Teams I want nothing to do with (1 Viewer)

[Ministry of Pain]

Just for fun I thought I'd make a decent starting lineup out of this list. You could definitely be competitive with this team in a 12 team league. You'd be hard pressed to find value during your draft if you're avoiding all of those teams.

QB: Jay Cutler

RB: Steven Jackson

RB: Rashard Mendenhall

WR: Larry Fitzgerald

WR: Hines Ward

Flex: Chris Wells

TE: Zach Miller or Kellen Winslow

But you wouldn't be able to draft Fitz, Wells, Jackson and Mendenhall because those are all 1st and 2nd round picks (at the worst. They are overvalued, which is kind of the point of this thread.

"Teams I want nothing to do with" implies differently.

Would you be happier if it said "Teams whose players I want nothing to do with anywhere near their current ADP?" That's pretty obviously what he meant. He's not going to pass on Fitz in the 5th round, but will he ever be there in the 5th round? No.

There are at least a dozen posters who disagree with you on this page alone.

I see both sides here. Sure, I'll take Fitz in the 5th round but like the poster said, no way he lasts to that point. But on the larger scale, I would like to avoid AZ like the bubonic plague this year without Warner running the show.

These are teams that I identified as murky at best, and poor in other aspects. I can find other guys around where these guys are drafted that I am much more comfortable with. Look at the great WRs you can pick up in the 2nd/3rd/4th rounds on productive teams. Let someone else gamble on the WR1 from bad team.

Here are the 5 worst passing teams from a year ago and the WR1 production of the teams

Cleveland-Massaquoi 34/624/3

NY Jets-Cotchery 57/823/3

Buffalo-Owens 55/825/5

Oakland-Murphy 34/521/4

St Louis-Avery 47/589/5

The amount of donuts these guys threw up during the season would be enough to sink most owners. Murphy wasn't even the WR1 in theory, it was Chaz who a lot of owners burned picks on. The avg here is about 45/650/4Td which is 134 total points/avg 8-9 points a week, non PPR 5-6 a week, it's death for owners.

I should have focused on the passing games mostly, there are a couple RBs along the way I like and TEs but again if I land no one on any of these teams, fine by me.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I see both sides here. Sure, I'll take Fitz in the 5th round but like the poster said, no way he lasts to that point. But on the larger scale, I would like to avoid AZ like the bubonic plague this year without Warner running the show. These are teams that I identified as murky at best, and poor in other aspects. I can find other guys around where these guys are drafted that I am much more comfortable with. Look at the great WRs you can pick up in the 2nd/3rd/4th rounds on productive teams. Let someone else gamble on the WR1 from bad team. Here are the 5 worst passing teams from a year ago and the WR1 production of the teamsCleveland-Massaquoi 34/624/3NY Jets-Cotchery 57/823/3Buffalo-Owens 55/825/5Oakland-Murphy 34/521/4St Louis-Avery 47/589/5The amount of donuts these guys threw up during the season would be enough to sink most owners. Murphy wasn't even the WR1 in theory, it was Chaz who a lot of owners burned picks on. The avg here is about 45/650/4Td which is 134 total points/avg 8-9 points a week, non PPR 5-6 a week, it's death for owners. I should have focused on the passing games mostly, there are a couple RBs along the way I like and TEs but again if I land no one on any of these teams, fine by me.

Ahhhh, but what might be more "realistic" is to look at the bottom five teams from the PREVIOUS year (2008), and see what their best receivers did the following year. That adds the Bengals, the Seahawks, and the Ravens (in place of Jets, Bills and Rams). And now you are looking at:Bengals - Ocho 72/1047/9Seahawks - Housh - 79/911/3Baltimore - Mason - 74/1028/7Not bad numbers for "awful passing teams".Since you are more less projecting who the "bad" teams are going to be, the first point of consideration would be what they did last year right? So if you go into 2009, looking at the worst passing teams from 2008 (and more or less eliminating them), you've got trouble if you assume they are all going to suck.I'm not saying all you are doing is looking at previous year's numbers to determine who to put on the "no-draft" list, I'm just saying teams some might suspect to be really awful don't turn out to be that awful.I remember back in 2001 discussing a certain NFL team. The team was coming off of a 5-11 season, and they seemed to be trending down. I was wondering if this team would the the first 0-16 team in NFL history because their line was so absolutely dreadful. If there was ever a "Do not draft anybody from this team" team for me, this was it. I was not alone.Of course, the Patriots won the superbowl that year. Troy Brown put up 1300 receiving yards and 5 TDs, and Antowain Smith put up 1350 yards and 14 TDs.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I see both sides here. Sure, I'll take Fitz in the 5th round but like the poster said, no way he lasts to that point. But on the larger scale, I would like to avoid AZ like the bubonic plague this year without Warner running the show. These are teams that I identified as murky at best, and poor in other aspects. I can find other guys around where these guys are drafted that I am much more comfortable with. Look at the great WRs you can pick up in the 2nd/3rd/4th rounds on productive teams. Let someone else gamble on the WR1 from bad team. Here are the 5 worst passing teams from a year ago and the WR1 production of the teamsCleveland-Massaquoi 34/624/3NY Jets-Cotchery 57/823/3Buffalo-Owens 55/825/5Oakland-Murphy 34/521/4St Louis-Avery 47/589/5The amount of donuts these guys threw up during the season would be enough to sink most owners. Murphy wasn't even the WR1 in theory, it was Chaz who a lot of owners burned picks on. The avg here is about 45/650/4Td which is 134 total points/avg 8-9 points a week, non PPR 5-6 a week, it's death for owners. I should have focused on the passing games mostly, there are a couple RBs along the way I like and TEs but again if I land no one on any of these teams, fine by me.

Ahhhh, but what might be more "realistic" is to look at the bottom five teams from the PREVIOUS year (2008), and see what their best receivers did the following year. That adds the Bengals, the Seahawks, and the Ravens (in place of Jets, Bills and Rams). And now you are looking at:Bengals - Ocho 72/1047/9Seahawks - Housh - 79/911/3Baltimore - Mason - 74/1028/7Not bad numbers for "awful passing teams".Since you are more less projecting who the "bad" teams are going to be, the first point of consideration would be what they did last year right? So if you go into 2009, looking at the worst passing teams from 2008 (and more or less eliminating them), you've got trouble if you assume they are all going to suck.I'm not saying all you are doing is looking at previous year's numbers to determine who to put on the "no-draft" list, I'm just saying teams some might suspect to be really awful don't turn out to be that awful.I remember back in 2001 discussing a certain NFL team. The team was coming off of a 5-11 season, and they seemed to be trending down. I was wondering if this team would the the first 0-16 team in NFL history because their line was so absolutely dreadful. If there was ever a "Do not draft anybody from this team" team for me, this was it. I was not alone.Of course, the Patriots won the superbowl that year. Troy Brown put up 1300 receiving yards and 5 TDs, and Antowain Smith put up 1350 yards and 14 TDs.

Do you want to go back and do every year for the last 10-15 years? I just looked back to last year because people are saying the WR1 on a bad team is better. You make some valid points HS, please don't think I'm screaming thru the internet. I threw 2 names out there in the OP, more as examples than bible quotes. But yeah, I would rather gamble on the WR3 on Dallas, Indy, Green Bay to fill out my WR5/6 type slots over a guy like the projected WR1 on most of the teams I listed. I would rather gamble on an injury to one of the guys ahead of them than be stuck trying to figure out when to start the others guys. Put it this way...if Bernard Berrian is healthy and Rice or Harvin go down...would you rather start Bernard Berrian or Donnie Avery for the next 4 weeks? If Miles Austin were out for a month and Roy Williams was definitely going to see targets, would you rather start him or the WR1 form Cleveland? Maybe I'm smoking cheeba(I'm not) but I believe I have played this long enough to realize that I hate getting stuck with bad situations. Guys that are in your starting line up and throwing up donuts 2-3 weeks can kill your season. Jeff Tefertiller says to never draft a player that you wouldn't want to start...think about it, that's all I'm saying. nice post

 

[TWP]

I'd also add to this response that some of the situations mentioned by the Holy one were predictable to be non-terrible situations. Carson Palmer being healthy, for instance. All told, I think quibbling with your list of teams makes perfect sense and people make good points in that direction. But at least to me your argument of generally avoiding fantasy wastelands makes a ton of sense.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I'd also add to this response that some of the situations mentioned by the Holy one were predictable to be non-terrible situations. Carson Palmer being healthy, for instance. All told, I think quibbling with your list of teams makes perfect sense and people make good points in that direction. But at least to me your argument of generally avoiding fantasy wastelands makes a ton of sense.

Things tend to be a lot more "predictable" after they've happened. If St Louis gets a lot better this year, people are going to look back and say "Hey, they finally got a QB that wasn't totally shell-shocked. That improvement was predictable!". And if they don't, nobody says anything. Just an example, I'm not necessarily saying that's what's going to happen.My major point (that others made before me) is that predicting player results is tough enough, so why throw something that is even harder to predict (team results) into the mix in ways that aren't necessary? I'm CERTAINLY not saying ignore team situation, far from it. I'm just saying don't totally eliminate guys based on the assumption that a team will not be good enough to produce results. The first reason is that sometimes bad teams DO produce good fantasy players, and the second is that it is very hard to predict if a team will be really really bad.MOP, I'm a little swamped at work right now, but I think doing exactly the "study" you suggest would be very meaningful. Take the bottom ten passing teams from year X and then look at how the top receivers for that team did in year X+1. I did last year, but go back as far as you want.Then compare that list to all of the WR3s in each of those years. It would be better to do guys that were EXPECTED to be WR3s going into the season to account for the injuries and such you mention. That may make it a little more subjective, but I want to give the WR3 camp a fair shake.Some of the #2 are very good, but most of those we already know about going into the season and are drafted accordingly. For example, Moss/Welker (whoever you consider #2) Fitz/Boldin etc. are obviously very good, but that's not the kind of guy you are talking about as a FF WR4/5 I don't think.If I get time, I will look back a bit, but I'd be even happier if someone else did it!

 

[BRONG]

I am trying to think of a worse example than MoP's pick of Roy Williams and I can't.