The Official Staff/Messageboard Survivor Thread (1 Viewer)

[Maurile Tremblay]

Link to Part I

 

[Fullback Fro]

Now if we can get a couple of more round posted. We can start using this thead.

Survivor 1

 

[joffer]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious

 

[LHUCKS]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

he just wants to prove that he won't be relying solely on Gannon, Collins, and Tui at QB this year.

 

[joffer]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

I never started discussing it. I'm just enjoying the good bickering...errr....debate. We just need more ammunition.

 

[LHUCKS]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad  Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious 

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

I never started discussing it. I'm just enjoying the good bickering...errr....debate. We just need more ammunition.

Yeah I know...I was just throwing some jabs. I'm ready for the rounds to be released as well. Is it going to continue to be two at a time?

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad  Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious 

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

I never started discussing it. I'm just enjoying the good bickering...errr....debate. We just need more ammunition.

Joffer, maybe I missed it . But what happened according to you. Why didn't you go QB earlier than what you did in this draft?

 

[radballs.]

I would imagine that Joffer felt that there was too much value to be had at the other positions.

 

[joffer]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad  Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious 

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

I never started discussing it. I'm just enjoying the good bickering...errr....debate. We just need more ammunition.

Joffer, maybe I missed it . But what happened according to you. Why didn't you go QB earlier than what you did in this draft?

You didn't miss it. I've been holding off on commenting until the full draft has been posted. I'll probably jump in tomorrow a little more. I won't get into it tonight since I'm a bit at the moment. Time for a little

 

[LHUCKS]

c'mon Dave, you're draft wasn't THAT bad  Let's get those next two rounds up here and get back to some serious 

You mean you don't want to discuss your QB situation any longer?

I never started discussing it. I'm just enjoying the good bickering...errr....debate. We just need more ammunition.

Joffer, maybe I missed it . But what happened according to you. Why didn't you go QB earlier than what you did in this draft?

Read his commentary to get his perspective. He was going for the Late round QB handcuff strategy...good in theory, but ...

 

[cracKer]

Read his commentary to get his perspective. He was going for the Late round QB handcuff strategy...good in theory, but ...

butt?

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I would imagine that Joffer felt that there was too much value to be had at the other positions.

Radballs,That's true to an extent, but you know you can't just ignore a position because of value. Sooner or later you have to take care of business. I'm not trying to rip on him (too much ) but I'd just like to know what happened in his head. You know, some may learn from his draft as much as any. Maybe he just thought the QB run would end and eventually would stop and he'd get value in QB later.In Redrafts, isn't that how many Sharks draft? It's a little bit different in Survivor.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Unlucky got his Feeley/Fiedler combo in rounds 11-12. And joffer got the second half of his Gannon/Collins combo in the 11th.Strong moves for both teams.

 

[LHUCKS]

Unlucky got his Feeley/Fiedler combo in rounds 11-12. And joffer got the second half of his Gannon/Collins combo in the 11th.Strong moves for both teams.

I would characterize the moves as vital.

 

[Chase Stuart]

http://apps.footballguys.com/04survivorall.cfm

11.07 - New England Patriots

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

13.07 - St. Louis Rams

14.06 - Desmond Clark

 

[BassNBrew]

http://apps.footballguys.com/04survivorall.cfm12.06 - Quentin Griffin

:rotflmao:

 

[LHUCKS]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.You could have had a productive tightend or WR or even Defense and instead you took a guy that has little chance of contributing to your team. I feel like Andy Dufresne in Shawshank...counting the days until I get my chance at these chumps....the ones I haven't thoroughly destroyed already anyhow.

 

[Chase Stuart]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.

Then I can't wait to hear your reviews of Grouse's tenth round pick "It's a wide-open race. HC Mike Shanahan would love to have a stud emerge to handle 25 carries a game. The top contenders are RB Quentin Griffin and RB Mike Anderson. Griffin's quickness and ability to catch the ball out of the backfield make him a great weapon, but his lack of size raises questions. Speedy rookie RB Tatum Bell is a raw talent who was not impressive during minicamp.""The feeling around the Broncos is that Quentin Griffin, who busted loosefor 136 yards on 28 carries against Indianapolis in his only start as arookie last season, could start if he holds up physically. Griffin isundersized (5-7, 195), but he's only five pounds lighter than Portis wasas a rookie and, last time Barry Sanders looked, height wasn't an issue atrunning back. Griffin is the ideal third-down back because of his naturalreceiving skills, but he can also be an electric runner in Denver'sone-cut system. What he's not likely to provide on a consistent basis is ahome-run threat - his long run last season was a 23-yarder againstChicago. Griffin is also the kind of back who showed some wear after highcarry totals at Oklahoma. The Sooners ran him as often as 36 times in asingle game, but Griffin might break down later in the season if he seesthat kind of work."Bell at 6.07 seems quite a bit less valuable than Griffin at 12.06

 

[Joe T]

clear winners of rounds 11-14:Fro - continues to dominate with huge value picks. Atrain, Calico, and Wilkins are all great at this point in the draft. Yes I am a believer that Atrain will continue to contribute in Chicago.Shick - solidifies his team with 3 good mid-level receivers and a solid D. He didn't reach for a D like some staff did.Joffer and Unlucky grabbed the qb's they needed. Unlucky's team is starting to look very good at this point. I like Joffer's Reggie Williams pick as he seems the most logical rookie WR to produce this season.I like Pickles two non-defense picks.Clear losers these rounds: Jason and Chase.I’m am amazed at Jason’s and Chase’s picks. They both had clear needs and instead wasted several picks in these rounds when there was clearly value available. I would like to hear the reasoning for grabbing not one, but two defenses significantly early. You guys must have run different numbers than I did, so I’d love to hear the rationale of that.I think Chase killed his chances in these four roundsatriotsQ. GriffinRamsDesmond ClarkWood went:Stephen JacksonDolphinsEaglesMarcus PollardWow. Those rounds will come back to haunt those two teams. Obviously, Jason has a lot more confidence in his WR 3 combo of Ashley Lelie and Brandon Loyd than I do. I’m seeing a lot of trouble in his WR unit as a whole yet he’s adding 2 D’s a questionable RB 4 and a TE who is seeing decreasing playing time.Chase would have been better served as well grabbing a WR 5 intead of D2 here and he did the same as Jason in grabbing a RB 4 who will likely put up a lot of zeros. He also grabbed an overrated TE.Wow.

 

[LHUCKS]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.

Then I can't wait to hear your reviews of Grouse's tenth round pick "It's a wide-open race. HC Mike Shanahan would love to have a stud emerge to handle 25 carries a game. The top contenders are RB Quentin Griffin and RB Mike Anderson. Griffin's quickness and ability to catch the ball out of the backfield make him a great weapon, but his lack of size raises questions. Speedy rookie RB Tatum Bell is a raw talent who was not impressive during minicamp.""The feeling around the Broncos is that Quentin Griffin, who busted loosefor 136 yards on 28 carries against Indianapolis in his only start as arookie last season, could start if he holds up physically. Griffin isundersized (5-7, 195), but he's only five pounds lighter than Portis wasas a rookie and, last time Barry Sanders looked, height wasn't an issue atrunning back. Griffin is the ideal third-down back because of his naturalreceiving skills, but he can also be an electric runner in Denver'sone-cut system. What he's not likely to provide on a consistent basis is ahome-run threat - his long run last season was a 23-yarder againstChicago. Griffin is also the kind of back who showed some wear after highcarry totals at Oklahoma. The Sooners ran him as often as 36 times in asingle game, but Griffin might break down later in the season if he seesthat kind of work."Bell at 6.07 seems quite a bit less valuable than Griffin at 12.06

Not to re-hash our 99 page Denver RB thread...but Griffin is horrible.If he is the starter it's a great pick...more than likely he wont be and you've wasted a roster spot and hurt your chances of surviving.I always play the odds.Who wrote that anyhow?

 

[Chase Stuart]

clear winners of rounds 11-14:Fro - continues to dominate with huge value picks. Atrain, Calico, and Wilkins are all great at this point in the draft. Yes I am a believer that Atrain will continue to contribute in Chicago.Shick - solidifies his team with 3 good mid-level receivers and a solid D. He didn't reach for a D like some staff did.Joffer and Unlucky grabbed the qb's they needed. Unlucky's team is starting to look very good at this point. I like Joffer's Reggie Williams pick as he seems the most logical rookie WR to produce this season.I like Pickles two non-defense picks.Clear losers these rounds: Jason and Chase.I’m am amazed at Jason’s and Chase’s picks. They both had clear needs and instead wasted several picks in these rounds when there was clearly value available. I would like to hear the reasoning for grabbing not one, but two defenses significantly early. You guys must have run different numbers than I did, so I’d love to hear the rationale of that.I think Chase killed his chances in these four roundsatriotsQ. GriffinRamsDesmond ClarkWood went:Stephen JacksonDolphinsEaglesMarcus PollardWow. Those rounds will come back to haunt those two teams. Obviously, Jason has a lot more confidence in his WR 3 combo of Ashley Lelie and Brandon Loyd than I do. I’m seeing a lot of trouble in his WR unit as a whole yet he’s adding 2 D’s a questionable RB 4 and a TE who is seeing decreasing playing time.Chase would have been better served as well grabbing a WR 5 intead of D2 here and he did the same as Jason in grabbing a RB 4 who will likely put up a lot of zeros. He also grabbed an overrated TE.Wow.

Hey JoeT...you've been pretty fair to me so far, so I'll assume this isn't a The Patriots choice was obvious--I feel very happy at QB and WR. I'm three deep with studs at QB, and four deep with guys I like at WR. A fith WR or the top defense in the league? It was a no brainer.The next pick? I like Quentin Griffin a lot. He could certainly be a RB2 by the end of the year. In the twelth round, no way do I pass that chance up.Tyrone Calico? Terry Glenn? Reggie Williams? These are the star WRs left in the thirteenth round. Johnny Morton? Joey Galloway? David Givens in the 12th?I like the WRs I took in the 18th and 19th (or something like that) rounds. They were two guys I think people are underestimating, and I think they're just a hair below the guys in the 12th and 13th. Obviously, the dropoff at both D and RB is far greater than WR IMO, from the 12th to the 18th.I hated taking the Rams, but there was no one else I wanted with that pick. If it wasn't the Rams, it was Desmond Clark. Personally, I don't think the Rams will be number three again this year--but hopefully they stay in the top ten.The big advantage to grabbing two "stud" Ds? You can grab BOTH five RBs AND six WRs. That's why I did that there (along with there being absolutely nobody of 'value' in the 14th).

 

[Chase Stuart]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.

Then I can't wait to hear your reviews of Grouse's tenth round pick "It's a wide-open race. HC Mike Shanahan would love to have a stud emerge to handle 25 carries a game. The top contenders are RB Quentin Griffin and RB Mike Anderson. Griffin's quickness and ability to catch the ball out of the backfield make him a great weapon, but his lack of size raises questions. Speedy rookie RB Tatum Bell is a raw talent who was not impressive during minicamp.""The feeling around the Broncos is that Quentin Griffin, who busted loosefor 136 yards on 28 carries against Indianapolis in his only start as arookie last season, could start if he holds up physically. Griffin isundersized (5-7, 195), but he's only five pounds lighter than Portis wasas a rookie and, last time Barry Sanders looked, height wasn't an issue atrunning back. Griffin is the ideal third-down back because of his naturalreceiving skills, but he can also be an electric runner in Denver'sone-cut system. What he's not likely to provide on a consistent basis is ahome-run threat - his long run last season was a 23-yarder againstChicago. Griffin is also the kind of back who showed some wear after highcarry totals at Oklahoma. The Sooners ran him as often as 36 times in asingle game, but Griffin might break down later in the season if he seesthat kind of work."Bell at 6.07 seems quite a bit less valuable than Griffin at 12.06

Not to re-hash our 99 page Denver RB thread...but Griffin is horrible.If he is the starter it's a great pick...more than likely he wont be and you've wasted a roster spot and hurt your chances of surviving.I always play the odds.Who wrote that anyhow?

The Sporting News and PFW.Why is Griffin a zero each week?It seems to me, that whatever happens he's going to get SOME playing time this year. He got 94 carries last year, I don't see that going down.I could see him producing 400-600 total yards even if he loses the starting job.And btw, I don't think Griffin is garbage. I think Griffin = good.

 

[Chris Smith]

Chase would have been better served as well grabbing a WR 5 intead of D2 here

I don't think that is true if the receiver(s) he would have taken here could be selected later on in the draft.Getting a good 2nd defense makes sense in that case.

 

[Joe T]

Chase - have you looked at all the variability of defenses year in and year out. I can see grabbing one good D that you think will do well, but grabbing two that early is wasting a pick. There is a lot of fluctuation from year to year so you are spending two picks on a crap shoot.IMO.not fishing by the way either.I'll go look and see what happened later in the draft to see if you made up for this, but at this point we obviously took different paths in the draft.

 

[radballs.]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.You could have had a productive tightend or WR or even Defense and instead you took a guy that has little chance of contributing to your team. I feel like Andy Dufresne in Shawshank...counting the days until I get my chance at these chumps....the ones I haven't thoroughly destroyed already anyhow.

I think that's good value there. He has as much chance at producing and he comes at a cheaper price. He played pretty well in week 16 last year.

 

[Jason Wood]

Hey Joe,Well, if you read my commentary it's no secret that I regretted the Philly D pick right after making it, so why would I try to make excuses for it now? Ultimately I don't see that it hurt me 1-20 as I still feel I have one of the better teams when all is said and done, but certainly had I to do it over again I wouldn't have grabbed a 2nd defense that early.As to Pollard, I did a study last year talking about just how little separates most fantasy TEs beyond the few rarified breed who are major offensive forces. For that reason, I normally wait even longer than I did to take a TE, but with so many flying off the board, I was glad to nab Pollard when I did. I'd be stunned if Pollard finished any worse than TE12 and actually expect him to have YET ANOTHER top 10 season. Since 17 TEs went ahead of him, in my view it was value AND others reached at the position.As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do. However, I believe that worst case, i.e., Faulk is healthy all season, Jackson gets 125-150 touches and a half dozen touchdowns; much of it coming in a few select weeks which ideally helps more in a Survivor format than in others. In looking at some of the absolute trash that went at RB ahead of Jackson (Bettis?), I'll gladly roll the dice. Best case, Faulk gets hurt and Jackson rolls up a huge rookie season. Again, I recognize that some don't see SJ getting much run at all in 2004, and in that case, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[LHUCKS]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.You could have had a productive tightend or WR or even Defense and instead you took a guy that has little chance of contributing to your team. I feel like Andy Dufresne in Shawshank...counting the days until I get my chance at these chumps....the ones I haven't thoroughly destroyed already anyhow.

I think that's good value there. He has as much chance at producing and he comes at a cheaper price. He played pretty well in week 16 last year.

In a re-draft, yes. In a survivor, no.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I love the Griffin pick in the 12th round.Griffin and Wheatley were two RBs I was initially targeting in the 10th, but I ended up not needing them when Buckhalter and Moe Williams were available in the 9th and 10th.

 

[LHUCKS]

I love the Griffin pick in the 12th round.Griffin and Wheatley were two RBs I was initially targeting in the 10th, but I ended up not needing them when Buckhalter and Moe Williams were available in the 9th and 10th.

Now Wheatley I can see, Griffin was just a bad pick.Wheatley always looks good when he runs.Wheatley has less quality competition.Oakland didn't spend a high pick on a rookie RB.Hearst looked solid last year, Hambrick looked like ####.Turner has already called out Hambrick for being lazy in the offseason.I really see no comparison here.

 

[radballs.]

Wheatley always looks good when he runs.Wheatley has less quality competition.

You're kidding right, LHUCKS. You can't be serious with both of those comments.

 

[bostonfred2]

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do. However, I believe that worst case, i.e., Faulk is healthy all season, Jackson gets 125-150 touches and a half dozen touchdowns; much of it coming in a few select weeks which ideally helps more in a Survivor format than in others.

Your worst case scenario for Jackson is 125-150 touches and a half dozen TDs? I don't think that's a very realistic worst case.

 

[bostonfred2]

Chase - have you looked at all the variability of defenses year in and year out. I can see grabbing one good D that you think will do well, but grabbing two that early is wasting a pick. There is a lot of fluctuation from year to year so you are spending two picks on a crap shoot.

Just because year n to year n+1 scoring is not predictable, doesn't mean that defenses are not predictable. I think that's a myth.

 

[LHUCKS]

12.06 - Quentin Griffin

This is an example of what I call a wasted pick, and more importantly a wasted roster spot.

Then I can't wait to hear your reviews of Grouse's tenth round pick "It's a wide-open race. HC Mike Shanahan would love to have a stud emerge to handle 25 carries a game. The top contenders are RB Quentin Griffin and RB Mike Anderson. Griffin's quickness and ability to catch the ball out of the backfield make him a great weapon, but his lack of size raises questions. Speedy rookie RB Tatum Bell is a raw talent who was not impressive during minicamp.""The feeling around the Broncos is that Quentin Griffin, who busted loosefor 136 yards on 28 carries against Indianapolis in his only start as arookie last season, could start if he holds up physically. Griffin isundersized (5-7, 195), but he's only five pounds lighter than Portis wasas a rookie and, last time Barry Sanders looked, height wasn't an issue atrunning back. Griffin is the ideal third-down back because of his naturalreceiving skills, but he can also be an electric runner in Denver'sone-cut system. What he's not likely to provide on a consistent basis is ahome-run threat - his long run last season was a 23-yarder againstChicago. Griffin is also the kind of back who showed some wear after highcarry totals at Oklahoma. The Sooners ran him as often as 36 times in asingle game, but Griffin might break down later in the season if he seesthat kind of work."Bell at 6.07 seems quite a bit less valuable than Griffin at 12.06

Not to re-hash our 99 page Denver RB thread...but Griffin is horrible.If he is the starter it's a great pick...more than likely he wont be and you've wasted a roster spot and hurt your chances of surviving.I always play the odds.Who wrote that anyhow?

The Sporting News and PFW.Why is Griffin a zero each week?It seems to me, that whatever happens he's going to get SOME playing time this year. He got 94 carries last year, I don't see that going down.I could see him producing 400-600 total yards even if he loses the starting job.And btw, I don't think Griffin is garbage. I think Griffin = good.

a) PFW completely dropped the ball on that one.b) You watched Griffin play last year and thought he was "good"? I would say medicore at best. And if you wanted to see good, you should have tuned into the Hearst games last year when he was healthy, he's still twice the back as Griffin.Let's say just for kicks that he does get 600 yards and a couple of TDs...you'd rather have him over a solid WR or TE or top Defense?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Just because year n to year n+1 scoring is not predictable, doesn't mean that defenses are not predictable.

This may be true. But ADP and defensive production don't correlate, either. So if defenses are predictable, at least most people do a lousy job of predicting them.

 

[LHUCKS]

Wheatley always looks good when he runs.Wheatley has less quality competition.

You're kidding right, LHUCKS. You can't be serious with both of those comments.

I'm dead serious.You'd rather have Amos/####-brick/Fargas than Hearst/Bell????

 

[Fullback Fro]

When's Smelvin and BnB's commentary going to be posted? Love that stuff.

 

[Jason Wood]

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do. However, I believe that worst case, i.e., Faulk is healthy all season, Jackson gets 125-150 touches and a half dozen touchdowns; much of it coming in a few select weeks which ideally helps more in a Survivor format than in others.

Your worst case scenario for Jackson is 125-150 touches and a half dozen TDs? I don't think that's a very realistic worst case.

BFred,Funny, you didn't quote the part of my response where I said:

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do......Again, I recognize that some don't see SJ getting much run at all in 2004, and in that case, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I wasn't asked to draft a team based on consensus expectations, I was asked to draft a team based on my own projections, and that's what I expect from Jackson this year.And FYI, according to Xpertleagues, Steven Jackson is being drafted on average in the 10th round (10.1).

 

[Chase Stuart]

Chase - have you looked at all the variability of defenses year in and year out. I can see grabbing one good D that you think will do well, but grabbing two that early is wasting a pick. There is a lot of fluctuation from year to year so you are spending two picks on a crap shoot.

Just because year n to year n+1 scoring is not predictable, doesn't mean that defenses are not predictable. I think that's a myth.

I actually agree with JoeT here. I don't think I'm going to have two of the top three Ds, as they ranked last year.I just didn't see a better pick here. Like I said, if it wasn't the D I was going to grab a TE. There were three guys I was targeting real late. Are they as good as the guys you can get in the 12th? No. Are the anything more than marginally worse? Not in my opinion.I don't need two stars out of my WR5/6 spots. I need two guys that will get me 50 catches and a few TDs. I think the guys I took real late are nearly as likely to get that than someone like Roy or Reggie Williams. (I actually like Reggie a bit--Roy I'm not too high on).If I didn't take the Rams D(probably my least favorite pick of the draft), I was going to take Desmond Clark, and then take three Ds late. This probably would have prevented me from my 15th round pick--who you guys will REALLY laugh at when you see.But this late in the draft, you focus on the guys you want and you go get them.I'm sick of debating Denver RBs--things should clear up soon.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Let's say just for kicks that he does get 600 yards and a couple of TDs...you'd rather have him over a solid WR or TE or top Defense?

You show me a solid WR this late.I grabbed a TE I liked.I think I've cornered the market on stud Ds. How many more should I take?Obviously, if you like QG this was a great pick. If you don't, this was a bad pick. I don't see a ton of value in going back and forth as to whether or not Griffin will start. Everyone says you need to take risks to win a competitive league--this was an extremely low value risk (just cost me a 12th rounder) with very high upside. I'm happy with that.

 

[Fullback Fro]

Question for all Staff.If you could, would you, in your honest expert opinion, trade teams with me up to this point in the draft right now, if you could?edited to add you guys are too proud to admit you would.

 

[David Dodds]

clear winners of rounds 11-14:Fro - continues to dominate with huge value picks. Atrain, Calico, and Wilkins are all great at this point in the draft. Yes I am a believer that Atrain will continue to contribute in Chicago.Shick - solidifies his team with 3 good mid-level receivers and a solid D. He didn't reach for a D like some staff did.Joffer and Unlucky grabbed the qb's they needed. Unlucky's team is starting to look very good at this point. I like Joffer's Reggie Williams pick as he seems the most logical rookie WR to produce this season.I like Pickles two non-defense picks.Clear losers these rounds: Jason and Chase.I’m am amazed at Jason’s and Chase’s picks. They both had clear needs and instead wasted several picks in these rounds when there was clearly value available. I would like to hear the reasoning for grabbing not one, but two defenses significantly early. You guys must have run different numbers than I did, so I’d love to hear the rationale of that.I think Chase killed his chances in these four roundsatriotsQ. GriffinRamsDesmond ClarkWood went:Stephen JacksonDolphinsEaglesMarcus PollardWow. Those rounds will come back to haunt those two teams. Obviously, Jason has a lot more confidence in his WR 3 combo of Ashley Lelie and Brandon Loyd than I do. I’m seeing a lot of trouble in his WR unit as a whole yet he’s adding 2 D’s a questionable RB 4 and a TE who is seeing decreasing playing time.Chase would have been better served as well grabbing a WR 5 intead of D2 here and he did the same as Jason in grabbing a RB 4 who will likely put up a lot of zeros. He also grabbed an overrated TE.Wow.

I feel I won rounds 11-14 in a landslide here. I got 2 of the best 3 defenses and landed Roy Williams and Kevin Johnson (Possibly both WR#1 on their teams).Gimme some love Joe T....Funniest commentary moments here:- Joffer's team goes from a 9.5% chance to win to an 8.5% chance to win with two average picks in rounds 13 and 14. Hmmmm, Seems to me the commentary is finally coming around to seeing that you need at least some QBs on your roster. hard to believe a team could slip that far when we are drafting backups, kickers and defenses now.- Although I am not a huge fan of Colin Dowling's overall team, I love the fact it consistently gets 1s and 2s in the commentary. I hate to break the news to everyone. It isn't that bad of a team at all. He is stocked at RB (if Chris Brown is the starter in Tennessee). He first gets ripped that his team is awful and now gets horrible grades because of a week 10 bye week problem that is a long ways off. And not to keep picking on Joffer, but isn't half of his roster off on week 10 too? Maybe Colin is planning on just being better than him to advance?Anyway I am good with no love from Joe T here. We will know the real score soon. The rest of this draft will be posted no later than Monday. My full blown statistical simulation will appear Tuesday morning. And then EVERYONE will know the true grades here.and despite no love from Joe T, I recognize that he has one of the better teams in Survivor I. Not the best (those spots are locked up by the staff), but a good effort.

 

[David Dodds]

Question for all Staff.If you could, would you, in your honest expert opinion, trade teams with me up to this point in the draft right now, if you could?edited to add you guys are too proud to admit you would.

Why would I trade away the winner to get eliminated early? Let the smack begin.

 

[BassNBrew]

When's Smelvin and BnB's commentary going to be posted? Love that stuff.

11-1213-14

 

[David Dodds]

Marc said he would give that to me tonight for S2.

 

[bostonfred2]

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do. However, I believe that worst case, i.e., Faulk is healthy all season, Jackson gets 125-150 touches and a half dozen touchdowns; much of it coming in a few select weeks which ideally helps more in a Survivor format than in others.

Your worst case scenario for Jackson is 125-150 touches and a half dozen TDs? I don't think that's a very realistic worst case.

BFred,Funny, you didn't quote the part of my response where I said:

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do......Again, I recognize that some don't see SJ getting much run at all in 2004, and in that case, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I wasn't asked to draft a team based on consensus expectations, I was asked to draft a team based on my own projections, and that's what I expect from Jackson this year.And FYI, according to Xpertleagues, Steven Jackson is being drafted on average in the 10th round (10.1).

That's because I wasn't talking about your best case scenario. I'm a big believer in taking players with a high expected value, based on how likely I think they are to reach their upside, and how likely I think they are to hit their worst case numbers. For that to work, I try to be completely honest about their worst case scenario, even if I like the player. I don't think that's what you've done. To me, Jackson's worst case scenario is a handful of carries throughout the year as he sits on the bench learning, and I think that's more likely than you seem to. We can agree to disagree on how likely that is, in fact, that's where most people's rankings differ, but I think you're dead wrong about his worst case scenario. I'm not picking on you or your pick - in fact, I think he's a fine pick in the 11th. But the most important thing to come out of these drafts is the discussion, and I think a discussion of the term "worst case" is very relevant to drafting and player projections.

 

[radballs.]

Wheatley always looks good when he runs.Wheatley has less quality competition.

You're kidding right, LHUCKS. You can't be serious with both of those comments.

I'm dead serious.You'd rather have Amos/####-brick/Fargas than Hearst/Bell????

I think all the backs in Oakland are crappy, Wheatley included. And that's coming from a Raider fan. There's just as much competition for Wheatley in Oakland as there is Griffin in Denver.

 

[radballs.]

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do. However, I believe that worst case, i.e., Faulk is healthy all season, Jackson gets 125-150 touches and a half dozen touchdowns; much of it coming in a few select weeks which ideally helps more in a Survivor format than in others.

Your worst case scenario for Jackson is 125-150 touches and a half dozen TDs? I don't think that's a very realistic worst case.

BFred,Funny, you didn't quote the part of my response where I said:

As to Steven Jackson, it's clear from reading the message boards lately that some don't see Jackson's 2004 outlook the way I do......Again, I recognize that some don't see SJ getting much run at all in 2004, and in that case, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I wasn't asked to draft a team based on consensus expectations, I was asked to draft a team based on my own projections, and that's what I expect from Jackson this year.And FYI, according to Xpertleagues, Steven Jackson is being drafted on average in the 10th round (10.1).

That's because I wasn't talking about your best case scenario. I'm a big believer in taking players with a high expected value, based on how likely I think they are to reach their upside, and how likely I think they are to hit their worst case numbers. For that to work, I try to be completely honest about their worst case scenario, even if I like the player. I don't think that's what you've done. To me, Jackson's worst case scenario is a handful of carries throughout the year as he sits on the bench learning, and I think that's more likely than you seem to. We can agree to disagree on how likely that is, in fact, that's where most people's rankings differ, but I think you're dead wrong about his worst case scenario. I'm not picking on you or your pick - in fact, I think he's a fine pick in the 11th. But the most important thing to come out of these drafts is the discussion, and I think a discussion of the term "worst case" is very relevant to drafting and player projections.

I agree with Fred here. J Dub, are sure you didn't mean Jax's BEST case scenario?

 

[bostonfred2]

Just because year n to year n+1 scoring is not predictable, doesn't mean that defenses are not predictable.

This may be true. But ADP and defensive production don't correlate, either. So if defenses are predictable, at least most people do a lousy job of predicting them.

That's because ADP in year n+1 correlates to year n scoring.

 

[LHUCKS]

I feel I won rounds 11-14 in a landslide here. I got 2 of the best 3 defenses and landed Roy Williams and Kevin Johnson (Possibly both WR#1 on their teams).

I completey agree with you here David. I have you rated as the best draft in these rounds. That being said, I am always so-so on your early rounds. I dinged you last year in Survivor I for your early rounds and I disagreed with a couple of your early picks in the FFINDEX draft this year.On the other hand, we seem to have very similar mid-late round draft strategies.