Waldman posts new Dynasty Rankings (1 Viewer)

[Go deep]

Thanks for the reminder about BJGE, I simply missed him. To give you guys more to nitpick until there are other rankings to enjoy chewing on, here's a little bit about how I look at rankings. This will hopefully give you a little more perspective.When I'm ranking 240 players (and really more but we display the top 60 at each position and the top 75 overall), I'm not so concerned with whether player A is over player B in a dynasty ranking. You might be, but that's not my approach. I'm more concerned about where I tier a player. Since we don't have a function that does that, I can give you a rough estimate of what I'm thinking as tiers is a rough (very rough) pyramid shape. The Elite tier is roughly the first 2-3 playersThe Starter 1 is roughly the 8-13 after the Elite The Starter 2 is roughly 12-26 after the Starter 1The Starter 3 is roughly the 15-30 after the starter 3The groupings get larger as I get further into backups, practice squad players and free agents. I also tend to place less weight on lifespan for dynasty leagues. If there's a player that's 27-28 and he's about to leave his team and likely for much better environs (DeAngelo Williams) then he might be done as an RB1 in two years, but even if your goal is to build the 70s Steelers, or 80s 49ers you still need a mix of great vets that have 2-3 years left and young players that mature as a core and stay for 8-10 seasons.I don't believe in downgrading a player with 2-3 years of very good production left in him. One year? I'll make very few exceptions, but if the guy has 2-3 years from my perspective then I'm not dinging him. Therefore if player A is ranked one spot over B and it's within 5-10 picks, you can nitpick whether they are in relation to each other, but in the reality of how I do this work those tiers are fluid enough that on a given day or week I'd agree with you. What's more important is whether I have player A and B in one tier and player C in another. For instance, James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect. Hope that helps. Keep nitpicking.

Hey Matt, youre one of my favorites of the guys who put out their rankings for FBG, bu i have a few issues here i wouldlike to discuss.How can you have a predetermined set of tiers that you rank in, wouldnt it change depending on the group of players?You also mention that a team needs veterans to win a championship, but thats not true at all. Why cant i win with a bunch of guys in their prime? Also, why wouldnt you value a guy with 5+ years left more than a guy with 2 or 3? I know you are more concerned with the current season, but if you had valued the 23 year old RB over the 28 year old 4 years ago, wouldnt you be better off this season? Not to mention, unless you have no problem watching a guy lose all dynasty value while on your roster, your last chance to trade a guy for fair value is when he only has a couple seasons left.

 

[Concept Coop]

Who in their right mind would take Rice over Foster right now?

I think he's a better talent and his sitaution is a little more stable. I'm not knocking Foster as it's very close - I'm just not going to over-react based on one season. In 2009 Rice was a top 4 RB, now he's not? See what I mean? Same could happen to Foster and while I don't think he's a one hot wonder, I also don't think he'll be the best RB in football next year.I also play in ppr leagues so that creates some bias as well - although I own Foster in my ppr re-draft and he's been the top back all season..Willis MaGahee is likely gone after this year which doesn't mean that Rice automatically gets the red-zone carries, but I know he's capable of short yardage carries. If Kubiak gets cannned after this season and a new coaching staff comes in an implements a new blocking scheme it could mean trouble for Foster. Foster is a classic one cut and go runner that is perfect for a ZBS. That's not to say he can't be successful in a poer bocking scheme as he's big and strong and can be shifty when needed. Rice is the superior runner though imo so I'd take him if I had to make that choice.It's very close, but I don't see it as outlandish for some one to prefer Rice. There's too much "what have you doen for me lately" mentality in fantasy football sometimes and that can be a dangerous thing in dynatsy leagues. Look at all the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round of dynasty start-ups following their rookie seasons.

The same overreaction (right or wrong) that places Foster as top 4 this season, placed Rice as top 4 last season; the major difference being points. Foster is besting Rice's great year last season, and is DOUBLING the production this season. I don't know why great production in 2009 is more valid than better production in 2010. Why is one overreacting based off of one year and the other not?As for the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round, I don't think the Forte owners are anymore upset than the Rice owners that overpaid with a top 3 or 4 (overall) pick on a RB2 (by points) this season - they are producing equally, IIRC, and are close to the same age.And I wouldn't put much stock in the fact that McGahee will be leaving. I think the Ravens find another back to replace him. Rice needs to worry about McGahee the role, not the running back. Rice is not a great redzone back, and for a team that plays the way they do, redzone production from a RB is huge.

 

[Go deep]

Who in their right mind would take Rice over Foster right now?

I think he's a better talent and his sitaution is a little more stable. I'm not knocking Foster as it's very close - I'm just not going to over-react based on one season. In 2009 Rice was a top 4 RB, now he's not? See what I mean? Same could happen to Foster and while I don't think he's a one hot wonder, I also don't think he'll be the best RB in football next year.I also play in ppr leagues so that creates some bias as well - although I own Foster in my ppr re-draft and he's been the top back all season..Willis MaGahee is likely gone after this year which doesn't mean that Rice automatically gets the red-zone carries, but I know he's capable of short yardage carries. If Kubiak gets cannned after this season and a new coaching staff comes in an implements a new blocking scheme it could mean trouble for Foster. Foster is a classic one cut and go runner that is perfect for a ZBS. That's not to say he can't be successful in a poer bocking scheme as he's big and strong and can be shifty when needed. Rice is the superior runner though imo so I'd take him if I had to make that choice.It's very close, but I don't see it as outlandish for some one to prefer Rice. There's too much "what have you doen for me lately" mentality in fantasy football sometimes and that can be a dangerous thing in dynatsy leagues. Look at all the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round of dynasty start-ups following their rookie seasons.

The same overreaction (right or wrong) that places Foster as top 4 this season, placed Rice as top 4 last season; the major difference being points. Foster is besting Rice's great year last season, and is DOUBLING the production this season. I don't know why great production in 2009 is more valid than better production in 2010. Why is one overreacting based off of one year and the other not?As for the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round, I don't think the Forte owners are anymore upset than the Rice owners that overpaid with a top 3 or 4 (overall) pick on a RB2 (by points) this season - they are producing equally, IIRC, and are close to the same age.And I wouldn't put much stock in the fact that McGahee will be leaving. I think the Ravens find another back to replace him. Rice needs to worry about McGahee the role, not the running back. Rice is not a great redzone back, and for a team that plays the way they do, redzone production from a RB is huge.

I think people felt better about putting Rice in their top 5 dynasty backs because of talent. On the other hand, people are skeptical of Foster because his success is based more on situation. Talent doesnt change, situations does. I believe it is far more likely Rice is still a starting RB in the BFL 3 years from now.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Thanks for the reminder about BJGE, I simply missed him. To give you guys more to nitpick until there are other rankings to enjoy chewing on, here's a little bit about how I look at rankings. This will hopefully give you a little more perspective.When I'm ranking 240 players (and really more but we display the top 60 at each position and the top 75 overall), I'm not so concerned with whether player A is over player B in a dynasty ranking. You might be, but that's not my approach. I'm more concerned about where I tier a player. Since we don't have a function that does that, I can give you a rough estimate of what I'm thinking as tiers is a rough (very rough) pyramid shape. The Elite tier is roughly the first 2-3 playersThe Starter 1 is roughly the 8-13 after the Elite The Starter 2 is roughly 12-26 after the Starter 1The Starter 3 is roughly the 15-30 after the starter 3The groupings get larger as I get further into backups, practice squad players and free agents. I also tend to place less weight on lifespan for dynasty leagues. If there's a player that's 27-28 and he's about to leave his team and likely for much better environs (DeAngelo Williams) then he might be done as an RB1 in two years, but even if your goal is to build the 70s Steelers, or 80s 49ers you still need a mix of great vets that have 2-3 years left and young players that mature as a core and stay for 8-10 seasons.I don't believe in downgrading a player with 2-3 years of very good production left in him. One year? I'll make very few exceptions, but if the guy has 2-3 years from my perspective then I'm not dinging him. Therefore if player A is ranked one spot over B and it's within 5-10 picks, you can nitpick whether they are in relation to each other, but in the reality of how I do this work those tiers are fluid enough that on a given day or week I'd agree with you. What's more important is whether I have player A and B in one tier and player C in another. For instance, James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect. Hope that helps. Keep nitpicking.

Hey Matt, youre one of my favorites of the guys who put out their rankings for FBG, bu i have a few issues here i wouldlike to discuss.How can you have a predetermined set of tiers that you rank in, wouldnt it change depending on the group of players?You also mention that a team needs veterans to win a championship, but thats not true at all. Why cant i win with a bunch of guys in their prime? Also, why wouldnt you value a guy with 5+ years left more than a guy with 2 or 3? I know you are more concerned with the current season, but if you had valued the 23 year old RB over the 28 year old 4 years ago, wouldnt you be better off this season? Not to mention, unless you have no problem watching a guy lose all dynasty value while on your roster, your last chance to trade a guy for fair value is when he only has a couple seasons left.

My pleasure to answer...I don't have a predetermined set as much as a rough set that develops as I go. Trying to explain it after the fact makes it seem more predetermined than it is. As I'm ranking, I tend to get feel for certain demarcation lines (that are players) that I begin placing players over or under. Then I begin refining those rankings as I go. I also believe a guy with 2-3 years left is in his prime. Most athletes are in their prime at age 28-29. I value guys with 5+ years but only if they come out of the box as total studs in a good situation. Otherwise, I don't take stock in 5+ years. I try to look ahead in 2-3 year increments. That's just how I see dynasty league football.Now I might play and keep players with 5+ with the hope I'm hitting big, but would I push that philosophy on others...nope. I think 2-3 years is safe and encourages others to re-examine (and not write off) players that might have overlooked.

 

[Concept Coop]

I think people felt better about putting Rice in their top 5 dynasty backs because of talent. On the other hand, people are skeptical of Foster because his success is based more on situation. Talent doesnt change, situations does. I believe it is far more likely Rice is still a starting RB in the BFL 3 years from now.

Talent is very subjective, for one. Foster produces more points. My leagues count points.Lastly, average talents don't put up historic numbers. Foster is on pace to smash anything AP has ever done. I was slow to view Foster as elite. Honestly, I still don't "see" elite when I watch Foster play. But that only means that I am missing something and my eyes are dead wrong. Nothing more. It shouldn't matter what a person looks like when they put up 2,000/20. If they can do that, they are elite. Houston scheme is a benefit for Foster, no doubt. But Houston's scheme doesn't produce 2000/20 without Arian Foster.I don't think Foster could do what AP is doing in Minny. Peterson is the best at getting yards that aren't there for other backs, and Foster doesn't have to do much of that. But I am not so sure that AP does any better in Houston, than what Foster is doing right now.

 

[Matt Waldman]

As far as the Foster/Rice thing goes...LOL - as me at any particular hour and I'd probably agree Foster needs to be above Rice and Rice needs to be 3-4 spots lower. However, those are decision that I think a lot of us face in drafts with players on lists. One day he's a little higher, the next he's a little lower, etc.

 

[Go deep]

Thanks for the reminder about BJGE, I simply missed him. To give you guys more to nitpick until there are other rankings to enjoy chewing on, here's a little bit about how I look at rankings. This will hopefully give you a little more perspective.When I'm ranking 240 players (and really more but we display the top 60 at each position and the top 75 overall), I'm not so concerned with whether player A is over player B in a dynasty ranking. You might be, but that's not my approach. I'm more concerned about where I tier a player. Since we don't have a function that does that, I can give you a rough estimate of what I'm thinking as tiers is a rough (very rough) pyramid shape. The Elite tier is roughly the first 2-3 playersThe Starter 1 is roughly the 8-13 after the Elite The Starter 2 is roughly 12-26 after the Starter 1The Starter 3 is roughly the 15-30 after the starter 3The groupings get larger as I get further into backups, practice squad players and free agents. I also tend to place less weight on lifespan for dynasty leagues. If there's a player that's 27-28 and he's about to leave his team and likely for much better environs (DeAngelo Williams) then he might be done as an RB1 in two years, but even if your goal is to build the 70s Steelers, or 80s 49ers you still need a mix of great vets that have 2-3 years left and young players that mature as a core and stay for 8-10 seasons.I don't believe in downgrading a player with 2-3 years of very good production left in him. One year? I'll make very few exceptions, but if the guy has 2-3 years from my perspective then I'm not dinging him. Therefore if player A is ranked one spot over B and it's within 5-10 picks, you can nitpick whether they are in relation to each other, but in the reality of how I do this work those tiers are fluid enough that on a given day or week I'd agree with you. What's more important is whether I have player A and B in one tier and player C in another. For instance, James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect. Hope that helps. Keep nitpicking.

Hey Matt, youre one of my favorites of the guys who put out their rankings for FBG, bu i have a few issues here i wouldlike to discuss.How can you have a predetermined set of tiers that you rank in, wouldnt it change depending on the group of players?You also mention that a team needs veterans to win a championship, but thats not true at all. Why cant i win with a bunch of guys in their prime? Also, why wouldnt you value a guy with 5+ years left more than a guy with 2 or 3? I know you are more concerned with the current season, but if you had valued the 23 year old RB over the 28 year old 4 years ago, wouldnt you be better off this season? Not to mention, unless you have no problem watching a guy lose all dynasty value while on your roster, your last chance to trade a guy for fair value is when he only has a couple seasons left.

My pleasure to answer...I don't have a predetermined set as much as a rough set that develops as I go. Trying to explain it after the fact makes it seem more predetermined than it is. As I'm ranking, I tend to get feel for certain demarcation lines (that are players) that I begin placing players over or under. Then I begin refining those rankings as I go. I also believe a guy with 2-3 years left is in his prime. Most athletes are in their prime at age 28-29. I value guys with 5+ years but only if they come out of the box as total studs in a good situation. Otherwise, I don't take stock in 5+ years. I try to look ahead in 2-3 year increments. That's just how I see dynasty league football.Now I might play and keep players with 5+ with the hope I'm hitting big, but would I push that philosophy on others...nope. I think 2-3 years is safe and encourages others to re-examine (and not write off) players that might have overlooked.

Fair enough, i know there are many ways to run a successful dynasty team. I agree that athletes are still in their pime at 28, but you and i both know RB's dont last much past that. Not only are you likely to lose their value all together in a couple years, but most RB's numbers start to decline the closer they get to 30. Maybe just as important, they lose perceived value. I know alot of people dont really worry about this, but if you are not "recycling" players, how are you going to replace those players when they are gone?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Who in their right mind would take Rice over Foster right now?

I think he's a better talent and his sitaution is a little more stable. I'm not knocking Foster as it's very close - I'm just not going to over-react based on one season. In 2009 Rice was a top 4 RB, now he's not? See what I mean? Same could happen to Foster and while I don't think he's a one hot wonder, I also don't think he'll be the best RB in football next year.I also play in ppr leagues so that creates some bias as well - although I own Foster in my ppr re-draft and he's been the top back all season..Willis MaGahee is likely gone after this year which doesn't mean that Rice automatically gets the red-zone carries, but I know he's capable of short yardage carries. If Kubiak gets cannned after this season and a new coaching staff comes in an implements a new blocking scheme it could mean trouble for Foster. Foster is a classic one cut and go runner that is perfect for a ZBS. That's not to say he can't be successful in a poer bocking scheme as he's big and strong and can be shifty when needed. Rice is the superior runner though imo so I'd take him if I had to make that choice.It's very close, but I don't see it as outlandish for some one to prefer Rice. There's too much "what have you doen for me lately" mentality in fantasy football sometimes and that can be a dangerous thing in dynatsy leagues. Look at all the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round of dynasty start-ups following their rookie seasons.

The same overreaction (right or wrong) that places Foster as top 4 this season, placed Rice as top 4 last season; the major difference being points. Foster is besting Rice's great year last season, and is DOUBLING the production this season. I don't know why great production in 2009 is more valid than better production in 2010. Why is one overreacting based off of one year and the other not?

I don't think you read what I wrote correctly - maybe my fault for not being clear. I never said great production in 2009 was better than production this year - the whole point is that things can change from year to year. I base a lot of my "love" on what I thought of Rice coming into the league, not just on 2009. I think he's the better talent and think he can outproduce Foster next year like he did in 2009.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Thanks for the reminder about BJGE, I simply missed him. To give you guys more to nitpick until there are other rankings to enjoy chewing on, here's a little bit about how I look at rankings. This will hopefully give you a little more perspective.When I'm ranking 240 players (and really more but we display the top 60 at each position and the top 75 overall), I'm not so concerned with whether player A is over player B in a dynasty ranking. You might be, but that's not my approach. I'm more concerned about where I tier a player. Since we don't have a function that does that, I can give you a rough estimate of what I'm thinking as tiers is a rough (very rough) pyramid shape. The Elite tier is roughly the first 2-3 playersThe Starter 1 is roughly the 8-13 after the Elite The Starter 2 is roughly 12-26 after the Starter 1The Starter 3 is roughly the 15-30 after the starter 3The groupings get larger as I get further into backups, practice squad players and free agents. I also tend to place less weight on lifespan for dynasty leagues. If there's a player that's 27-28 and he's about to leave his team and likely for much better environs (DeAngelo Williams) then he might be done as an RB1 in two years, but even if your goal is to build the 70s Steelers, or 80s 49ers you still need a mix of great vets that have 2-3 years left and young players that mature as a core and stay for 8-10 seasons.I don't believe in downgrading a player with 2-3 years of very good production left in him. One year? I'll make very few exceptions, but if the guy has 2-3 years from my perspective then I'm not dinging him. Therefore if player A is ranked one spot over B and it's within 5-10 picks, you can nitpick whether they are in relation to each other, but in the reality of how I do this work those tiers are fluid enough that on a given day or week I'd agree with you. What's more important is whether I have player A and B in one tier and player C in another. For instance, James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect. Hope that helps. Keep nitpicking.

Hey Matt, youre one of my favorites of the guys who put out their rankings for FBG, bu i have a few issues here i wouldlike to discuss.How can you have a predetermined set of tiers that you rank in, wouldnt it change depending on the group of players?You also mention that a team needs veterans to win a championship, but thats not true at all. Why cant i win with a bunch of guys in their prime? Also, why wouldnt you value a guy with 5+ years left more than a guy with 2 or 3? I know you are more concerned with the current season, but if you had valued the 23 year old RB over the 28 year old 4 years ago, wouldnt you be better off this season? Not to mention, unless you have no problem watching a guy lose all dynasty value while on your roster, your last chance to trade a guy for fair value is when he only has a couple seasons left.

My pleasure to answer...I don't have a predetermined set as much as a rough set that develops as I go. Trying to explain it after the fact makes it seem more predetermined than it is. As I'm ranking, I tend to get feel for certain demarcation lines (that are players) that I begin placing players over or under. Then I begin refining those rankings as I go. I also believe a guy with 2-3 years left is in his prime. Most athletes are in their prime at age 28-29. I value guys with 5+ years but only if they come out of the box as total studs in a good situation. Otherwise, I don't take stock in 5+ years. I try to look ahead in 2-3 year increments. That's just how I see dynasty league football.Now I might play and keep players with 5+ with the hope I'm hitting big, but would I push that philosophy on others...nope. I think 2-3 years is safe and encourages others to re-examine (and not write off) players that might have overlooked.

Fair enough, i know there are many ways to run a successful dynasty team. I agree that athletes are still in their pime at 28, but you and i both know RB's dont last much past that. Not only are you likely to lose their value all together in a couple years, but most RB's numbers start to decline the closer they get to 30. Maybe just as important, they lose perceived value. I know alot of people dont really worry about this, but if you are not "recycling" players, how are you going to replace those players when they are gone?

I guess I look at fantasy owners to look at that with my rankings and think for themselves that if I'm ranking a guy that old, that high, then he's probably one of those one-year window players. On the flip side, look at Cedric Benson and Thomas Jones as small exceptions of RBs that are touted early, don't produce, but years later become half-decent returns on investment and at that they only have a few good up and down years that don't meet the initial expectation. I once wrote a piece on dynasty playing that talked about how I wanted to build teams the way Hugh Hefner built his publishing empire - long-term, long-lasting and filled with beautiful pic(k)s - but you also have to kind of know your philosophy. Some want that ultimate goal of building a team stacked with players that you only have to reload a few at a time at most. Some rebuild every couple of years and jettison a big portion of the roster. The tough part about dynasty rankings is understanding the perspective of the person ranking the players. There's a lot unsaid that isn't always obvious on the page - in addition to the fact that I'll be wrong on guys or adjust stuff as the season progresses into the offseason and free agency. It's basically a snapshot of what I'm thinking right now.

 

[Go deep]

I think people felt better about putting Rice in their top 5 dynasty backs because of talent. On the other hand, people are skeptical of Foster because his success is based more on situation. Talent doesnt change, situations does. I believe it is far more likely Rice is still a starting RB in the BFL 3 years from now.

Talent is very subjective, for one. Foster produces more points. My leagues count points.Lastly, average talents don't put up historic numbers. Foster is on pace to smash anything AP has ever done. I was slow to view Foster as elite. Honestly, I still don't "see" elite when I watch Foster play. But that only means that I am missing something and my eyes are dead wrong. Nothing more. It shouldn't matter what a person looks like when they put up 2,000/20. If they can do that, they are elite. Houston scheme is a benefit for Foster, no doubt. But Houston's scheme doesn't produce 2000/20 without Arian Foster.

I don't think Foster could do what AP is doing in Minny. Peterson is the best at getting yards that aren't there for other backs, and Foster doesn't have to do much of that. But I am not so sure that AP does any better in Houston, than what Foster is doing right now.

Those are elite numbers, but i believe alot of RB's would have similar numbers given 400 touches in the Houston offense. Steve Slaton had almost 1700 total yards and 10 TD's, and he was never used exclusively at the goalline. I have watched him alot, and if i saw something that told me otherwise, i would have no problem admitting i was wrong about Foster. However, i dont see one thing he does that most RB's in the league couldnt do. Im not going to call someone elite because their numebrs are elite. With that said, as long as he continues to get 400 touches in a Kubiak lead Houston offense with a dominant Oline and Schaub and Andre Johnson, he will continue to be an elite FF starter.

The last thing i want to do is get into another Foster conversation though. I was just pointing out why people, including myself, might have Rice ranked higher than Foster.

 

[bonesman]

James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect.

Whoa... you *really* don't discount for age.

 

[Matt Waldman]

James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect.

Whoa... you *really* don't discount for age.

Or injury! I was thinking about Edgar Bennett, his RB coach when I meant to be writing about Earl

 

[Matt Waldman]

Another guy I'd like to hear what you guys think about is Dwayne Bowe.

It does look like I hate the Chiefs based on my rankings, but not intentional. If it were the Cowboys, I'd probably admit some guilt

Bowe was so fantastic for a stretch until Bailey shut him down, but is there another quality WR that is opposite him right now? Maybe McCluster becomes that guy, but I see him more as an RB/WR combo than the next Steve Smith (CAR). I tend to believe the elite WRs are guys that have another strong WR or TE opposite him in the lineup and neither Moeaki or McCluster are there yet.

Thoughts about what you've seen from Bowe. Not the stats, but actual play that might change my mind?

 

[Go deep]

Another guy I'd like to hear what you guys think about is Dwayne Bowe. It does look like I hate the Chiefs based on my rankings, but not intentional. If it were the Cowboys, I'd probably admit some guilt Bowe was so fantastic for a stretch until Bailey shut him down, but is there another quality WR that is opposite him right now? Maybe McCluster becomes that guy, but I see him more as an RB/WR combo than the next Steve Smith (CAR). I tend to believe the elite WRs are guys that have another strong WR or TE opposite him in the lineup and neither Moeaki or McCluster are there yet. Thoughts about what you've seen from Bowe. Not the stats, but actual play that might change my mind?

A good/great running game can be just as effective, if not more than a good #2 WR.

 

[NorrisB]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

 

[Concept Coop]

Another guy I'd like to hear what you guys think about is Dwayne Bowe. It does look like I hate the Chiefs based on my rankings, but not intentional. If it were the Cowboys, I'd probably admit some guilt Bowe was so fantastic for a stretch until Bailey shut him down, but is there another quality WR that is opposite him right now? Maybe McCluster becomes that guy, but I see him more as an RB/WR combo than the next Steve Smith (CAR). I tend to believe the elite WRs are guys that have another strong WR or TE opposite him in the lineup and neither Moeaki or McCluster are there yet. Thoughts about what you've seen from Bowe. Not the stats, but actual play that might change my mind?

I think you have to look at what he has done this season, understanding that he HASN'T has a 2nd WR, yet, and still is produced(ing) top 5 numbers. I don't know why not having a number 2 next season or the season after will affect him anymore than it has this season.

 

[Concept Coop]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

If you are competing for a championship, there are not (even close) to 29 RBs that will help you win one in the next two years, more so than DeAngelo.That is why rankings vary so much in dynasty leagues: teams are in different positions, and people's value on immediate returns are as individual as the owners playing. I would gladly take Williams over a lesser 22 year RB if he helped me win it all, even once. In other words, I will gladly take 2-3 years of top 10 production over 5-6 years of top 20. Others wouldn't and neither is "right".

 

[The Comedian]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

 

[Go deep]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

Where would you rank him? I think 30 is too low, but 16-20 seems right to me.

 

[NorrisB]

if you look at his rankings at 30 Id definitely take Spiller over him and probably Felix Jones too

 

[Concept Coop]

if you look at his rankings at 30 Id definitely take Spiller over him and probably Felix Jones too

Who do you think will most help you win it all in the next three years: Williams, Jones, Spiller?

 

[Concept Coop]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

That statement would have been correct two years ago. No longer true.

Care to expand on that? When do players become less talented before age sets in?

 

[NorrisB]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

That statement would have been correct two years ago. No longer true.

Care to expand on that? When do players become less talented before age sets in?

Since Mike Goodson is outperforming him

 

[Go deep]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

That statement would have been correct two years ago. No longer true.

Care to expand on that? When do players become less talented before age sets in?

Well, that's the problem. Age HAS started to set in. Most athletes start losing speed by age 26. It's a fact. D-Will is clearly not the same player he was two years ago and he never will be.

 

[tdmills]

DeAngelo is a different case because he has been in a timeshare his whole career.

People like to comment about his age....yet he has under 1000 touches in his career vs LT who has over 3500 touches(still has over 4 YPC this year).

Dwill averaged over 5 YPC 3 years in a row before Carolina fell apart this year(are you discounting Steve Smith and Jstew too?) and he was injured.

 

[NorrisB]

DeAngelo is a different case because he has been in a timeshare his whole career.People like to comment about his age....yet he has under 1000 touches in his career vs LT who has over 3500 touches(still has over 4 YPC this year).Dwill averaged over 5 YPC 3 years in a row before Carolina fell apart this year(are you discounting Steve Smith and Jstew too?) and he was injured.

Yes I am Steve Smith is like WR60 for me Stewart I like a lot

 

[Concept Coop]

Well, that's the problem. Age HAS started to set in. Most athletes start losing speed by age 26. It's a fact. D-Will is clearly not the same player he was two years ago and he never will be.

Actually, it is not a fact. It is the opposite: you made it up.

 

[NorrisB]

Gonna be 28+ when the next year starts, he'll be almost 30 after your first year with him I think I'll grab someone else RB7 is a joke

 

[Go deep]

Gonna be 28+ when the next year starts, he'll be almost 30 after your first year with him I think I'll grab someone else RB7 is a joke

Im with you on the RB7 thing, all i am saying is that he is still the same player he was last year. I dont think he was a top 5 talent at any point, but i do think he is a top 10 talent and will continue to be for the next couple years.

 

[Concept Coop]

Gonna be 28+ when the next year starts, he'll be almost 30 after your first year with him I think I'll grab someone else RB7 is a joke

If you read what Waldman wrote, his rankings include 2-3 years of production. In that span, Williams could be top 10. I am not saying you should value him as top 10 - I don't - but RB30 is far more extreme than RB7.

 

[plyka]

He's not a Chiefs fan

Deangelo Williams, Gore and Turner all higher than Charles.

when I looked at the rankings I said the same exact thing...he should be about #6...and with enough carries he would be top 3

well, that's one side of the thoery. The other side is that more carries works against him and results in his best assets that make him so good (the speed, the quick burst) gets slower as he he gets beat up. That's always been the concern with him by coaches; afraid to use him like a workhorse beacuse he's not the biggest guy in the world. I agree with that line of thought because over the long-term, you don't see guys his size last a really long time. Similar to Chris Johnson, can CERTAINLY do it short term, but even CJ isn't the same this year. I wouldn't call it his speed or really be able to put a finger on what it is exactly, but he doesn't look the same this year Could it be overuse and wear and tear? Perhaps.With that being said, I still like him better than he is ranked and, because of age, better than Gore and Turner. DWIL is the tricky one here. I keep having this thought that this guy may be in Indy or Washington or somewhere next year where he may be dominant for a few seasons.

Deangelo is the same age as Gore though. I agree that he can have a big year next year depending where he goes, but he doesnt have much time left before he turns 30.

But Deangelo doesn't have the same wear and tear on his body. One of the positives of an RBBC, in fact i think only 2 years of serious work on his body, both in the 200+ carries average since he broke out rather late.

 

[plyka]

Rice > Foster?

I think so.

Not me. In my scoring system Foster has almost double Rice's points this season. Thats with both players playing in every game this season, and both in very good situations that frankly should not change much in the near term. Maybe McGahee goes away, but there is still McLain, and whoever replaces McGahee. Maybe Tate comes in, but there is already Derrick Ward playing well in spot duty. Tate probably replaces Ward in that role if he can get past him. I know that we dont want to just look at the fact that Foster has doubled Rice's production in this ONE season for dynasty purposes, but its not like Rice is in a bad situation in Baltimore, and we are talking about double - not just a few points. 284-146 in my league. Thats a huge difference.

Arian Foster is a top RB in this league without doubt. I think that he can still be had cheap. People say it is wise to buy low and sell high, but i think it is wise to buy high and sell higher. Arian foster has broken through but most on the board and in fantasy rate more big name players ahead of him. I wish trading was still open, in the leagues I don't have him in I would be trying to trade for him. He isn't being valued correctly in my eyes.

 

[Go deep]

Rice > Foster?

I think so.

Not me. In my scoring system Foster has almost double Rice's points this season. Thats with both players playing in every game this season, and both in very good situations that frankly should not change much in the near term. Maybe McGahee goes away, but there is still McLain, and whoever replaces McGahee. Maybe Tate comes in, but there is already Derrick Ward playing well in spot duty. Tate probably replaces Ward in that role if he can get past him. I know that we dont want to just look at the fact that Foster has doubled Rice's production in this ONE season for dynasty purposes, but its not like Rice is in a bad situation in Baltimore, and we are talking about double - not just a few points. 284-146 in my league. Thats a huge difference.

Arian Foster is a top RB in this league without doubt. I think that he can still be had cheap. People say it is wise to buy low and sell high, but i think it is wise to buy high and sell higher. Arian foster has broken through but most on the board and in fantasy rate more big name players ahead of him. I wish trading was still open, in the leagues I don't have him in I would be trying to trade for him. He isn't being valued correctly in my eyes.

Big name players have those names for a reason. Its not like people like Chris Johnson because he has a cool name, its because he has put up big numbers consistently.By the way, still think it was a big mistake to have CJ as my #1 RB this week?

 

[plyka]

I

Who in their right mind would take Rice over Foster right now?

I think he's a better talent and his sitaution is a little more stable. I'm not knocking Foster as it's very close - I'm just not going to over-react based on one season. In 2009 Rice was a top 4 RB, now he's not? See what I mean? Same could happen to Foster and while I don't think he's a one hot wonder, I also don't think he'll be the best RB in football next year.I also play in ppr leagues so that creates some bias as well - although I own Foster in my ppr re-draft and he's been the top back all season..Willis MaGahee is likely gone after this year which doesn't mean that Rice automatically gets the red-zone carries, but I know he's capable of short yardage carries. If Kubiak gets cannned after this season and a new coaching staff comes in an implements a new blocking scheme it could mean trouble for Foster. Foster is a classic one cut and go runner that is perfect for a ZBS. That's not to say he can't be successful in a poer bocking scheme as he's big and strong and can be shifty when needed. Rice is the superior runner though imo so I'd take him if I had to make that choice.It's very close, but I don't see it as outlandish for some one to prefer Rice. There's too much "what have you doen for me lately" mentality in fantasy football sometimes and that can be a dangerous thing in dynatsy leagues. Look at all the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round of dynasty start-ups following their rookie seasons.

The same overreaction (right or wrong) that places Foster as top 4 this season, placed Rice as top 4 last season; the major difference being points. Foster is besting Rice's great year last season, and is DOUBLING the production this season. I don't know why great production in 2009 is more valid than better production in 2010. Why is one overreacting based off of one year and the other not?As for the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round, I don't think the Forte owners are anymore upset than the Rice owners that overpaid with a top 3 or 4 (overall) pick on a RB2 (by points) this season - they are producing equally, IIRC, and are close to the same age.And I wouldn't put much stock in the fact that McGahee will be leaving. I think the Ravens find another back to replace him. Rice needs to worry about McGahee the role, not the running back. Rice is not a great redzone back, and for a team that plays the way they do, redzone production from a RB is huge.

I think people felt better about putting Rice in their top 5 dynasty backs because of talent. On the other hand, people are skeptical of Foster because his success is based more on situation. Talent doesnt change, situations does. I believe it is far more likely Rice is still a starting RB in the BFL 3 years from now.

Guys hAve been repeating this foster doesn't have talent line for the entire year especially pre draft when a 4th round pick wasseen as excessive for foster. It's all BS, foster is one of the most talented RB's in the league, not to mention his great situation.rice on the other hand ie producing like the 4th round pick despite being on a dominant team. I'm not sure how rice's situation could get better than it is. If they switched teams is still rather have foster.

 

[plyka]

Another guy I'd like to hear what you guys think about is Dwayne Bowe. It does look like I hate the Chiefs based on my rankings, but not intentional. If it were the Cowboys, I'd probably admit some guilt Bowe was so fantastic for a stretch until Bailey shut him down, but is there another quality WR that is opposite him right now? Maybe McCluster becomes that guy, but I see him more as an RB/WR combo than the next Steve Smith (CAR). I tend to believe the elite WRs are guys that have another strong WR or TE opposite him in the lineup and neither Moeaki or McCluster are there yet. Thoughts about what you've seen from Bowe. Not the stats, but actual play that might change my mind?

I drafted bowe in all my teams, but traded him mid year on my deep keeper league. I don't see the elite talent there despite his spectacular run. There is a difference to me between w arian foster and bowe. I see the elite talent with foster. Bowe is big and strong, but he is not a natural wr. He catches with his body and needs to be open to make plays. I would take elite talent at the wr spot like fitz, dez bryant and crabtree over bowe, despite their lack of production this year. Especially in dynasty.

 

[Go deep]

I

Who in their right mind would take Rice over Foster right now?

I think he's a better talent and his sitaution is a little more stable. I'm not knocking Foster as it's very close - I'm just not going to over-react based on one season. In 2009 Rice was a top 4 RB, now he's not? See what I mean? Same could happen to Foster and while I don't think he's a one hot wonder, I also don't think he'll be the best RB in football next year.I also play in ppr leagues so that creates some bias as well - although I own Foster in my ppr re-draft and he's been the top back all season..Willis MaGahee is likely gone after this year which doesn't mean that Rice automatically gets the red-zone carries, but I know he's capable of short yardage carries. If Kubiak gets cannned after this season and a new coaching staff comes in an implements a new blocking scheme it could mean trouble for Foster. Foster is a classic one cut and go runner that is perfect for a ZBS. That's not to say he can't be successful in a poer bocking scheme as he's big and strong and can be shifty when needed. Rice is the superior runner though imo so I'd take him if I had to make that choice.It's very close, but I don't see it as outlandish for some one to prefer Rice. There's too much "what have you doen for me lately" mentality in fantasy football sometimes and that can be a dangerous thing in dynatsy leagues. Look at all the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round of dynasty start-ups following their rookie seasons.

The same overreaction (right or wrong) that places Foster as top 4 this season, placed Rice as top 4 last season; the major difference being points. Foster is besting Rice's great year last season, and is DOUBLING the production this season. I don't know why great production in 2009 is more valid than better production in 2010. Why is one overreacting based off of one year and the other not?As for the people that took Forte and Slaton in the first round, I don't think the Forte owners are anymore upset than the Rice owners that overpaid with a top 3 or 4 (overall) pick on a RB2 (by points) this season - they are producing equally, IIRC, and are close to the same age.And I wouldn't put much stock in the fact that McGahee will be leaving. I think the Ravens find another back to replace him. Rice needs to worry about McGahee the role, not the running back. Rice is not a great redzone back, and for a team that plays the way they do, redzone production from a RB is huge.

I think people felt better about putting Rice in their top 5 dynasty backs because of talent. On the other hand, people are skeptical of Foster because his success is based more on situation. Talent doesnt change, situations does. I believe it is far more likely Rice is still a starting RB in the BFL 3 years from now.

Guys hAve been repeating this foster doesn't have talent line for the entire year especially pre draft when a 4th round pick wasseen as excessive for foster. It's all BS, foster is one of the most talented RB's in the league, not to mention his great situation.rice on the other hand ie producing like the 4th round pick despite being on a dominant team. I'm not sure how rice's situation could get better than it is. If they switched teams is still rather have foster.

I didnt say Foster doesnt have talent, i just said he wasnt as talented as Rice. Either way, i dont want to discuss Foster. You think he is an elite talent, i dont, the end.

 

[plyka]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

That statement would have been correct two years ago. No longer true.

Care to expand on that? When do players become less talented before age sets in?

Since Mike Goodson is outperforming him

Myopia is a disease rampant in the fantasy football world. You should get it checked out by a registered physician fast!!

 

[Concept Coop]

I drafted bowe in all my teams, but traded him mid year on my deep keeper league. I don't see the elite talent there despite his spectacular run. There is a difference to me between w arian foster and bowe. I see the elite talent with foster. Bowe is big and strong, but he is not a natural wr. He catches with his body and needs to be open to make plays. I would take elite talent at the wr spot like fitz, dez bryant and crabtree over bowe, despite their lack of production this year. Especially in dynasty.

Do you actually believe what you are saying: Not a natural WR? Catches with his body? Needs to be open to make plays? He is leading the NFL in TDs, that is not an accident, especially considering he gets the ball forced to him. He gets shut down for ONE game and people forget this.

 

[plyka]

Rice > Foster?

I think so.

Not me. In my scoring system Foster has almost double Rice's points this season. Thats with both players playing in every game this season, and both in very good situations that frankly should not change much in the near term. Maybe McGahee goes away, but there is still McLain, and whoever replaces McGahee. Maybe Tate comes in, but there is already Derrick Ward playing well in spot duty. Tate probably replaces Ward in that role if he can get past him. I know that we dont want to just look at the fact that Foster has doubled Rice's production in this ONE season for dynasty purposes, but its not like Rice is in a bad situation in Baltimore, and we are talking about double - not just a few points. 284-146 in my league. Thats a huge difference.

Arian Foster is a top RB in this league without doubt. I think that he can still be had cheap. People say it is wise to buy low and sell high, but i think it is wise to buy high and sell higher. Arian foster has broken through but most on the board and in fantasy rate more big name players ahead of him. I wish trading was still open, in the leagues I don't have him in I would be trying to trade for him. He isn't being valued correctly in my eyes.

Big name players have those names for a reason. Its not like people like Chris Johnson because he has a cool name, its because he has put up big numbers consistently.By the way, still think it was a big mistake to have CJ as my #1 RB this week?

Yeah, I do think it was a mistake. He got just 1 TD. The 8 catches helped massively in PPR leagues, but in standard leagues that doesn't really factor. I said i would keep him out of the top 5, and I completely stick by that. I'll put money down that 5 RBs outscore him. Not to mention he has barely caught any passes all year, catching 8 in a game could not be predicted. I would wait until some other RBs play before claiming victory on ranking CJ #1 with 1 TD. Your rank #23 and the quote "I wouldn't want to start him" for Blount will probably be a laugh. Your rank #14 for Mcfadden will probably be a bigger laugh. All in all, I would wait until we see more than 1 legitimate RB run before being able to judge your rankings.

 

[fatness]

Glad to see someone on the staff updating their rankings.

 

[Toads]

What's more important is whether I have player A and B in one tier and player C in another. For instance, James Starks and Edgar Bennett have vaulted to much higher tiers many might expect.

Nitpicking: Earl Bennett, right?

 

[munchkin]

It's not unusual for a FF team to feast on meaningless late game stats. That being said i would have a hard time rating CJ as a #1 back on any given week given that teams know that he can beat you but Bo Scaife and Kerry Collins can't. Randy Moss and to a greater degree Kenny Britt could beat you but again there isn't a QB on the team that can consistently get them the ball.

Foster is greatly aided by having Schaub and Johnson. I don't think you will find many teams stacking the box with Johnson in the game. You may die a slow death by not defending Foster but it would be a quick one having the safeties in the box defending the run. Johnson is a true difference maker with Schaub; Britt and to a lesser degree Moss not so much with Collins. Maybe that will change when Britt and Collins become more comfortable with each other but it's a bitter pill to swallow as we enter the playoffs.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Adding to the Johnson at No.1 conversation...

While I understand the points everyone is making about defenses shutting down Johnson without a good passing game, I think it's a similar but opposite reaction to people getting excited about a 5-6 game streak from Dwayne Bowe.

I think if it weren't for Chris Johnson's 7 for 5 outing against Houston and the debacle that was the Jacksonville game, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The Titans weren't that good through the air last year. In fact, Kenny Britt - until he got hurt - was better this year than last as a player. They've added Moss, who, if he stays next year (doubtful), should be better simply because he'll have an offseason to get familiar with the offense and the offensive familiar with him.

It's going to be the Vince Young show next year and probably without Jeff Fisher, so as long as they get an offensive-oriented mind that doesn't over-complicate things for Young, teams will continue worrying about crashing down the line off the edge and give Johnson more options at the line of scrimmage.

I could see an argument putting Johnson anywhere in spots 1-4, but I don't think any lower just because he - like every back not named Fred Jackson - had a bad game versus Pittsburgh - and one uncharacteristically meaningless outing two weeks ago.

Even the top backs each year have 4-5 sub par (lower than the average RB2 performance) performance every year.

 

[Go deep]

Yeah, I do think it was a mistake. He got just 1 TD. The 8 catches helped massively in PPR leagues, but in standard leagues that doesn't really factor. I said i would keep him out of the top 5, and I completely stick by that. I'll put money down that 5 RBs outscore him. Not to mention he has barely caught any passes all year, catching 8 in a game could not be predicted. I would wait until some other RBs play before claiming victory on ranking CJ #1 with 1 TD. Your rank #23 and the quote "I wouldn't want to start him" for Blount will probably be a laugh. Your rank #14 for Mcfadden will probably be a bigger laugh. All in all, I would wait until we see more than 1 legitimate RB run before being able to judge your rankings.

Ill take that bet, which 5 RB's do you think will outscore him? I'll give you 10/1 odds that 3 of your 5 dont finish with more FF points.

 

[tdmills]

Yeah, I do think it was a mistake. He got just 1 TD. The 8 catches helped massively in PPR leagues, but in standard leagues that doesn't really factor. I said i would keep him out of the top 5, and I completely stick by that. I'll put money down that 5 RBs outscore him. Not to mention he has barely caught any passes all year, catching 8 in a game could not be predicted. I would wait until some other RBs play before claiming victory on ranking CJ #1 with 1 TD. Your rank #23 and the quote "I wouldn't want to start him" for Blount will probably be a laugh. Your rank #14 for Mcfadden will probably be a bigger laugh. All in all, I would wait until we see more than 1 legitimate RB run before being able to judge your rankings.

Ill take that bet, which 5 RB's do you think will outscore him? I'll give you 10/1 odds that 3 of your 5 dont finish with more FF points.

This could get interesting

 

[munchkin]

Adding to the Johnson at No.1 conversation...While I understand the points everyone is making about defenses shutting down Johnson without a good passing game, I think it's a similar but opposite reaction to people getting excited about a 5-6 game streak from Dwayne Bowe. I think if it weren't for Chris Johnson's 7 for 5 outing against Houston and the debacle that was the Jacksonville game, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The Titans weren't that good through the air last year. In fact, Kenny Britt - until he got hurt - was better this year than last as a player. They've added Moss, who, if he stays next year (doubtful), should be better simply because he'll have an offseason to get familiar with the offense and the offensive familiar with him. It's going to be the Vince Young show next year and probably without Jeff Fisher, so as long as they get an offensive-oriented mind that doesn't over-complicate things for Young, teams will continue worrying about crashing down the line off the edge and give Johnson more options at the line of scrimmage. I could see an argument putting Johnson anywhere in spots 1-4, but I don't think any lower just because he - like every back not named Fred Jackson - had a bad game versus Pittsburgh - and one uncharacteristically meaningless outing two weeks ago. Even the top backs each year have 4-5 sub par (lower than the average RB2 performance) performance every year.

He also had poor games against Pitt, Denver, SDC and Philly; that's 6 out of 13 games in which he has underperformed based on expectation and talent. Matt, you would know better than I why he has had only 4 games with 4 or more receptions in a sputtering offense and oddly enough he doesn't seem to do much with those receptions to begin with. This doesn't change his ability (an obviously elite talent) but it certainly gives one pause as to what to expect in terms of production on any given Sunday. I think it is reasonable for someone to look at a lesser talent's match-up in assessing whom to play.

 

[thehornet]

Another guy I'd like to hear what you guys think about is Dwayne Bowe. It does look like I hate the Chiefs based on my rankings, but not intentional. If it were the Cowboys, I'd probably admit some guilt Bowe was so fantastic for a stretch until Bailey shut him down, but is there another quality WR that is opposite him right now? Maybe McCluster becomes that guy, but I see him more as an RB/WR combo than the next Steve Smith (CAR). I tend to believe the elite WRs are guys that have another strong WR or TE opposite him in the lineup and neither Moeaki or McCluster are there yet. Thoughts about what you've seen from Bowe. Not the stats, but actual play that might change my mind?

I drafted bowe in all my teams, but traded him mid year on my deep keeper league. I don't see the elite talent there despite his spectacular run. There is a difference to me between w arian foster and bowe. I see the elite talent with foster. Bowe is big and strong, but he is not a natural wr. He catches with his body and needs to be open to make plays. I would take elite talent at the wr spot like fitz, dez bryant and crabtree over bowe, despite their lack of production this year. Especially in dynasty.

WAT Dude? You are not a scout and you do not know what you are talking about here. Not a natural WR and catches with his body? Cut it out!!! This guy is a frigging STUD first round pick who has excelled in every year except one since his rookie season. Stop givin terrible player evaluations. If anyone is reaping the benefits of a fantastic situation, its foster not bowe.

 

[fsufan]

Ryan Fitzpartick not even ranked. Surprising, I think he holds down that job. The Bills need to build around him and get some defense.

if the bills have the chance to get luck they better do it

 

[FUBAR]

Adding to the Johnson at No.1 conversation...

While I understand the points everyone is making about defenses shutting down Johnson without a good passing game, I think it's a similar but opposite reaction to people getting excited about a 5-6 game streak from Dwayne Bowe.

I think if it weren't for Chris Johnson's 7 for 5 outing against Houston and the debacle that was the Jacksonville game, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The Titans weren't that good through the air last year. In fact, Kenny Britt - until he got hurt - was better this year than last as a player. They've added Moss, who, if he stays next year (doubtful), should be better simply because he'll have an offseason to get familiar with the offense and the offensive familiar with him.

It's going to be the Vince Young show next year and probably without Jeff Fisher, so as long as they get an offensive-oriented mind that doesn't over-complicate things for Young, teams will continue worrying about crashing down the line off the edge and give Johnson more options at the line of scrimmage.

I could see an argument putting Johnson anywhere in spots 1-4, but I don't think any lower just because he - like every back not named Fred Jackson - had a bad game versus Pittsburgh - and one uncharacteristically meaningless outing two weeks ago.

Even the top backs each year have 4-5 sub par (lower than the average RB2 performance) performance every year.

He also had poor games against Pitt, Denver, SDC and Philly; that's 6 out of 13 games in which he has underperformed based on expectation and talent. Matt, you would know better than I why he has had only 4 games with 4 or more receptions in a sputtering offense and oddly enough he doesn't seem to do much with those receptions to begin with. This doesn't change his ability (an obviously elite talent) but it certainly gives one pause as to what to expect in terms of production on any given Sunday.

I think it is reasonable for someone to look at a lesser talent's match-up in assessing whom to play.

I'm not arguing with your point, but 83 total yards and a TD isn't a poor game.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

DeAngelo Williams is like RB20-30 for me and I think Id lean to 30

This is insane. Williams is one of the more talented backs in the league.

Where would you rank him? I think 30 is too low, but 16-20 seems right to me.

It will be interesting to see where he ends up. If he goes to a good situation he could still have 2-3 highly productive years until he falls off.