What would you do with the 1st pick in a newly formed Dynasty League? (1 Viewer)

[Burning Sensation]

I'd just point out that Jackson has had injury bugs in the past, so it's surely not clear cut for years to come. If history shows anything, LT2 has been durable. I'd bet on LT2, but I can understand an arguement for Jackson's case.

Your just saying that because you own LT.

That is actually a good point though because as any LT2 owner knows how he's single handedly won games for them. So, maybe I'm biased...but there would be no way that I'd trade him for SJax straight up, but I would trade SJax stright up for him. All in all though, I think when you add his durability ontop of his production, he comes out ahead.

Neither would i, because of his "perceived" value, but then again, i wouldnt trade Jackson for LT, because i truly believe he will be the better back over the next 5 years.Although, i may just be a disgruntled ex. LT owner who traded him away for Wille Parker and Caddy a couple years back, possibly costing me a championship.

 

[EBF]

The thing people are neglecting to mention is that LT has a much better build and running style than Jackson. They're not equivalent, so the argument that Jackson will last longer simply because he's younger seems flimsy to me.

 

[Tick]

I'd definitely take LT.

Total FF points left to score in their careers is too simplified of a method to use. I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years, regardless of where the total points work out. With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so. With your favorite younger third-tier RB, you've probably got a starter for the next six seasons, but you need to work a lot harder on the rest of your roster to be a team to be feared.

Also, while it's easy to look back and say that Faulk shouldn't have been taken #1 at age 29, it's much harder at the time to figure out which young guy should have been taken ahead of him... Anthony Thomas or LT? William Green or Thomas Jones? Kevan Barlow or Brian Westbrook? McGahee or Larry Johnson?

Jackson is a reasonable argument against LT, but the gap right now is so huge and the future is unpredictable enough that I think you have to go with LT. Imagine taking Jackson, watching the LT winner win three titles, then having Jackson go Ricky on you or destroy his leg in a flag football game or shoot his ex-girlfriend.

Sure, you could imagine the opposite scenario just as easily, but I can't see looking past three years for RBs, and if you knew your league would only last three years, you'd take LT in a heartbeat.

 

[Burning Sensation]

The thing people are neglecting to mention is that LT has a much better build and running style than Jackson. They're not equivalent, so the argument that Jackson will last longer simply because he's younger seems flimsy to me.

While youth may not be the only factor in a RB's longevity, it certainly is the most important.

 

[Bizkiteer]

I'd just point out that Jackson has had injury bugs in the past, so it's surely not clear cut for years to come. If history shows anything, LT2 has been durable. I'd bet on LT2, but I can understand an arguement for Jackson's case.

Your just saying that because you own LT.

That is actually a good point though because as any LT2 owner knows how he's single handedly won games for them. So, maybe I'm biased...but there would be no way that I'd trade him for SJax straight up, but I would trade SJax stright up for him. All in all though, I think when you add his durability ontop of his production, he comes out ahead.

Neither would i, because of his "perceived" value, but then again, i wouldnt trade Jackson for LT, because i truly believe he will be the better back over the next 5 years.Although, i may just be a disgruntled ex. LT owner who traded him away for Wille Parker and Caddy a couple years back, possibly costing me a championship.

LOL! Just goes to show what can happen when an person falls in love with a player...uh huh...caddy... Would have been really scary seeing LT & LJ each week...

 

[FantasyTrader]

I'd definitely take LT.Total FF points left to score in their careers is too simplified of a method to use. I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years, regardless of where the total points work out. With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so. With your favorite younger third-tier RB, you've probably got a starter for the next six seasons, but you need to work a lot harder on the rest of your roster to be a team to be feared.Also, while it's easy to look back and say that Faulk shouldn't have been taken #1 at age 29, it's much harder at the time to figure out which young guy should have been taken ahead of him... Anthony Thomas or LT? William Green or Thomas Jones? Kevan Barlow or Brian Westbrook? McGahee or Larry Johnson?Jackson is a reasonable argument against LT, but the gap right now is so huge and the future is unpredictable enough that I think you have to go with LT. Imagine taking Jackson, watching the LT winner win three titles, then having Jackson go Ricky on you or destroy his leg in a flag football game or shoot his ex-girlfriend.Sure, you could imagine the opposite scenario just as easily, but I can't see looking past three years for RBs, and if you knew your league would only last three years, you'd take LT in a heartbeat.

I agree with everything you're saying other than the value you are placing on Steven Jackson. I think you are WAY off... "I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years" - Is this the value you are currently placing on S-Jax? You HONESTLY believe he projects as the TENTH best RB during the average season over the next 6 years?"With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so..." - but with Jackson you're not? L.T.'s estmated value SO MUCH more that we're thinking the pts. seperating Tomlinson/Jackson over the next 3 years is going to be what wins you Championships vs. not contending?"but the gap right now is so huge"... I guess that answers my questions above. I think you're wrong. The gap is NOT huge. It's as big as it will EVER be because L.T. is coming off of an All-Everything season. That being said, I totally agree with the people advocating drafting LT and trading him. It's his PERCEIVED value that is too juicy to pass up - not his REAL Dynasty Value.

 

[redman]

Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?

Assuming of course you cant trade LT, because he would clearly get more in a trade, the answer to this question should be the 1.1 pick.

I would bet that very few people here think LT is the correct answer.

This is all I have been trying to say. Its more complex than "L.T. is the best right now, end of discussion."

The guy whose career I most model LT's on is Walter Payton's. Right now, on Walter Payton's timeline, LT has just finished the 1980 season:
+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1975 chi | 13 | 196 679 3.5 7 | 33 213 6.5 0 || 1976 chi | 14 | 311 1390 4.5 13 | 15 149 9.9 0 || 1977 chi | 14 | 339 1852 5.5 14 | 27 269 10.0 2 || 1978 chi | 16 | 333 1395 4.2 11 | 50 480 9.6 0 || 1979 chi | 16 | 369 1610 4.4 14 | 31 313 10.1 2 || 1980 chi | 16 | 317 1460 4.6 6 | 46 367 8.0 1 || 1981 chi | 16 | 339 1222 3.6 6 | 41 379 9.2 2 || 1982 chi | 9 | 148 596 4.0 1 | 32 311 9.7 0 || 1983 chi | 16 | 314 1421 4.5 6 | 53 607 11.5 2 || 1984 chi | 16 | 381 1684 4.4 11 | 45 368 8.2 0 || 1985 chi | 16 | 324 1551 4.8 9 | 49 483 9.9 2 || 1986 chi | 16 | 321 1333 4.2 8 | 37 382 10.3 3 || 1987 chi | 12 | 146 533 3.7 4 | 33 217 6.6 1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 190 | 3838 16726 4.4 110 | 492 4538 9.2 15 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+Do you think it's so guaranteed that Jackson will outperform LT over the next 5-7 years using Payton as the model?P.S. - don't forget that both 1982 and 1987 were strike-shortened seasons.

I dont think i would ever use that word in FF. I also try to avoid comparing one player to another. The point i am trying to make is, if you had to bet right now, who would you lay your money on to have more fantasy points between 2007 and 2013, LT or Jackson?Obviously there is more to it than that, but basically, that is the first thing i look at when gauging fantasy value.

Agreed that "guaranteed" is too strong of a word. The original question was, "Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?"My point is that it's far from clear that Jackson will be that guy given the career path that I believe LT is on. Could I be wrong? Absolutely. But then I too believe that RB's can really only be valued out about three years for practical reasons, and I also am willing to bet that SJ will miss more games over the next 3, 5 or 7 years than LT will.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I'm an Sjax owner here, and I think that one of the major major fallacies in this whole thread is the idea that age is the only determining factor of an FF running back when experience shows us that that is far, far, far from true.

We have seen countless young RBs coming off great seasons with bright futures ahead of them just fall off the map. Some from their team falling apart, some losing their starting gig unexpectedly, some getting injured, some just flat out not performing any more, and some from a combination of the lot.

Remember a few years ago when KJ was the young RB coming off a great season with a bright future ahead of him going 1.02 in dynasty drafts? How about the year before that when Mcgahee was the young RB coming off a great season with a bright future ahead of him going 1.02 in dynasty drafts? LT was the only guy ahead of him at the time, but let's say LT was his current age (28.2) back then. Given the logic of the original post you would have taken both KJ and Mcgahee over the current LT and look what you would have gotten.

Again I'm an SJax owner who has been high on him his whole career and am I big fan. I once took him well above his ADP myself (1.09 in a startup draft going into his 2nd year). But even still, who knows where he'll be in the 3 years. Who knows where he'll be in 2. Heck, who knows where he'll be next year. Who knows what happens if his team falls apart. Who knows what happens if he gets another new coach. If I know Sjax was going to put up numbers like this year's numbers for the next 7 years then ok, I'd buy Sjax at #1. But history has showed us that it's rare for a guy that puts up one great season to put together a bunch more of them. LT is one of those rare guys, and Jackson may or may not be. If he turns out not to be (which history tells us is likely the case), then the return investment you're getting on missing out on those 2-3 years of LT numbers is a very poor investment. Would you give up 2-3 years of LT numbers to have present day Mcgahee or present day KJ? That may very well be what the deal ends up being 3 years from now.

 

[KTM]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.

How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

 

[FantasyTrader]

I'm an Sjax owner here, and I think that one of the major major fallacies in this whole thread is the idea that age is the only determining factor of an FF running back when experience shows us that that is far, far, far from true. We have seen countless young RBs coming off great seasons with bright futures ahead of them just fall off the map. Some from their team falling apart, some losing their starting gig unexpectedly, some getting injured, some just flat out not performing any more, and some from a combination of the lot.Remember a few years ago when KJ was the young RB coming off a great season with a bright future ahead of him going 1.02 in dynasty drafts? How about the year before that when Mcgahee was the young RB coming off a great season with a bright future ahead of him going 1.02 in dynasty drafts? LT was the only guy ahead of him at the time, but let's say LT was his current age (28.2) back then. Given the logic of the original post you would have taken both KJ and Mcgahee over the current LT and look what you would have gotten.Again I'm an SJax owner who has been high on him his whole career and am I big fan. I once took him well above his ADP myself (1.09 in a startup draft going into his 2nd year). But even still, who knows where he'll be in the 3 years. Who knows where he'll be in 2. Heck, who knows where he'll be next year. Who knows what happens if his team falls apart. Who knows what happens if he gets another new coach. If I know Sjax was going to put up numbers like this year's numbers for the next 7 years then ok, I'd buy Sjax at #1. But history has showed us that it's rare for a guy that puts up one great season to put together a bunch more of them. LT is one of those rare guys, and Jackson may or may not be. If he turns out not to be (which history tells us is likely the case), then the return investment you're getting on missing out on those 2-3 years of LT numbers is a very poor investment. Would you give up 2-3 years of LT numbers to have present day Mcgahee or present day KJ? That may very well be what the deal ends up being 3 years from now.

I'm only speaking for myself personally, but McGahee and K.J. have never had as much upside at any point as Steven Jackson does right now. They have NEVER looked as dominant rushing the football (in the NFL) as S-Jax did at the end of last year. But your point about L.T. being a proven commodity is a very fair argument.

 

[FantasyTrader]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

- weak argument. I could turn around and ask you how many RB's have ever had over 2,000 yards from scrimmage in a single season to NOT be on a fantasy roster for 5-6 years. Outlook beyond 2 years does NOT carry little value. You need to continually look toward the future.

 

[SCGiants]

I would take Bush or trade down for a lower one plus a 2nd and 4th maybe. M. Jones-Drew for the low first. then I would try and nab Cutler with the 4th pick I got from the trade. The second I would sneak in another RB..there is where I would try for Williams. I would let the others scamper for LT2, LJ and the upright runner S Jackson. Grab the future and though it may not pay off year one I would be happy with a good rook pick and a future dynasty Championship team that would last more than one fluke season.

 

[switz]

Who will have more total yards and TD's over the next 5-7 years, Tomlinson or Jackson?Assuming of course you cant trade LT, because he would clearly get more in a trade, the answer to this question should be the 1.1 pick.I would bet that very few people here think LT is the correct answer.

More total yards in the next 5-7 years? Yes LT is the correct answer.There is nothing to indicate he is slowing down.His offensive cast is improving, not worsening.His body hasn't taken much of a beating.He is far more talented.SJax is going to have a short career, mark my words. I wouldn't be surprised if LT from today out plays longer than SJax. Plus, SJax is on a team with old players at the other offensive positions, well mostly WR. He gets hit more. Yada yada

 

[FreeBaGeL]

They have NEVER looked as dominant rushing the football (in the NFL) as S-Jax did at the end of last year.

To be fair, they were pretty dominant down the stretch as well. Sjax finished up the last 7 games with 744 rush yards, 7 rush TDs, 354 rec yds, and 3 rec TDs. Mcgahee ended with 618 rush yds and 10 rush TDs but only 80 rec yds. KJ finished things up with 825 rush yds and 4 rush TDs, along with 110 rec yds.The major difference is in the receiving yards, which tend to be a very volataile statistic for running backs (remember it wasn't long ago Shaun Alexander and Ahman Green were considered "receiving" runners).Again I'm a big Sjax fan and think there's a chance he could be even better this year (it took Linehan half a season to finally just start feeding SJax in the redzone instead of trying to throw it in every time last year, so maybe if he'll let him run in the redzone all year he can really compile some gaudy TD numbers), but be careful. The guys that maintain those types of numbers are few and far between.

 

[Burning Sensation]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

Kept on your roster or were still productive?

 

[spec1alk]

you know what agitates me, everyone says that LT can go nowhere but down (which I agree with), but no one thinks the same of SJ. Who is to say that SJ will not regress?

 

[Tick]

I'd definitely take LT.Total FF points left to score in their careers is too simplified of a method to use. I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years, regardless of where the total points work out. With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so. With your favorite younger third-tier RB, you've probably got a starter for the next six seasons, but you need to work a lot harder on the rest of your roster to be a team to be feared.Also, while it's easy to look back and say that Faulk shouldn't have been taken #1 at age 29, it's much harder at the time to figure out which young guy should have been taken ahead of him... Anthony Thomas or LT? William Green or Thomas Jones? Kevan Barlow or Brian Westbrook? McGahee or Larry Johnson?Jackson is a reasonable argument against LT, but the gap right now is so huge and the future is unpredictable enough that I think you have to go with LT. Imagine taking Jackson, watching the LT winner win three titles, then having Jackson go Ricky on you or destroy his leg in a flag football game or shoot his ex-girlfriend.Sure, you could imagine the opposite scenario just as easily, but I can't see looking past three years for RBs, and if you knew your league would only last three years, you'd take LT in a heartbeat.

I agree with everything you're saying other than the value you are placing on Steven Jackson. I think you are WAY off... "I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years" - Is this the value you are currently placing on S-Jax? You HONESTLY believe he projects as the TENTH best RB during the average season over the next 6 years?"With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so..." - but with Jackson you're not? L.T.'s estmated value SO MUCH more that we're thinking the pts. seperating Tomlinson/Jackson over the next 3 years is going to be what wins you Championships vs. not contending?"but the gap right now is so huge"... I guess that answers my questions above. I think you're wrong. The gap is NOT huge. It's as big as it will EVER be because L.T. is coming off of an All-Everything season. That being said, I totally agree with the people advocating drafting LT and trading him. It's his PERCEIVED value that is too juicy to pass up - not his REAL Dynasty Value.

In Zealots scoring:LT 429 pointsSJ 326 pointsThat's an enormous gap, no?LT's rank among RBs by year:7 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 1He's amazingly consistent, and I don't see much of an indication that he'll drop off soon. Jackson looked really good, but as others have mentioned, there are lots of guys who have one good season and drop off for some reason. LT has shown consistency that makes a team a contender with him in the lineup every season. Look around at the other guys in the league, and there's a lot of bouncing around from top-5 to the 10-15 range.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

you know what agitates me, everyone says that LT can go nowhere but down (which I agree with), but no one thinks the same of SJ. Who is to say that SJ will not regress?

Errr...that's exactly what much of the 2nd page is discussing...

 

[Domination]

Even with the expected slight decline in LT's numbers, he is still the far and away best player. Similarly to P Manning a few years ago, noone thought he would throw for another 50 TDs, but they still thought that he was the best QB.

 

[FantasyTrader]

I'd definitely take LT.

Total FF points left to score in their careers is too simplified of a method to use. I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years, regardless of where the total points work out. With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so. With your favorite younger third-tier RB, you've probably got a starter for the next six seasons, but you need to work a lot harder on the rest of your roster to be a team to be feared.

Also, while it's easy to look back and say that Faulk shouldn't have been taken #1 at age 29, it's much harder at the time to figure out which young guy should have been taken ahead of him... Anthony Thomas or LT? William Green or Thomas Jones? Kevan Barlow or Brian Westbrook? McGahee or Larry Johnson?

Jackson is a reasonable argument against LT, but the gap right now is so huge and the future is unpredictable enough that I think you have to go with LT. Imagine taking Jackson, watching the LT winner win three titles, then having Jackson go Ricky on you or destroy his leg in a flag football game or shoot his ex-girlfriend.

Sure, you could imagine the opposite scenario just as easily, but I can't see looking past three years for RBs, and if you knew your league would only last three years, you'd take LT in a heartbeat.

I agree with everything you're saying other than the value you are placing on Steven Jackson. I think you are WAY off..."I'd much rather get the #1 RB for three years than the #10 RB for 6 years" - Is this the value you are currently placing on S-Jax? You HONESTLY believe he projects as the TENTH best RB during the average season over the next 6 years?

"With LT, you're a major contender for the next three seasons or so..." - but with Jackson you're not? L.T.'s estmated value SO MUCH more that we're thinking the pts. seperating Tomlinson/Jackson over the next 3 years is going to be what wins you Championships vs. not contending?

"but the gap right now is so huge"... I guess that answers my questions above. I think you're wrong. The gap is NOT huge. It's as big as it will EVER be because L.T. is coming off of an All-Everything season.

That being said, I totally agree with the people advocating drafting LT and trading him. It's his PERCEIVED value that is too juicy to pass up - not his REAL Dynasty Value.

In Zealots scoring:LT 429 points

SJ 326 points

That's an enormous gap, no?

LT's rank among RBs by year:

7 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 1

He's amazingly consistent, and I don't see much of an indication that he'll drop off soon. Jackson looked really good, but as others have mentioned, there are lots of guys who have one good season and drop off for some reason. LT has shown consistency that makes a team a contender with him in the lineup every season. Look around at the other guys in the league, and there's a lot of bouncing around from top-5 to the 10-15 range.

This has become an L.T. vs. S-Jax thread and that's unfortunate. I've never said anwhere that I think Jackson is a better RB right now (or will ever be) - in fact nobody in this thread has. What I find disheartening is that despite all we know about RB longevity, people refuse to acknowledge that this is the highest LT's value will EVER be. Yes - Jackson could shred his ACL in week 1 this year, he could die in a car accident, he could get hit by a meteor - we just don't know. The only thing that we know is that LT has been in the league 7 years vs. Jackson's 4. Maybe this is a better way of phrasing it to help to help people disassociate from the situation. You own a '98 Chevy and I own an '01. By STATISTICAL AVERAGES each will last the same amount of time. I could give a rat's a-- how good your particular car has been to you, I have 3 years on you. End of discussion. I mean, this isn't even about LaDanian Tomlinson - it's about stats. Alexander was "special" until last year. Faulk was special. C-Mart was special. Another RB will come along shortly who is special. But the statistical average will not change.

Good stats on L.T. though - he is the man that's for sure!

 

[KTM]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.

How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

- weak argument. I could turn around and ask you how many RB's have ever had over 2,000 yards from scrimmage in a single season to NOT be on a fantasy roster for 5-6 years. Outlook beyond 2 years does NOT carry little value. You need to continually look toward the future.

Yes, you do. In 2 year increments. You mean to tell me you're making decisions right now for the 2012 season?

 

[Pipes]

Another thing to consider if you really want Jackson, which seems to be the comparison, you'd better not trade down to pick #5. At worst he's the #3 pick overall in a new dynasty and maybe even the #2 pick behind LT.

 

[chris1969]

I'd rate LJ over LT at this point. San Diego is gonna give the QB more work the next couple of seasons and KC will be giving less.

 

[SCGiants]

This may sound nuts.. but I have little faith in KC and LJs future. They have no qb imo worth a dime.. Gonzo is old and has been used for blocking far more than he likes.. the o line is old as dirt..the good ones left anyway and they have garbage WRs... plus their division is hetting stronger in the passing attack which means kc may be coming from behind more often than not..not exactly a pretty picture for a running game. Even Oakland has a chance to have a passing game with a new coach.

I think LJ has one more year of stardom before he comes crashing back to earth... imo its a perfect sell high scenerio.

BUT you wont see that printed anywhere were sites take money from subscribers........too risky.

 

[FantasyTrader]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.

How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

- weak argument. I could turn around and ask you how many RB's have ever had over 2,000 yards from scrimmage in a single season to NOT be on a fantasy roster for 5-6 years. Outlook beyond 2 years does NOT carry little value. You need to continually look toward the future.

Yes, you do. In 2 year increments. You mean to tell me you're making decisions right now for the 2012 season?

No. I'm saying I'm making decision right now that will impact the 2012 season.

 

[Tick]

This has become an L.T. vs. S-Jax thread and that's unfortunate. I've never said anwhere that I think Jackson is a better RB right now (or will ever be) - in fact nobody in this thread has. What I find disheartening is that despite all we know about RB longevity, people refuse to acknowledge that this is the highest LT's value will EVER be. Yes - Jackson could shred his ACL in week 1 this year, he could die in a car accident, he could get hit by a meteor - we just don't know. The only thing that we know is that LT has been in the league 7 years vs. Jackson's 4.

Maybe this is a better way of phrasing it to help to help people disassociate from the situation. You own a '98 Chevy and I own an '01. By STATISTICAL AVERAGES each will last the same amount of time. I could give a rat's a-- how good your particular car has been to you, I have 3 years on you. End of discussion. I mean, this isn't even about LaDanian Tomlinson - it's about stats. Alexander was "special" until last year. Faulk was special. C-Mart was special. Another RB will come along shortly who is special. But the statistical average will not change.

Good stats on L.T. though - he is the man that's for sure!

That is a good analogy, but I'm not sure it's the end of the discussion.If I have a 98 Honda that has the best reliability rating around and you've got an 05 Hyundai that came in third in the major awards the year it came out, I'm feeling pretty good in the Honda.

 

[FantasyTrader]

This has become an L.T. vs. S-Jax thread and that's unfortunate. I've never said anwhere that I think Jackson is a better RB right now (or will ever be) - in fact nobody in this thread has. What I find disheartening is that despite all we know about RB longevity, people refuse to acknowledge that this is the highest LT's value will EVER be. Yes - Jackson could shred his ACL in week 1 this year, he could die in a car accident, he could get hit by a meteor - we just don't know. The only thing that we know is that LT has been in the league 7 years vs. Jackson's 4.

Maybe this is a better way of phrasing it to help to help people disassociate from the situation. You own a '98 Chevy and I own an '01. By STATISTICAL AVERAGES each will last the same amount of time. I could give a rat's a-- how good your particular car has been to you, I have 3 years on you. End of discussion. I mean, this isn't even about LaDanian Tomlinson - it's about stats. Alexander was "special" until last year. Faulk was special. C-Mart was special. Another RB will come along shortly who is special. But the statistical average will not change.

Good stats on L.T. though - he is the man that's for sure!

That is a good analogy, but I'm not sure it's the end of the discussion.If I have a 98 Honda that has the best reliability rating around and you've got an 05 Hyundai that came in third in the major awards the year it came out, I'm feeling pretty good in the Honda.

Excellent point. Maybe it turns out you have a '99 Ferrari and I have a'06 KIA - and you could say - I could give a rats a-- how many years you have on me. Works both ways I guess.

 

[KTM]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.

How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

- weak argument. I could turn around and ask you how many RB's have ever had over 2,000 yards from scrimmage in a single season to NOT be on a fantasy roster for 5-6 years. Outlook beyond 2 years does NOT carry little value. You need to continually look toward the future.

Yes, you do. In 2 year increments. You mean to tell me you're making decisions right now for the 2012 season?

No. I'm saying I'm making decision right now that will impact the 2012 season.

Can you list a few examples?

 

[KTM]

This has become an L.T. vs. S-Jax thread and that's unfortunate. I've never said anwhere that I think Jackson is a better RB right now (or will ever be) - in fact nobody in this thread has. What I find disheartening is that despite all we know about RB longevity, people refuse to acknowledge that this is the highest LT's value will EVER be. Yes - Jackson could shred his ACL in week 1 this year, he could die in a car accident, he could get hit by a meteor - we just don't know. The only thing that we know is that LT has been in the league 7 years vs. Jackson's 4.

Maybe this is a better way of phrasing it to help to help people disassociate from the situation. You own a '98 Chevy and I own an '01. By STATISTICAL AVERAGES each will last the same amount of time. I could give a rat's a-- how good your particular car has been to you, I have 3 years on you. End of discussion. I mean, this isn't even about LaDanian Tomlinson - it's about stats. Alexander was "special" until last year. Faulk was special. C-Mart was special. Another RB will come along shortly who is special. But the statistical average will not change.

Good stats on L.T. though - he is the man that's for sure!

That is a good analogy, but I'm not sure it's the end of the discussion.If I have a 98 Honda that has the best reliability rating around and you've got an 05 Hyundai that came in third in the major awards the year it came out, I'm feeling pretty good in the Honda.

Excellent point. Maybe it turns out you have a '99 Ferrari and I have a'06 KIA - and you could say - I could give a rats a-- how many years you have on me. Works both ways I guess.

In FF, most of the time we don't know if we're going to end up with the '99 Ferrari or a '99 Dodge Neon when we buy (aka draft) our car in '99. This is why LT carries so much weight - he's proven to be that Ferrari. I'll take the proven Ferrari over trading it away for a couple of "hopeful" Ferraris. Which, more times than not, turn out to be just a decent Camry or two.

 

[FantasyTrader]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.

How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

- weak argument. I could turn around and ask you how many RB's have ever had over 2,000 yards from scrimmage in a single season to NOT be on a fantasy roster for 5-6 years. Outlook beyond 2 years does NOT carry little value. You need to continually look toward the future.

Yes, you do. In 2 year increments. You mean to tell me you're making decisions right now for the 2012 season?

No. I'm saying I'm making decision right now that will impact the 2012 season.

Can you list a few examples?

This year's rookie draft, trades of future draft picks. I play in a very well established Dynasty league and there is a pick in the 2010 daft that has already been traded. We think about our teams in years (at least I do), not months - and I feel it's a big reason why I've won it in '02, '04, '05,'06. For example, I traded away Alexander the offseason before last year when his value was at it's threshold. What will happen (at least your best guess of wht will happen) is as important as right now. I truely beleve this.

 

[KTM]

It's amazing how much people are over-thinking dynasty these days. Any outlook past 2 years carries very little value.

How many players are kept on your roster for 5 - 6 years?

- weak argument. I could turn around and ask you how many RB's have ever had over 2,000 yards from scrimmage in a single season to NOT be on a fantasy roster for 5-6 years. Outlook beyond 2 years does NOT carry little value. You need to continually look toward the future.

Yes, you do. In 2 year increments. You mean to tell me you're making decisions right now for the 2012 season?

No. I'm saying I'm making decision right now that will impact the 2012 season.

Can you list a few examples?

This year's rookie draft, trades of future draft picks. I play in a very well established Dynasty league and there is a pick in the 2010 daft that has already been traded. We think about our teams in years (at least I do), not months - and I feel it's a big reason why I've won it in '02, '04, '05,'06. For example, I traded away Alexander the offseason before last year when his value was at it's threshold. What will happen (at least your best guess of wht will happen) is as important as right now. I truely beleve this.

What did you get for SA? It's easy to say it now that 2005 was his threshhold. Nobody could've predicted that he was going to break his foot in 2006. He's got a similar style to LT - where he's absorbing minimal impact/hits. He's looking to be quite a value play in dynasties.It's a matter of taste I guess, but what will happen in 2010 is not as important as what will happen in 2008. 2010 is important, but its so easy to get wrapped up in trying to find the newest and greatest thing that we get stuck always chasing the future studs instead of trying to win today.