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!
High deviations are overrated. You need some, but you also need some baseline guys - which usually end up being the guys who you would start each week if this were a redraft. I wouldn't want to have any position where my baseline player isn't putting up acceptable scoring most weeks. A guy like Vick is good because he will blow up some weeks. But he'll also have some bad weeks, so you need to pair him up with another quality QB for the weeks he doesn't blow up.That's a good point right there Mark. I like guys that have big games in this format...i.e. high deviations.
Case in point, if you have seven WRs that score 13 points every week your #4-#7 WRs are as worthless as Lawrence Phillips. Now if you have seven guys that score between 20 and 6 every week(but average 13 a week) your WRs will on average score more points than the consistent WRs will...simple math.
I agree with you there. With the major premise being "never score the lowest" having baseline guys are a must. I always try to mix it up.You need some, but you also need some baseline guys -That's a good point right there Mark. I like guys that have big games in this format...i.e. high deviations.
Case in point, if you have seven WRs that score 13 points every week your #4-#7 WRs are as worthless as Lawrence Phillips. Now if you have seven guys that score between 20 and 6 every week(but average 13 a week) your WRs will on average score more points than the consistent WRs will...simple math.
I stopped after round 4 actually - I shoudl have said rounds 1-4. I meant to divide it in fifths, not fourths.
I'm confused by the question - I am not some big Brown proponent, but in THIS format, he is an exceptional risk/reward player. He simply has to be available for 16 games this year (which he has a better chance of doing by being relieved by Henry), and he'll give MT a big reward.In a "normal" league, he should go a full round later. In a best starter league, he's a nice risk-reward pick.
I would trade mine for Yudkin's straight up, but not for Levin's just because of personal choice, and I think Levin's are better than Bass's. As much as I like his top two, I don't like Givens as a WR3.
My point was that if you give any RB the touches we have been talking about, there are probably 25+ RB that would do better than Brown IMO. I also think that Brown's TD chances may be limited playing on a mediocre team and giving way to Henry.I'm not saying that he's not a good selection, but I see his partly cloudy day as partly cloudy while you see him as partly sunny.
that's where I'm at- I don;t like Givens as much as Ward as WR3 - but I like my opps from the bench, too.I like your WRs, B-fred, but I'm, nowhere near as high on your WR1/2 as my WR1/2 - personal preferences there. I'll take your WR3 over RSmith. You essentially, IMO, have three WR2s playing your three WR spots and I have a true WR 1, a better WR2, and a lesser WR2 playing my three WR spots.
Not really - I see Brown having had INSANE production last year on limited touches - this year, his touches will be again limited with Henry in a RBBC. Foregt the 20 touches a game. What Brown was able to do in limnted numbers of rushes last year was insane.If he stays healthy, it doesn't matter if he gets 10, 15, or 20 touches - he has the opp to blow up. Brown is an explosive back - I think of Westbrook when I think of Brown - doesn't need a ton of work, just needs to stay available to play, and he'll be explosive throughout the game on limted touches. I am not sur ehow that is debatable.
Blue light special of the draft.
I wanted to land 3 starting QBs, and I think these guys combined should be good enough to be a strength rather than a weakness.At RB, I was stoked to get 2 of my top-10 RBs so RB3 wasn't a huge concern, especially considering the scoring system. Blaylock and Rhodes have the potential to be very valuable if the RBs ahead of them get dinged up and could also get a few carries each and every week and Gore could win that starting job at some point so he was well worth the risk in round 16 despite the bye week conflict.
The top of this draft broke differently than it has in years past with WRs flying off the board (and TEs too) I decided to go the LHUCKS route from last year and take 3 very good RBs and go for the "solid but unspectacular" at WR. I souldn't disagree with Smelvin more about WRs dominating this league. You just need the right mix of WRs. The guys I took all seem undervalued for their draft slot and I think both Chambers and Branch are going to have top 10 years. When I took the two QBs back to back it was on a bit of a whim and also because the WRs I was looking at there were boldin (who I hate) Steve Smith (I hate injury concerns in a survivor league) and Donald Driver (who maybe should have been my pick over Collins but what the hell). I was trying to stay away from McMichael because it seemed that Miami didn't really throw to him in the first preseason game (a bit of a red flag for me since they threw the ball a lot in that game). Then I looked back and they targeted the TE position 12 times in the game, so even if randy's number wasn't called the position was involved in the offensive game plan. The most interesting thing about my draft this year is I have really avoided the bye week issues. I have only 1 position where 2 players there are on the same bye week (WR week 10), and that is solid for a team like this. Maybe I should have left toefield off the team and taken 1 more WR, but the guys around the toefield pick all had bye week issues (week 4 and 8 this year are killers)
I'm not sure where you are getting Brown as having limited touches last year. He averaged 20 carriees and 2 receptions a game which over a full season would have been over 350 touches.Brown averaged 14.2 fantasy ppg last year, which fell behind SA, Holmes, LT, Martin, Barber, DD, Edge, Dillon, Rudi, McGahee, Westbrook, KJones, LJohnson, and JJones. With potential comeback seasons for Lewis, Portis, AGreen, and Deuce, as well as newcomers Jordan, SJackson, and a Denver RB, I would not put Brown in the Top 20 even if he matched last year's numbers--but with Henry around I doubt he will come close to a pace for 350+ touches.
Look at the games where he DID have limited touches due to gettng knocked out due to injury - the Miami game for one - games where his touches WERE limited, he had insane production in those games.In his last two games, he left each due to the injured toe:19 rushes, 104 yards, 0 catches15 rushes 91 yards 1 TD, 1 catch 10 yardsMiami game, in a half of football:16 rushes 100 yards, 1 catch 5 yards.In beteween those game, there were games where he was being used as a workhorse - and got numbers and racked up lots of rushes - sometimes, Dave, you need to go "inside the numbers" and not stand pat on them.There are also two games last year where he got limited work - but those games I don't recall if he was limited due to ineffectiveness or injury.
Very interesting strategy.....Especially considering that you are drafting from the #12 spot in CHUG next week....No doubt you swung for the fences with this approach....especially with guys like Owens, Arrington & Taylor. Your squad is very intriguing, the ultimate boom or bust team. No one can say that you don't have stones after this draft!I wasn't in a position conducive to select him, but I couldn't agree with you more. I've gotten to the point that I'm almost avoiding him becuase I'm one SS injury away from seeing numerous teams go down the pooper.Any thoughts on the stud WR route out of the gate? Someone tries it every year and usually goes down in flames. Keep in mind that the ppr is rb-0, wr-1, te-3.absolutely boggles the mind how far Steve Smith continues to fall in drafts
My comments:Gatorman
Kickers and DEFs serviceable. Very strong team. Great drafting 
Solid analysis SinrmanLHUCKS
Green and Pennington should be decent production each week. Little shaky at RB, in my opinion at least. Barber should do well. "Caddy" could do well and be a decent pick, but could equally be a bust and struggle. Who knows? Barlow was a decent value pick, and will put up some points, but will struggle again this year. WRs at first glance don't do much for me. But the more I look at it, the more I think it could do ok at least. Wayne should continue to do well (who wouldn't in that offense?). Kennison and Moss could put up some points, but their inconsistency has me a bit concerned. Burress and Galloway will also be inconsistent, but could be decent value picks. The other two could step up and give a decent week or two, or could be wasted picks. Who knows? TEs are extremely strong. Can't go wrong with Tony G. Couple him with Franks, and then toss in Graham, and I like it. At 2 PPR, that makes up for other shortcomings. Kickers should be ok, especially for when they were taken. DEFs will be ok overall, though nothing spectacular. Overall, this team has some big pluses (QB and TE) and some minuses (RB and possibly WR).
Some points...
I don't think anyone was finding fault with your comments. Any league should welcome feedback from outsiders, especially well thought out and detailed ones.I was just curious why some people think that different strategies that could be just as (or more effective) often are frowned upon.Don't get me wrong guys. I took everything at face value. I did take some looks at where people were drafted, hence my "good value" comments here and there. I can agree with most everyone's reasoning for taking a certain player when they did. I probably should have, but I didn't really take BYE weeks into account (you'd think I would have learned after my bye week problem in last year's MB vs. Staff challenge). That should definitely be factored in. I can understand and appreciate picks like LHUCKS who was scared of the week 5 bye week situation he was in.
Heck, if I had been in this same draft, I woulda had my own drafting strategy. I'm one who usually will nab the BPA (in my opinion at least), rather than strictly go by need. So hey, after this draft, I may have given myself a
I see your logic for going WR-WR. I would seriously consider it myself (and if you remember me last year, I went RB-WR-WR in the first three rounds). It CAN work, but you have to be smart about it. You are trying something outside of the norm, and should be commended for it. In fact, I like to think those are more fun to watch to see if strategies outside of the norm can work.I don't think anyone was finding fault with your comments. Any league should welcome feedback from outsiders, especially well thought out and detailed ones.I was just curious why some people think that different strategies that could be just as (or more effective) often are frowned upon.Don't get me wrong guys. I took everything at face value. I did take some looks at where people were drafted, hence my "good value" comments here and there. I can agree with most everyone's reasoning for taking a certain player when they did. I probably should have, but I didn't really take BYE weeks into account (you'd think I would have learned after my bye week problem in last year's MB vs. Staff challenge). That should definitely be factored in. I can understand and appreciate picks like LHUCKS who was scared of the week 5 bye week situation he was in.
Heck, if I had been in this same draft, I woulda had my own drafting strategy. I'm one who usually will nab the BPA (in my opinion at least), rather than strictly go by need. So hey, after this draft, I may have given myself a
I have not gone RB/RB at all this year (by design) to explore the viability of different strategies. In this league I went WR-WR out of the 8 slot, which is normally a little early to consider that. But given that the upper tier of RB were all gone, I felt like it was worth the risk.I don't think I mentioned it yet, but I do think Fred has the best team. As we've seen before, that may not mean much as any team can be booted at any time (didn't the LT/Lewis owner go in the first week 2 years ago?).I see your logic for going WR-WR. I would seriously consider it myself (and if you remember me last year, I went RB-WR-WR in the first three rounds). It CAN work, but you have to be smart about it. You are trying something outside of the norm, and should be commended for it. In fact, I like to think those are more fun to watch to see if strategies outside of the norm can work.I don't think anyone was finding fault with your comments. Any league should welcome feedback from outsiders, especially well thought out and detailed ones.I was just curious why some people think that different strategies that could be just as (or more effective) often are frowned upon.Don't get me wrong guys. I took everything at face value. I did take some looks at where people were drafted, hence my "good value" comments here and there. I can agree with most everyone's reasoning for taking a certain player when they did. I probably should have, but I didn't really take BYE weeks into account (you'd think I would have learned after my bye week problem in last year's MB vs. Staff challenge). That should definitely be factored in. I can understand and appreciate picks like LHUCKS who was scared of the week 5 bye week situation he was in.
Heck, if I had been in this same draft, I woulda had my own drafting strategy. I'm one who usually will nab the BPA (in my opinion at least), rather than strictly go by need. So hey, after this draft, I may have given myself a
Of all the picks that I made, 20.06 was one of the hardest...... as odd as that sounds... I wanted three DTS.... I think the ability to blow up at any moment can't be overlooked, and given the roster limit, I wanted a third DT. However, I wrote off the third D until the end of the draft and by the time we got there, it was very slim pickings..... so the debate went something like this....Will Grant
Can't go wrong with 'Pepper, though the loss of Moss and the uncertain future has me a little concerned. Nabbing Harrington AND Garcia was a nice move, because that ensures the starting QB in DET. The new offense there has me very excited (being a Lions fan and all), and should do very well this year. One of the two should make up for any bad games from 'Pepper. Brown, Jones, Portis, and Shelton? I'm REALLY digging this group of RBs. Nice work. Bennett, Evans, and Fitz should give some decent points. Curtis, Gaffney, and Stallworth should have a surprise week or two in there to help out. TEs are decent at least, especially for when Will picked them up. Good value. Kickers should put up decent amount of points. Defenses are a little iffy, and picking CLE DEF, even at 20.06, has me scratching my head. I guess Will was ready for it to be over and there was nothing else worthwhile picking....? But overall, VERY strong team.
I don't disagree that there is strength in numbers, and certainly there are some WR that will have a few big weeks that should help neutralize having stud WR. However, I still think that a much larger percentage of great weeks will come from the top tier of WR. Basically, when Moss has a big week, very few other WR will have similar numbers.As for RB, more than a third of NFL teams (actually almost half) had different starters throughout the season than the guy on day one. Off the top of my head, Buf, KC, Den, Cle, Min, Pit, Ten, Mia, Oak, Car, TB, and Ari fall in that category while Bal, Det, and Dal are also candidates. Long story short, the early picks on draft day at RB could very easily be wasted should something happen that changes their status. You certainly will not see turnaround like that at WR with the rare exception of injury, but I doubt the injury rate for WR is anywhere near as high as at RB.
Actually that schedule has a mistake. It's 1 team per week for weeks 1-6. Then it's weeks 7/8, 9/10, 11/12, 13/14, and 15/16.And as for the format, this is the 4th year of what was originally an invite commentary league by FBGs. The goal was to have a 12 team draft with pre- and post-draft strategy writeups as well as commentary that went pick by pick. It wouldn't have been as useful to people to have it be 18 teams because few leagues are 18 team leagues, right?How can this be a Survivor league when someone isn't eliminated every week?You guys are missing 6 other players. You need 18 teams for a Survivor league.
Thanks for the kind words. If I had anything about this draft that I could change it would be when I took my kickers relative to my defenses. Miami was not my forst choice and I probably should have taken one of the defensive combos I had in mind with a double pick and forgotten about it. I thought that my sleeper defense (the KC chiefs) would be there at the last pick in 20 because they were valued so low. Should have taken them at 19.01 and taken any K left at 20.12I also agree with aaron on the WR thing. I think that Maurile and Yudkin were saved by the fact that everyone seemed to change their strategy this year. The history of this draft has been one of not just stud RB, but stud running back depletion. The fact that so many people were changing gears this year made HAVE to take J Lewis so these guys wouldn't be rewarded for changing their draft strategies. I have to admit I was very frustrated by the run on WRs since most Survivor drafts I have seen have the 1 spot taking Tomlinson and then getting 2 WRs of the Chad and holt ilk, but changing on the fly is what I do best. The 2 QB thing was as close to being "on tilt" as I have ever been in FF and probably led to my weakness at K and D. However, I will say that Miami's D may be better than it was last year in the point getting categories: Sacks, Turnovers, TDs, and special team TDs. This team will attack on D more and will scheme for opponents as opposed to "just lining up in our base and forcing you to beat us." I don't see them holding down scoring, but I think they may score more points than they did last year.My comments:
Gatorman
Strong QBs. Incredible RBs with LT, Lewis (at 3.01?!??!), and Westbrook. Toefield and Faulk may get a little PT here and there, so they may help one or two weeks. WRs naturally are quite weak, but serviceable. But having not picked one until the end of the 6th round, what do you expect? Despite his off-field issues, McMichael in the 9th at 2 PPR?!?!
Gatorman
BostonFred
Will Grant
Cobalt Cruisin'
Pick to win it all:
Will Grant
Though he's my pick (barring injuries of course), I still think the MB team is a bit stronger, and could still pull out the victory overall.
I saw things a bit different this year that forced my hand. I don't see a bit of difference between the RBs at the 1/2 turn and the 2/3 turn. In the IBF I would have traded out of the 2.1-2.3 down to the late second for basically nothing. If I had gone RB/RB at the turn in this league, I would have been giving up ground to all the stud RBs and then making up nothing at the RB2 spot. Then you guys at the front would have jumped me on the WRs gaining further advantage. I was forced to go WR in this draft to level the playing field. I knew Taylor would slip and was willing to take that risk as I don't think you can play conservative from the back of the field and beat a group this strong. We'll see how it works out...I realize that stud WR has never worked in this format before so I have long odds to beat.
Or maybe it's a sign that you guys are finally getting better.
Hey bud, you forgot: NO LIFE
Sorry, couldn't resist. That one was to easy!
I think my squad was pretty much the consensus favorite last year...and then I was eliminated in week 1.
I'm actually in the 6th year of a Survivor league that uses 18 teams. One and done. No immunity or sticking around if you're low score for the week.Also, by its very format a Survivor league has little or nothing to do with a traditional league (as supported by comments to that effect in this thread). So using 12 teams seems to be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.And as for the format, this is the 4th year of what was originally an invite commentary league by FBGs. The goal was to have a 12 team draft with pre- and post-draft strategy writeups as well as commentary that went pick by pick. It wouldn't have been as useful to people to have it be 18 teams because few leagues are 18 team leagues, right?How can this be a Survivor league when someone isn't eliminated every week?
By the Steve McNair owner - my plan was to get McNair and Volek on the cheap as my QB2/3.That QB run, though, killed me when my QB 1 became Delhomme. I'm still confident that my Qbs will be competitive. I am probabl yhigher on both McNair and Delhomme than most others - I see Delhomme as Brady-lite in terms of fantasy production.
That's true it was a shocker - I recall you tracked yourself for the rest of the year, right?I think my squad was pretty much the consensus favorite last year...and then I was eliminated in week 1.
...I fixed it.
