Terrell Suggs a LB? (1 Viewer)

[acpkg]

My league is on nfl.com (cbs) and right now they have Suggs listed as a LB, so I can't play him at DL. They also have Adalius Thomas listed as a DL and not an LB. This has to be a mistake, right? Does anyone know anything about this? Thanks fellas.

 

[Weiner Dog]

They are probably two years behind the times.

Thomas = OLB

Suggs = DE

 

[Rovers]

I've been attempting to have a dicussion about these new hybrid positions, and how they get listed, but it doesn't seem to get much interest. It's something of a crap shoot. The default listing at MFL is based on the depth charts at NFL.com. Suggs is listed as a DE on the Ravens' depth chart at NFL.com, so that should be how he gets listed in your league. BTW, a commishioner can change a players' listed position at MFL.

It all depends, as far as I know, on what base defense a team gives to the NFL in the way of a depth chart. Baltimore and Miami still show a base 4-3, so Suggs and Taylor remain listed as DE's. At the Ravens site, Suggs is listed as a "Rush LB/DE". I am waiting to see what base D the Jets supply to the NFL.... if Bryan Thomas gets a DE listing, (that is if Mangini uses a 4-3 depth chart) he'll be a stud. As an LB, not worth keeping.

Another player who's listing is up in the air is Dallas' Greg Ellis. Will Parcells show him as a DE, or an OLB? SF shows a 3-4, so Lawson is an OLB. Drafting these hybrid players is a risky proposition. It isn't terribly fair, either. Speaking of Dallas, Ware gets the OLB listing, but he plays the spot much more like Suggs does in Baltimore.

Check your league by laws on what authority has say over a players positional listing. While it may not be completely fair, using the NFL.com depth chart is probably the best way to avoid disputes. We have that in my league's bylaws, and while I don't like it all that much, it does avoid problems.

Teams can wait until, I believe two weeks before the regular season before supplying the NFL with updated depth charts. In the meantime, Suggs should be listed as a DE, in my opinion, in accordance with official NFL data.

 

[imeimex]

2 years ago Suggs played the hybrid OLB/DE position, but last year he was moved back almost exclusively to Defensive End. MFL had Suggs as a Linebacker 2 years ago and switched him back to D-Line last year. Rovers is correct that MFL is based on the NFL.com website and MFL updates position changes throughout the year. Also your commish may have an option to switch the positions for you, on MFL the commish can choose to allow you to start Suggs at DL or LB.

 

[pretender]

Seems to me that the way Rovers league is set-up is the best way to determine the position listed for the hybrid player. The commishioner should follow the way the NFL has that player set up. Otherwise there might be a temptation to downplay the player's position that is in question to lessen the value of the player towards another owner. I don't know any commishioners that would do that but to have a baseline rule that states whatever the NFL uses is what our league uses seems pretty smart to me. Cuts out any grey areas. Those that draft or pick-up the hybrid players gamble that his position stays to his advantage and can't argue if the NFL changes.

 

[Rovers]

Seems to me that the way Rovers league is set-up is the best way to determine the position listed for the hybrid player. The commishioner should follow the way the NFL has that player set up. Otherwise there might be a temptation to downplay the player's position that is in question to lessen the value of the player towards another owner. I don't know any commishioners that would do that but to have a baseline rule that states whatever the NFL uses is what our league uses seems pretty smart to me. Cuts out any grey areas. Those that draft or pick-up the hybrid players gamble that his position stays to his advantage and can't argue if the NFL changes.

I agree.... I don't like how it's done now, but using the NFL.com depth charts does remove any potential for disputes. Doing some forward thinking, I do think if this trend continues, the FF world might need to add another positional category. The problem with that is I'm very doubtful that the NFL cares much, and isn't likely to make any changes in the way they list depth charts now. The NFL has woken up to the fact that FF generates some serious cash though, but having said that, they will remain way behind the curve in terms of recognizing the clear trend in FF towards IDP and dynasty leagues. The NFL could care less about FF, unless they see it as a way to increase revenue..... which they have already figured out. They are clearly out to monopolize the FF market. It doesn't matter to them that their actions will make FF much less appealing..... stinkin bean counters.

If the NFL isn't careful, they could ruin the entire market for FF.

 

[imeimex]

Seems to me that the way Rovers league is set-up is the best way to determine the position listed for the hybrid player. The commishioner should follow the way the NFL has that player set up. Otherwise there might be a temptation to downplay the player's position that is in question to lessen the value of the player towards another owner. I don't know any commishioners that would do that but to have a baseline rule that states whatever the NFL uses is what our league uses seems pretty smart to me. Cuts out any grey areas. Those that draft or pick-up the hybrid players gamble that his position stays to his advantage and can't argue if the NFL changes.

I agree.... I don't like how it's done now, but using the NFL.com depth charts does remove any potential for disputes. Doing some forward thinking, I do think if this trend continues, the FF world might need to add another positional category. The problem with that is I'm very doubtful that the NFL cares much, and isn't likely to make any changes in the way they list depth charts now. The NFL has woken up to the fact that FF generates some serious cash though, but having said that, they will remain way behind the curve in terms of recognizing the clear trend in FF towards IDP and dynasty leagues. The NFL could care less about FF, unless they see it as a way to increase revenue..... which they have already figured out. They are clearly out to monopolize the FF market. It doesn't matter to them that their actions will make FF much less appealing..... stinkin bean counters.

If the NFL isn't careful, they could ruin the entire market for FF.

I agree that every league should have a rule for this in future years, as the 3-4 has become even more popular. Obviously Suggs value is much higher as a Defensive Lineman than as a Linebacker, because typically these rush guys are never going to score enough tackles to be a viable fantasy football linebacker (unless sacks are scored much higher than tackles). MFL waited until just before the regular season to switch Suggs from a linebacker to a D-Line last year, and Suggs value was hurt during the offseason because of it. Even elite ends like Jason Taylor are now being put into some 3-4 defenses and this has a potential to affect fantasy leagues across the board, especially dynasty leagues where you draft Taylor as a defensive lineman and risk losing him to linebacker.

 

[Rovers]

Seems to me that the way Rovers league is set-up is the best way to determine the position listed for the hybrid player. The commishioner should follow the way the NFL has that player set up. Otherwise there might be a temptation to downplay the player's position that is in question to lessen the value of the player towards another owner. I don't know any commishioners that would do that but to have a baseline rule that states whatever the NFL uses is what our league uses seems pretty smart to me. Cuts out any grey areas. Those that draft or pick-up the hybrid players gamble that his position stays to his advantage and can't argue if the NFL changes.

I agree.... I don't like how it's done now, but using the NFL.com depth charts does remove any potential for disputes. Doing some forward thinking, I do think if this trend continues, the FF world might need to add another positional category. The problem with that is I'm very doubtful that the NFL cares much, and isn't likely to make any changes in the way they list depth charts now. The NFL has woken up to the fact that FF generates some serious cash though, but having said that, they will remain way behind the curve in terms of recognizing the clear trend in FF towards IDP and dynasty leagues. The NFL could care less about FF, unless they see it as a way to increase revenue..... which they have already figured out. They are clearly out to monopolize the FF market. It doesn't matter to them that their actions will make FF much less appealing..... stinkin bean counters.

If the NFL isn't careful, they could ruin the entire market for FF.

I agree that every league should have a rule for this in future years, as the 3-4 has become even more popular. Obviously Suggs value is much higher as a Defensive Lineman than as a Linebacker, because typically these rush guys are never going to score enough tackles to be a viable fantasy football linebacker (unless sacks are scored much higher than tackles). MFL waited until just before the regular season to switch Suggs from a linebacker to a D-Line last year, and Suggs value was hurt during the offseason because of it. Even elite ends like Jason Taylor are now being put into some 3-4 defenses and this has a potential to affect fantasy leagues across the board, especially dynasty leagues where you draft Taylor as a defensive lineman and risk losing him to linebacker.

WOOOO-HOOOO! Finally, someone else who sees the hand writing on the wall! This issue is the elephant in the living room. Everyone (or atleast most) just try to ignore it. The problem is.... there is no easy, simple fix. The NFL could care less, so the continued use of their depth charts will only compound the issue later on. Off the top of my head, players that I would classify as hybrids:

Ware

Lawson

Suggs

B Thomas

Jason Taylor

Wimbley

maybe Ellis, on Dallas

There are more, and the number will continue to increase. MAJOR impact on IDP dynasty leagues. perhaps the number of hybrids has to increase in the next seveal years before it's properly addressed, but now is the time for discussion on it, and what it's long term impact will be. The more teams gravitate to some sort of 3-4, the more this issue will be difficult to continue to ignore.

 

[fruity pebbles]

You should get to play them at either position if they play a certain amount of time at each. Like fantasy baseball if a guy plays 5 games at a position he qualifies there next year.

 

[Keg]

Seems to me that the way Rovers league is set-up is the best way to determine the position listed for the hybrid player. The commishioner should follow the way the NFL has that player set up. Otherwise there might be a temptation to downplay the player's position that is in question to lessen the value of the player towards another owner. I don't know any commishioners that would do that but to have a baseline rule that states whatever the NFL uses is what our league uses seems pretty smart to me. Cuts out any grey areas. Those that draft or pick-up the hybrid players gamble that his position stays to his advantage and can't argue if the NFL changes.

I agree.... I don't like how it's done now, but using the NFL.com depth charts does remove any potential for disputes. Doing some forward thinking, I do think if this trend continues, the FF world might need to add another positional category. The problem with that is I'm very doubtful that the NFL cares much, and isn't likely to make any changes in the way they list depth charts now. The NFL has woken up to the fact that FF generates some serious cash though, but having said that, they will remain way behind the curve in terms of recognizing the clear trend in FF towards IDP and dynasty leagues. The NFL could care less about FF, unless they see it as a way to increase revenue..... which they have already figured out. They are clearly out to monopolize the FF market. It doesn't matter to them that their actions will make FF much less appealing..... stinkin bean counters.

If the NFL isn't careful, they could ruin the entire market for FF.

I agree that every league should have a rule for this in future years, as the 3-4 has become even more popular. Obviously Suggs value is much higher as a Defensive Lineman than as a Linebacker, because typically these rush guys are never going to score enough tackles to be a viable fantasy football linebacker (unless sacks are scored much higher than tackles). MFL waited until just before the regular season to switch Suggs from a linebacker to a D-Line last year, and Suggs value was hurt during the offseason because of it. Even elite ends like Jason Taylor are now being put into some 3-4 defenses and this has a potential to affect fantasy leagues across the board, especially dynasty leagues where you draft Taylor as a defensive lineman and risk losing him to linebacker.

WOOOO-HOOOO! Finally, someone else who sees the hand writing on the wall! This issue is the elephant in the living room. Everyone (or atleast most) just try to ignore it. The problem is.... there is no easy, simple fix. The NFL could care less, so the continued use of their depth charts will only compound the issue later on. Off the top of my head, players that I would classify as hybrids:

Ware

Lawson

Suggs

B Thomas

Jason Taylor

Wimbley

maybe Ellis, on Dallas

There are more, and the number will continue to increase. MAJOR impact on IDP dynasty leagues. perhaps the number of hybrids has to increase in the next seveal years before it's properly addressed, but now is the time for discussion on it, and what it's long term impact will be. The more teams gravitate to some sort of 3-4, the more this issue will be difficult to continue to ignore.

should anything be done to help SLB's or DTs?if you dont like a players outlook dont draft him or trade him...most of us avoid SLBs because of their normal fantasy irrelevance...and even more so most DEs are looked at as virtually worthless due to the overwhelming even keeled production at the position outside of the top tier of DEs...so I guess if you want to help the position you are going to have to do like some leagues do with RB/WRs/TEs with PPR .5/recp for RB, 1pt/WR, 1.5/TE....gonna have to weight sacks more for LBs if you want the hybrid to be the equivalent of a MLB or WLB(i dont think you can create a HYBRID position)...but for me I dont see that need...leave it as is and savvy owners will build strong teams while other owners will be lost in a gaze of the NAME GAME or such...

oh and rovers

 

[imeimex]

I appreciate your view, but I completely disagree. What I think you are saying is that you recognize the problem but refuse to address it. I agree with your assesment that most defensive lineman are interchangable, but as long as you have a defensive line position in IDP than you will have to at some point draft a couple of them. The 3-4 will further devalue the defensive lineman that are placed at linebacker, just the same way as the running back was always scoring a lot more in the early years of fantasy football before Point Per Reception leagues and start 2 QBs.

All I'm saying is that commissioners should address this in league rules before it becomes a problem. Of course I am biased, being a Terrell Suggs owner in a dynasty league his trade value as a linebacker last offseason made him virtually worthless.

Seems to me that the way Rovers league is set-up is the best way to determine the position listed for the hybrid player. The commishioner should follow the way the NFL has that player set up. Otherwise there might be a temptation to downplay the player's position that is in question to lessen the value of the player towards another owner. I don't know any commishioners that would do that but to have a baseline rule that states whatever the NFL uses is what our league uses seems pretty smart to me. Cuts out any grey areas. Those that draft or pick-up the hybrid players gamble that his position stays to his advantage and can't argue if the NFL changes.

I agree.... I don't like how it's done now, but using the NFL.com depth charts does remove any potential for disputes. Doing some forward thinking, I do think if this trend continues, the FF world might need to add another positional category. The problem with that is I'm very doubtful that the NFL cares much, and isn't likely to make any changes in the way they list depth charts now. The NFL has woken up to the fact that FF generates some serious cash though, but having said that, they will remain way behind the curve in terms of recognizing the clear trend in FF towards IDP and dynasty leagues. The NFL could care less about FF, unless they see it as a way to increase revenue..... which they have already figured out. They are clearly out to monopolize the FF market. It doesn't matter to them that their actions will make FF much less appealing..... stinkin bean counters.

If the NFL isn't careful, they could ruin the entire market for FF.

I agree that every league should have a rule for this in future years, as the 3-4 has become even more popular. Obviously Suggs value is much higher as a Defensive Lineman than as a Linebacker, because typically these rush guys are never going to score enough tackles to be a viable fantasy football linebacker (unless sacks are scored much higher than tackles). MFL waited until just before the regular season to switch Suggs from a linebacker to a D-Line last year, and Suggs value was hurt during the offseason because of it. Even elite ends like Jason Taylor are now being put into some 3-4 defenses and this has a potential to affect fantasy leagues across the board, especially dynasty leagues where you draft Taylor as a defensive lineman and risk losing him to linebacker.

WOOOO-HOOOO! Finally, someone else who sees the hand writing on the wall! This issue is the elephant in the living room. Everyone (or atleast most) just try to ignore it. The problem is.... there is no easy, simple fix. The NFL could care less, so the continued use of their depth charts will only compound the issue later on. Off the top of my head, players that I would classify as hybrids:

Ware

Lawson

Suggs

B Thomas

Jason Taylor

Wimbley

maybe Ellis, on Dallas

There are more, and the number will continue to increase. MAJOR impact on IDP dynasty leagues. perhaps the number of hybrids has to increase in the next seveal years before it's properly addressed, but now is the time for discussion on it, and what it's long term impact will be. The more teams gravitate to some sort of 3-4, the more this issue will be difficult to continue to ignore.

should anything be done to help SLB's or DTs?if you dont like a players outlook dont draft him or trade him...most of us avoid SLBs because of their normal fantasy irrelevance...and even more so most DEs are looked at as virtually worthless due to the overwhelming even keeled production at the position outside of the top tier of DEs...so I guess if you want to help the position you are going to have to do like some leagues do with RB/WRs/TEs with PPR .5/recp for RB, 1pt/WR, 1.5/TE....gonna have to weight sacks more for LBs if you want the hybrid to be the equivalent of a MLB or WLB(i dont think you can create a HYBRID position)...but for me I dont see that need...leave it as is and savvy owners will build strong teams while other owners will be lost in a gaze of the NAME GAME or such...

oh and rovers

 

[Rovers]

Yeah, my good friend Keg..... he's wrong a lot.

But, his attitude towards this whole hybrid player issue is shared by most IDP players from what I've seen.

The idea behind FF, IMO, is to get the best football players based on what their value is to the team they play for. Merriman is MUCH more valuable to SD than he is to FF, for instance. I think FF falls behind the curve here.... it's not about "helping SLB's" , it's about transferring the value of players into FF comensurate with the value they have on the field for the NFL team they play for.

Hybrid players are obviously very valued in the NFL, just look at how teams draft now. That value, with the way player's positions are now listed, does not translate into FF value. There is a clear movement in the NFL to go with flexable defenses. What is happening now is that the standard 4-3 defenses create more valuable FF players. The number of 4-3 defensive teams is shrinking, and that is because the 3-4 is a better defense, generally speaking, in the NFL.

I picked up Bryan Thomas for a relatively cheap price, but now it's up to pure dumb luck..... do the Jets supply the NFL with a base 3-4 depth chart? If so, Thomas is almost worthless as a 3-4 OLB. List him as a DE, and he's golden.

I think FF has to continually struggle to make the on field value of players translate to FF value. As most leagues run things now, that isn;t happenning with these hybrid players.

 

[imeimex]

We will be seeing hybrid players on both sides of the ball for a long time to come. What if Reggie Bush lined up on the flank more than he did as a RB? Teams are getting smarter and placing players in their most productive role despite typical old rules of sloting someone into a position. As a football team you put your best players on the field and give them the opportunity to make plays.

The next question will be where to slot them in the fantasy football world.

I think any good league will rocognize this fact and award players appropriately. After all fantasy football should be about rewarding players to their true value and scoring rules should change accordingly.

Evveryone can go with the same old scoring rules and have a chance but hopefully fantasy football evolves as real football and the sharks can once again have an advantage. Disclaiming the evolution of fantasy football will just result in having the same results every year. We are the people that made fantasy football in the first place and we should develop as the NFL does.

 

[Rovers]

We will be seeing hybrid players on both sides of the ball for a long time to come. What if Reggie Bush lined up on the flank more than he did as a RB? Teams are getting smarter and placing players in their most productive role despite typical old rules of sloting someone into a position. As a football team you put your best players on the field and give them the opportunity to make plays.

The next question will be where to slot them in the fantasy football world.

I think any good league will rocognize this fact and award players appropriately. After all fantasy football should be about rewarding players to their true value and scoring rules should change accordingly.

Evveryone can go with the same old scoring rules and have a chance but hopefully fantasy football evolves as real football and the sharks can once again have an advantage. Disclaiming the evolution of fantasy football will just result in having the same results every year. We are the people that made fantasy football in the first place and we should develop as the NFL does.

So.... yer saying the you and I are ahead of the curve in FF IDP thinking? I agree. We're freakin geniuses. OK, all kidding aside, I've been harping on this all year. Few want to carry the torch, but at some point, the pot WILL boil over, and a creative solution has to be made and agreed upon. This reminds me of my local..... guys that HATE ANY rule change. It's like pulling teeth. status quo rules the day, until it becomes a tempest in a teapot, and people scramble for answers.

 

[ffchamp1]

We will be seeing hybrid players on both sides of the ball for a long time to come. What if Reggie Bush lined up on the flank more than he did as a RB? Teams are getting smarter and placing players in their most productive role despite typical old rules of sloting someone into a position. As a football team you put your best players on the field and give them the opportunity to make plays.

The next question will be where to slot them in the fantasy football world.

I think any good league will rocognize this fact and award players appropriately. After all fantasy football should be about rewarding players to their true value and scoring rules should change accordingly.

Evveryone can go with the same old scoring rules and have a chance but hopefully fantasy football evolves as real football and the sharks can once again have an advantage. Disclaiming the evolution of fantasy football will just result in having the same results every year. We are the people that made fantasy football in the first place and we should develop as the NFL does.

So.... yer saying the you and I are ahead of the curve in FF IDP thinking? I agree. We're freakin geniuses. OK, all kidding aside, I've been harping on this all year. Few want to carry the torch, but at some point, the pot WILL boil over, and a creative solution has to be made and agreed upon. This reminds me of my local..... guys that HATE ANY rule change. It's like pulling teeth. status quo rules the day, until it becomes a tempest in a teapot, and people scramble for answers.

For what it is worth, I have run my IDP league like this for the last dozen years or so...NFL.com is written in the by-laws as the source for depth charts.

Once a player STARTS two games at "another" position than what he is listed, he becomes eligable at that new position. ie Hill last year was listed as a CB for OAK but played S, and after 2 starts he could be signed and played at either position. The smart move was to play him at CB and get S points from him.

This eliminates the Reggie Bush at Flanker arguements from both sides of the ball.

As far as MFL, commsioners can override the postion designation which I find myself doing a week or two BEFORE the season begins.

Tom

 

[Keg]

I think any good league will rocognize this fact and award players appropriately. After all fantasy football should be about rewarding players to their true value and scoring rules should change accordingly.

just trying to play devils advocate...A few examples:

Big Ben was looked at as a winner but no a QB you can rely on as a fantasy starter(by most)....but he wins so how do you adjust scoring to award a QB like Ben for WINNING without the stats?

Demorrio Williams was top 10 in most leagues last yr....yet he is being benched this yr....so he was a "BAD" nfl player but wonderful Fantasy Player so how do you adjust scoring to show how he actually affected his team?

Champ Bailey is a shut down corner and we know how they score(usually) in FF...should champ be awarded points based on the number of pass attempts that dont go his way because he is to good to throw at(you know what I mean)

all I am trying to say is that...certain schemes make some players value better and some worse...some positions do the same...does that mean it shouldnt be looked at? No but are there 2 sides to it? Yeah and I am just trying to speak to that side is all

oh and fwiw I just wanted to give my friend Rovers a bit of a hard time since his rants have gone pretty much unhearlded

 

[Rovers]

LOL, Kegger!

No FF system will ever be perfect, and it will always be easy to find players whose on field value (whether good or bad) doesn't translate into FF value.

This is different. If FF existed in the days before the forward pass, there wouldn't have been WR's. This movement towards hybrid players is of course not as radical a change as the forward pass was, but it's still a philosophical and fundamental change in the game. It's very different than a QB who doesn't put up big numbers but wins on the field.

One reason this will take time is that there are still a lot of 4-3 based teams out there. I am thinking more along the lines of a "Hybrid" designation, perhaps as a flex, and maybe even some modified scoring for this new player listing. The trickiest part of this, and maybe the achilles heel of the idea, is which players should be listed as hybrids. The status que is the NFL.com depth chart, and while using that avoids disputes and keeps everyone on the same page, it's also restrictive for ahead of the curve, innovative changes in FF.