs offense. Larry Johnson looked DAMN GOOD in Priest's absence last year. I'll get laughed at for saying this, but I think the Chief offense was scarier with Johnson as the RB than it did with Priest. LJ just adds that excitement factor that all of the really great offenses of the past have had.I worry that the Chiefs' brass will not want to keep that talent on the bench all year.

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
I guess I'm in the minority here..

My problem with Priest is not that he is "injury prone" or age -- I think people forget how little he was used early in his career -- he has the less miles on him than a lot of RBs 3-4 years younger than him!

My problem is the direction of the Kansas City Chiefs offense. Larry Johnson looked DAMN GOOD in Priest's absence last year. I'll get laughed at for saying this, but I think the Chief offense was scarier with Johnson as the RB than it did with Priest. LJ just adds that excitement factor that all of the really great offenses of the past have had.

I worry that the Chiefs' brass will not want to keep that talent on the bench all year.
Based on what we've learned I wouldn't be too concerned about LJ taking anything away from Holmes unless there is an injury. Vermeil is very loyal to his guys and has not been enamoured with LJ. Yes, LJ looked good but so did Balylock until he got injured. Now they know they have a back up they can count on if Holmes gets injured.Many are speculating that LJ will get a lot of touches based on his performance. But he did no better than any other RB so why would he see more time? Vermeil likes to use 1 back and give him a blow here and there but Holmes should see his 320+ carries leaving about 100 for LJ.

 

FFFIEND

Footballguy
Gimme Holmes in the 1st round and LJ in the 5th round. I will be a happy man and not look back. I will have the #1 RB in the game by far (take Holmes stats for the first 8 games in 2004 and LJ for the last 8 games).Priest & LJ all the way! :boxing:

 

cosjobs

Footballguy
Yesterday I did a draft (on this board) testing out theory of Priest without LJ (unless he lasted to R6, which he did not).Here's what I got:1.02 Priest2.11 Dante Culpepper3.02 Marvin Harrison4.11 Cedric Benson5.02 Jason Witten6.11 Fred Taylor7.02 Thomas Jones8.11 Keenan McCrdell9.02 Buffalo DefenseWhat I like about this draft is I have a top 3 RB, top 2 QB, top 3 TE and a top 3 Def. With every position covered I have six straight rounds I can go longshot/sleepers for back RBs and WRs with homerun potential.

 
M

MelvinTScupper

Guest
I did a search for this topic so I hope I'm not repeating anything...sorry if I am.

I have been reading an awful lot about Alexander and Holmes this year. Both seem like they could be legitamate #2 picks in any redraft, but I am curious what people on this board have to say about the positive and negatives of both players. Here are some of the things I see...

Alexander: Will probably never be the #1 fantasy back, but is steady as they come.
Alexander was the #1 fantasy back last year.
not in PPR ;)
 
M

MelvinTScupper

Guest
Yesterday I did a draft (on this board) testing out theory of Priest without LJ (unless he lasted to R6, which he did not).

Here's what I got:

1.02 Priest

2.11 Dante Culpepper

3.02 Marvin Harrison

4.11 Cedric Benson

5.02 Jason Witten

6.11 Fred Taylor

7.02 Thomas Jones

8.11 Keenan McCrdell

9.02 Buffalo Defense

What I like about this draft is I have a top 3 RB, top 2 QB, top 3 TE and a top 3 Def. With every position covered I have six straight rounds I can go longshot/sleepers for back RBs and WRs with homerun potential.
Was this a 9 round draft cos? Jeesh, your WR's STINK....and you took a D in the 9th? :yucky:
 

cosjobs

Footballguy
Yesterday I did a draft (on this board) testing out theory of Priest without LJ (unless he lasted to R6, which he did not).

Here's what I got:

1.02 Priest

2.11 Dante Culpepper

3.02 Marvin Harrison

4.11 Cedric Benson

5.02 Jason Witten

6.11 Fred Taylor

7.02 Thomas Jones

8.11 Keenan McCrdell

9.02 Buffalo Defense

What I like about this draft is I have a top 3 RB, top 2 QB, top 3 TE and a top 3 Def. With every position covered I have six straight rounds I can go longshot/sleepers for back RBs and WRs with homerun potential.
Was this a 9 round draft cos? Jeesh, your WR's STINK....and you took a D in the 9th? :yucky:
Its a 16 R. I can only start 2 WRs and one of them is Marvin HArrison. All other positions are filled and I have at least five picks for a better #2 WR than McCArdell. Small price to pay for a top 1-3 at every other position, I think,
 

Tick

Footballguy
Alexander: Will probably never be the #1 fantasy back,
(haven't read the thread yet, so sorry if this is a repeat)I'd take Holmes over Alexander easily. Holmes is a beast when healthy, and I'd just pin my team to him and hope he doesn't go down. If he doesn't, I probably win the championship. With Alexander, I'm less likely to finish last due to an injury, but also less likely to finish first IMO. Since I'd rather have a 50/50 chance of finishing first or last than a 20/80 chance of finishing first or somewhere else in the top half of the league, I'll go with Holmes.

That old thing about not being able to win your league in the first round, only being able to lose it? I think that's false with Holmes around. He probably wins you your league or loses it with one pick.

And regarding the quoted part above, Alexander finished first this past year - LT finished 3rd, Holmes 12th.

Shaun Alexander 353 1696 16 | 23 170 4 | 307 149

Tiki Barber 322 1518 13 | 52 578 2 | 300 142

LaDainian Tomlinson 339 1335 17 | 53 441 1 | 288 130

Curtis Martin 371 1697 12 | 41 245 2 | 278 121

Domanick Davis 301 1180 13 | 69 596 1 | 262 104

Edgerrin James 334 1548 9 | 51 483 0 | 257 100

Corey Dillon 345 1635 12 | 15 103 1 | 252 94

Rudi Johnson 362 1457 12 | 15 84 0 | 226 69

Willis McGahee 284 1128 13 | 22 169 0 | 208 50

Brian Westbrook 177 812 3 | 73 703 6 | 206 48

Clinton Portis 343 1315 5 | 40 235 2 | 202 44

Priest Holmes 196 892 14 | 19 187 1 | 198 41

 

Snotbubbles

Footballguy
In only 8 games!
He had 196 carries in 8 games. At that pace he would have gotten 392 carries. No wonder he broke down. The guys body is falling apart. It's obvious from watching Blaylock and LJ last year that any back with a little talent can excel in this offense.
 

Jim Otto

Footballguy
He had 196 carries in 8 games. At that pace he would have gotten 392 carries. No wonder he broke down. The guys body is falling apart. It's obvious from watching Blaylock and LJ last year that any back with a little talent can excel in this offense.
Thus the debate. :hophead: The Holmes+LJ strategy discussed ad nauseum on these boards is a solid one, throw in the questions about Alexander's contract situation and possible trade rumours and IMO Holmes is the better pick at the top of Round 1 (at least until the Seahawks situation plays itself out).

Thanks for contributing!

 

Bradshaw

Footballguy
Here's a different thought:First off, I am a believer that you can lose your FF draft in the first round much easier than you can win it. With that being said, let's say I choose Holmes at 1.03 if he is available, even though the conservative one in me (first round only) says take the safer plays of either Alexander or Edge. When the 4/5 turn comes my way, I pass on LJ with the 4th pick(which seems to be a logical decision), and wait for him to fall to me at #5. What if one of my "buddies" decides to take LJ before my #5 pick....is my draft, and the strategy I have put in place, all of the sudden a failure? Even if it is not deemed a failure, I guarantee I am questioning myself for the next 12-15 rounds, let alone the next 12-15 weeks.The other question to consider is that in the league I have #3, and am looking at this scenario: you can either start 2RB/2WR or 1RB/3WR (16 rounds). Should that change my thinking, since I could ride the KC RB all year except for the bye week.Thoughts? :popcorn:

 
In only 8 games!
He had 196 carries in 8 games. At that pace he would have gotten 392 carries. No wonder he broke down. The guys body is falling apart. It's obvious from watching Blaylock and LJ last year that any back with a little talent can excel in this offense.
It's obvious from watching football the last decade that many backup RBs can come in for a limited time and look better than the starter, only to fall flat on their faces the next year.
 

Jim Otto

Footballguy
Here's a different thought:

First off, I am a believer that you can lose your FF draft in the first round much easier than you can win it. With that being said, let's say I choose Holmes at 1.03 if he is available, even though the conservative one in me (first round only) says take the safer plays of either Alexander or Edge.

When the 4/5 turn comes my way, I pass on LJ with the 4th pick(which seems to be a logical decision), and wait for him to fall to me at #5. What if one of my "buddies" decides to take LJ before my #5 pick....is my draft, and the strategy I have put in place, all of the sudden a failure? Even if it is not deemed a failure, I guarantee I am questioning myself for the next 12-15 rounds, let alone the next 12-15 weeks.

The other question to consider is that in the league I have #3, and am looking at this scenario: you can either start 2RB/2WR or 1RB/3WR (16 rounds). Should that change my thinking, since I could ride the KC RB all year except for the bye week.

Thoughts?

:popcorn:
Take LJ in the 4th if you are worried about it, it's only a couple of picks difference (assuming it's serpentine).
 

larz

Footballguy
Would you feel more comfortable with Holmes if he had had some type of surgical procedure rather than just letting it heal? I know he said earlier in the spring that he still felt some looseness in the knee. Maybe it wasn't anything that surgery could have helped but I remember the speculation that he might need surgery.

 

Muahahaha

Footballguy
I still don't understand why LJ isn't worth a late 4th/early 5th pick. (It is basically the same thing.) At that point, you are looking at RB3/WR2/TE (you probably took a good RB2 & a top 5 WR1 at the 2/3 turn). I'd take LJ over Whitten right there. As for WRs, draft 4-5 WRs between rounds 6-12 and most likely one pans out as a good WR2. Take your QB in rounds 7/8. Your backup QB round 12-13.Lots of mocks work out like this:1: Holmes2: CJ/Holt (I have yet to participate in a mock where less than 2QBs and 2WRs went in rounds 1&2)3: CMart / Bell / Westbrook / Jordan (switch this order if RBs are flying in rounds 1-2)4: LJ5: What's left of Dunn / Barlow / Staley /FTaylorWhat is wrong with this strategy?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

jerseydevil20

Footballguy
FWIW - I just had arthroscopic surgery on my knee :X , but being the opportunistic FF fanatic I am, took the opportunity to shed some light on by #3 pick in the upcoming redraft :D . If I remember correctly, Priest strained his MCL last year. If I am incorrect in that, then the following is just general information. I asked my doctor about the nature of strains. He said strains do not involve tears. He said an MCL strain is typically fully recoverable in a relatively short amount of time. I imagine "fully recoverable" is probably relative for an athlete in peak form.

I am not drawing any conclusion from this information soley, but it does suggest that Priest may not be quite the risk I was thinking. His prior injury was the hip injury which doesn't concern me as much as a knee or ankle problem (he's now 18 months removed from the hip injury).

I guess I'm trying to talk myself into taking the risk... :confused: None of this convinces me that LJ won't start one or more games this year...

 

jurb26

Footballguy
Most people hated Alexander until this year when everything seemed to right for him. All his supporters tried to use this as retroactive justification for having been burnt by taking him #1/#2 overall the last few years. Good luck with that again in 2005.
Really, people hated Alexander when he was the #4, #5, and #6 RB in 2001, 2002, and 2003?Now he's done something LT has never done; finished as the #1 RB. (LT has never even finished as #2). If you want to keep hatin', go right ahead. I'll take four years of top-6 RB production, thanks. (Neither Holmes nor LT2 has managed that, either).
Right on, agreed.Why isn't anyone worrying about the thought of a minor Holmes/LJ RBBC situation? Seeing how effective LJ was last year, I can't help but think as a coaching staff, KC would want to limit Holmes worklaod in effort to keep him around for the stretch run of the season/playoffs. As aon outsider and plan football fan, this is what would seem to make the most sense to me. For fantasy purposes it would suck of course. Either way, Holmes has shown a propensity to getting dinged up with his current workload and age has got to be somewhat of a facor at this point (I don't care if he has not had a ton of work earlier in his career or not). Platooning LJ to keep Holmes fresh looks like a great idea to me from a KC team standpoint. I know this is not Vermeil's tendancy, but after not wining a playoff game in 4 years and only making the postseason 1 time in the last 4 years, maybe it's time for a change. :unsure:

 

lebowski

Footballguy
After reading most of these posts it seems like most lean toward Priest with a few for SA. Are there any changing opinions since Alexander officially signed?

 

eriadoc

Footballguy
I don't feel comfortable burning an early-round pick on Priest's cuff.I also don't feel comfortable taking Priest in the top 3 with the assumption that he'll last all season.I'll take Alexander.

 

gman8343

What would Lemmy do?
Alexander in a heartbeat. You NEED LJ if you take Priest, and I'm not willing to spend a 4th/5th rounder on him. Alexander (if healthy), is a virtual lock for top 5.

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
Most people hated Alexander until this year when everything seemed to right for him.  All his supporters tried to use this as retroactive justification for having been burnt by taking him #1/#2 overall the last few years.  Good luck with that again in 2005.
Really, people hated Alexander when he was the #4, #5, and #6 RB in 2001, 2002, and 2003?Now he's done something LT has never done; finished as the #1 RB. (LT has never even finished as #2). If you want to keep hatin', go right ahead. I'll take four years of top-6 RB production, thanks. (Neither Holmes nor LT2 has managed that, either).
Right on, agreed.Why isn't anyone worrying about the thought of a minor Holmes/LJ RBBC situation? Seeing how effective LJ was last year, I can't help but think as a coaching staff, KC would want to limit Holmes worklaod in effort to keep him around for the stretch run of the season/playoffs. As aon outsider and plan football fan, this is what would seem to make the most sense to me. For fantasy purposes it would suck of course. Either way, Holmes has shown a propensity to getting dinged up with his current workload and age has got to be somewhat of a facor at this point (I don't care if he has not had a ton of work earlier in his career or not). Platooning LJ to keep Holmes fresh looks like a great idea to me from a KC team standpoint. I know this is not Vermeil's tendancy, but after not wining a playoff game in 4 years and only making the postseason 1 time in the last 4 years, maybe it's time for a change. :unsure:
RBBC? No need to worry IMO. Vermeil is a 1 back guy mostly. Holmes is clearly the better back and will get the feature role. In fact there is nothing to suggest that there would be any reason for a RBBC. With that said, with Blaylock out of the way, LJ stands to get 100+ carries anyway because they run the ball so much. Holmes has to be spelled and in games where they have a big lead you might LJ in there mopping up and padding his stats.
 

Jim Otto

Footballguy
Most people hated Alexander until this year when everything seemed to right for him.  All his supporters tried to use this as retroactive justification for having been burnt by taking him #1/#2 overall the last few years.  Good luck with that again in 2005.
Really, people hated Alexander when he was the #4, #5, and #6 RB in 2001, 2002, and 2003?Now he's done something LT has never done; finished as the #1 RB. (LT has never even finished as #2). If you want to keep hatin', go right ahead. I'll take four years of top-6 RB production, thanks. (Neither Holmes nor LT2 has managed that, either).
Right on, agreed.Why isn't anyone worrying about the thought of a minor Holmes/LJ RBBC situation? Seeing how effective LJ was last year, I can't help but think as a coaching staff, KC would want to limit Holmes worklaod in effort to keep him around for the stretch run of the season/playoffs. As aon outsider and plan football fan, this is what would seem to make the most sense to me. For fantasy purposes it would suck of course. Either way, Holmes has shown a propensity to getting dinged up with his current workload and age has got to be somewhat of a facor at this point (I don't care if he has not had a ton of work earlier in his career or not). Platooning LJ to keep Holmes fresh looks like a great idea to me from a KC team standpoint. I know this is not Vermeil's tendancy, but after not wining a playoff game in 4 years and only making the postseason 1 time in the last 4 years, maybe it's time for a change. :unsure:
RBBC? No need to worry IMO. Vermeil is a 1 back guy mostly. Holmes is clearly the better back and will get the feature role. In fact there is nothing to suggest that there would be any reason for a RBBC. With that said, with Blaylock out of the way, LJ stands to get 100+ carries anyway because they run the ball so much. Holmes has to be spelled and in games where they have a big lead you might LJ in there mopping up and padding his stats.
One of the only things that makes me hesitate is the quote from Priest (I'll try to find a link) where he said his goals had changed this year.He basically said that his previous goals were primarily personal goals and not team goals, in other words, yardage and TD goals vs. games won and playoffs/championship etc. This year he said he wants to win a championship and do whatever is required of him to attain that goal (paraphrasing).

I have a feeling in the back of mind that this might indicate a change in attitude regarding playcalling and personnel usage that could have a negative impact on Holmes' stats this season.

Don't get me wrong, I will likel take him from the 3 spot this year and the LJ handcuff is not a big deal to me... but I still have this nagging feeling that all might not be what it was in KC.

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
Most people hated Alexander until this year when everything seemed to right for him.  All his supporters tried to use this as retroactive justification for having been burnt by taking him #1/#2 overall the last few years.  Good luck with that again in 2005.
Really, people hated Alexander when he was the #4, #5, and #6 RB in 2001, 2002, and 2003?Now he's done something LT has never done; finished as the #1 RB. (LT has never even finished as #2). If you want to keep hatin', go right ahead. I'll take four years of top-6 RB production, thanks. (Neither Holmes nor LT2 has managed that, either).
Right on, agreed.Why isn't anyone worrying about the thought of a minor Holmes/LJ RBBC situation? Seeing how effective LJ was last year, I can't help but think as a coaching staff, KC would want to limit Holmes worklaod in effort to keep him around for the stretch run of the season/playoffs. As aon outsider and plan football fan, this is what would seem to make the most sense to me. For fantasy purposes it would suck of course. Either way, Holmes has shown a propensity to getting dinged up with his current workload and age has got to be somewhat of a facor at this point (I don't care if he has not had a ton of work earlier in his career or not). Platooning LJ to keep Holmes fresh looks like a great idea to me from a KC team standpoint. I know this is not Vermeil's tendancy, but after not wining a playoff game in 4 years and only making the postseason 1 time in the last 4 years, maybe it's time for a change. :unsure:
RBBC? No need to worry IMO. Vermeil is a 1 back guy mostly. Holmes is clearly the better back and will get the feature role. In fact there is nothing to suggest that there would be any reason for a RBBC. With that said, with Blaylock out of the way, LJ stands to get 100+ carries anyway because they run the ball so much. Holmes has to be spelled and in games where they have a big lead you might LJ in there mopping up and padding his stats.
One of the only things that makes me hesitate is the quote from Priest (I'll try to find a link) where he said his goals had changed this year.He basically said that his previous goals were primarily personal goals and not team goals, in other words, yardage and TD goals vs. games won and playoffs/championship etc. This year he said he wants to win a championship and do whatever is required of him to attain that goal (paraphrasing).

I have a feeling in the back of mind that this might indicate a change in attitude regarding playcalling and personnel usage that could have a negative impact on Holmes' stats this season.

Don't get me wrong, I will likel take him from the 3 spot this year and the LJ handcuff is not a big deal to me... but I still have this nagging feeling that all might not be what it was in KC.
Could be but you might be reading too much into 1 comment. Vermeil said he wants Homes to get some big numbers (I forget what the exact numbers were) that set up for another career year. And you would expect a comment that is "team" oriented as well. But to think Vermeil is all of sudden going from a "1 back" guy to a "RBBC" is total change of philosophy I just don't see it happening. I guess it could but I doubt it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top