WR Emmanuel Sanders (RETIRED) (1 Viewer)

[matttyl]

He's actually a free agent in my 10 team dynasty league (31 man rosters with IDP). At what point in the upcoming rookie/free agent draft should I start thinking about drafting him? Early 2nd round?

 

[cloppbeast]

He's actually a free agent in my 10 team dynasty league (31 man rosters with IDP). At what point in the upcoming rookie/free agent draft should I start thinking about drafting him? Early 2nd round?

Late first.

 

[matttyl]

He's actually a free agent in my 10 team dynasty league (31 man rosters with IDP). At what point in the upcoming rookie/free agent draft should I start thinking about drafting him? Early 2nd round?

Late first.

So starting at picks 9-10?!

 

[MattFancy]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

 

[humpback]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

Haven't seen any, but curious what kind of offers you're getting (I'm assuming fairly low-ball tire kickers).

I agree that it's difficult to value him- I could see a range of anywhere in between what he did last year in Pitt and what Decker did last year in Denver. I'd lean towards the lower end myself.

 

[MattFancy]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

Haven't seen any, but curious what kind of offers you're getting (I'm assuming fairly low-ball tire kickers).

I agree that it's difficult to value him- I could see a range of anywhere in between what he did last year in Pitt and what Decker did last year in Denver. I'd lean towards the lower end myself.

Have had 2 so far: Quizz for Sanders and FJax for Sanders. Both from the same guy. Definitely think he's worth more than that. Just not sure what though.

 

[bostonfred]

I offered sanders for gerhart and was shot down with no counter. Both guys have some upside, both guys have a ceiling, and both of them have some risk. I would sweeten my side of the deal a little, but not sure how much. They're both borderline starters who you'd be a little uncomfortable to put in a week 1 lineup, but who could quickly become the kind of guy you want to start every week or find a way to get into your lineup for matchups and bye weeks.

 

[Adam Harstad]

The #4 Receiver (WR or TE) on the Broncos last year averaged 15.4 ppg, good for #20 across all WR/TEs in points per game (PPR scoring).

If that number dropped by 20% next year, the #4 in the Den Offense would still be projected in the top 36 of all Wr/TEs (top 30 of just WRs).

Is Sanders likely to duplicate Decker's top 10 WR finish in points per game (PPR)? Probably not given that Decker was the #2 scorer in that receiving core and regression to the mean is likely for all of the Broncos.

Is Sanders likely to command 80% of what the 4th highest scoring receiver in that offense (Julius) got? Barring injury, I would say yes. Keep in mind, that is only 70% of Decker's production.

70/1000/6 seems very reasonable to me. The upside (particularly in # of receptions) is much higher than that if he is used extensively in the slot.

I'm not sure I follow. The 4th WR in this offense last year got 16 catches for 200 yards. The 3rd WR (which I'd imagine Sanders projects to) got 73 for 778 (Welker). Not sure how a 20% drop in numbers put Sanders at 1000 yards.

You missed two key passages. It was the #4 receiver (WR or TE), and it was points per game. Pro-rate Welker's stats out to 16 games and you get 90/957/12, or 258 points. Pro-rate Julius Thomas' stats out to 16 games and you get 74/900/14, or 248 points. 80% of that would be about 198 fantasy points (70/1000/6 works out to 206, or in the right neighborhood).

 

[toxic]

The #4 Receiver (WR or TE) on the Broncos last year averaged 15.4 ppg, good for #20 across all WR/TEs in points per game (PPR scoring).

If that number dropped by 20% next year, the #4 in the Den Offense would still be projected in the top 36 of all Wr/TEs (top 30 of just WRs).

Is Sanders likely to duplicate Decker's top 10 WR finish in points per game (PPR)? Probably not given that Decker was the #2 scorer in that receiving core and regression to the mean is likely for all of the Broncos.

Is Sanders likely to command 80% of what the 4th highest scoring receiver in that offense (Julius) got? Barring injury, I would say yes. Keep in mind, that is only 70% of Decker's production.

70/1000/6 seems very reasonable to me. The upside (particularly in # of receptions) is much higher than that if he is used extensively in the slot.

I'm not sure I follow. The 4th WR in this offense last year got 16 catches for 200 yards. The 3rd WR (which I'd imagine Sanders projects to) got 73 for 778 (Welker). Not sure how a 20% drop in numbers put Sanders at 1000 yards.

You missed two key passages. It was the #4 receiver (WR or TE), and it was points per game. Pro-rate Welker's stats out to 16 games and you get 90/957/12, or 258 points. Pro-rate Julius Thomas' stats out to 16 games and you get 74/900/14, or 248 points. 80% of that would be about 198 fantasy points (70/1000/6 works out to 206, or in the right neighborhood).

Thanks Adam. That was exactly as I intended.

 

[donnie baseball]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

Haven't seen any, but curious what kind of offers you're getting (I'm assuming fairly low-ball tire kickers).

I agree that it's difficult to value him- I could see a range of anywhere in between what he did last year in Pitt and what Decker did last year in Denver. I'd lean towards the lower end myself.

I've been mulling over an offer of 2.01 for him in a 12 team PPR. Probably not going to do it.

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

Haven't seen any, but curious what kind of offers you're getting (I'm assuming fairly low-ball tire kickers).

I agree that it's difficult to value him- I could see a range of anywhere in between what he did last year in Pitt and what Decker did last year in Denver. I'd lean towards the lower end myself.

I've been mulling over an offer of 2.01 for him in a 12 team PPR. Probably not going to do it.

Depends on the type of team you have. If you have more of a win now team you don't take that deal. But in 2 years time Manning may be retired and Sanders may be useless.

 

[FUBAR]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

Haven't seen any, but curious what kind of offers you're getting (I'm assuming fairly low-ball tire kickers).I agree that it's difficult to value him- I could see a range of anywhere in between what he did last year in Pitt and what Decker did last year in Denver. I'd lean towards the lower end myself.

I've been mulling over an offer of 2.01 for him in a 12 team PPR. Probably not going to do it.

Depends on the type of team you have. If you have more of a win now team you don't take that deal. But in 2 years time Manning may be retired and Sanders may be useless.

I have Sanders in a rebuild and wouldn't trade him for less than the #8ish, depending on how the draft unfolds. With Peyton he is a likely adequate wr2. When Oz takes over, he'll probably go back to what he was with Ben, depending on the Thomas bros and welker.

 

[Sabertooth]

The #4 Receiver (WR or TE) on the Broncos last year averaged 15.4 ppg, good for #20 across all WR/TEs in points per game (PPR scoring).

If that number dropped by 20% next year, the #4 in the Den Offense would still be projected in the top 36 of all Wr/TEs (top 30 of just WRs).

Is Sanders likely to duplicate Decker's top 10 WR finish in points per game (PPR)? Probably not given that Decker was the #2 scorer in that receiving core and regression to the mean is likely for all of the Broncos.

Is Sanders likely to command 80% of what the 4th highest scoring receiver in that offense (Julius) got? Barring injury, I would say yes. Keep in mind, that is only 70% of Decker's production.

70/1000/6 seems very reasonable to me. The upside (particularly in # of receptions) is much higher than that if he is used extensively in the slot.

I'm not sure I follow. The 4th WR in this offense last year got 16 catches for 200 yards. The 3rd WR (which I'd imagine Sanders projects to) got 73 for 778 (Welker). Not sure how a 20% drop in numbers put Sanders at 1000 yards.

You missed two key passages. It was the #4 receiver (WR or TE), and it was points per game. Pro-rate Welker's stats out to 16 games and you get 90/957/12, or 258 points. Pro-rate Julius Thomas' stats out to 16 games and you get 74/900/14, or 248 points. 80% of that would be about 198 fantasy points (70/1000/6 works out to 206, or in the right neighborhood).

Thanks Adam. That was exactly as I intended.

ok still seems like a lot of fancy math to justify a middling player. Give me the under.

 

[Archer]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

I own him in a few leagues and i wouldn't trade him for anything less than a late 1st. He couldn't be in a safer system and we know he can catch the ball and run routes. He's a very good WR, not great, but he won't have to be to put up big numbers in that offense.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Man, if I owned Emmanuel Sanders, I would be giddy at the prospect of trading him for a first round rookie pick. *ANY* first round rookie pick. An early first, a mid first, a late first, a 2014 first, a 2015 first, a conditional 2018 first, you name it.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

He's going to have some 2 TD games.

He's going to have some 3/30/0 games.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I've been getting offers in for Sanders but I'm not quite sure how to value him. Any one see any recent trades go through for him?

I own him in a few leagues and i wouldn't trade him for anything less than a late 1st. He couldn't be in a safer system and we know he can catch the ball and run routes. He's a very good WR, not great, but he won't have to be to put up big numbers in that offense.

What, exactly, is this based on? I've seen plenty of Sanders, and he's been decidedly mediocre, based on everything from his numbers to the eyeball test. He's a fine fit in Denver as the WR3 and 4th option overall, but "very good" is a pretty big stretch.

 

[toxic]

The #4 Receiver (WR or TE) on the Broncos last year averaged 15.4 ppg, good for #20 across all WR/TEs in points per game (PPR scoring).

If that number dropped by 20% next year, the #4 in the Den Offense would still be projected in the top 36 of all Wr/TEs (top 30 of just WRs).

Is Sanders likely to duplicate Decker's top 10 WR finish in points per game (PPR)? Probably not given that Decker was the #2 scorer in that receiving core and regression to the mean is likely for all of the Broncos.

Is Sanders likely to command 80% of what the 4th highest scoring receiver in that offense (Julius) got? Barring injury, I would say yes. Keep in mind, that is only 70% of Decker's production.

70/1000/6 seems very reasonable to me. The upside (particularly in # of receptions) is much higher than that if he is used extensively in the slot.

I'm not sure I follow. The 4th WR in this offense last year got 16 catches for 200 yards. The 3rd WR (which I'd imagine Sanders projects to) got 73 for 778 (Welker). Not sure how a 20% drop in numbers put Sanders at 1000 yards.

You missed two key passages. It was the #4 receiver (WR or TE), and it was points per game. Pro-rate Welker's stats out to 16 games and you get 90/957/12, or 258 points. Pro-rate Julius Thomas' stats out to 16 games and you get 74/900/14, or 248 points. 80% of that would be about 198 fantasy points (70/1000/6 works out to 206, or in the right neighborhood).

Thanks Adam. That was exactly as I intended.

ok still seems like a lot of fancy math to justify a middling player. Give me the under.

Fair enough. FWIW, I also see him as middling player, albeit one in a very good situation. I tend to use ppg averages simply because I want to know how a player is likely to perform when healthy and then adjust for injury risk as opposed to developing a season-long projection that accounts for some magical injury probability. Perhaps a simpler way of presenting my logic is as follows:

2013:

D.Thomas 19.9 ppg

Decker 17.6 ppg

Welker 16.1 ppg

J.Thomas 15.4 ppg

I'm assuming some regression to the mean for Den in 2014 and assuming that Sanders will be 4th fiddle. Best guesses at this point (and they are obviously guesses)

2014:

D.Thomas 19 ppg

Welker 16 ppg

J.Thomas 15 ppg

Sanders: 12.5 ppg

I've assumed approximately a 10% drop in overall productivity for Denver, and placed the vast majority of that drop in the productivity of the #4 option (Sanders). It is entirely possible that that is still too optimistic for Denver overall (and for Sanders specifically), but I wasn't trying to do anything fancy to reach a conclusion I wanted.

 

[cstu]

I've assumed approximately a 10% drop in overall productivity for Denver, and placed the vast majority of that drop in the productivity of the #4 option (Sanders). It is entirely possible that that is still too optimistic for Denver overall (and for Sanders specifically), but I wasn't trying to do anything fancy to reach a conclusion I wanted.

There are some reasons to predict more of a drop than that:

- Manning is another year older, 38 is no spring chicken

- When he threw for 49 TD's he followed that up with 28 TD's the next year

- Decker to Sanders is a major downgrade

- Manning had 37 TD's in 2012

I expect Peyton's numbers to be closer to 2012 than 2013 (5000/40 is where I see it). I think most of the decrease will come from Sanders, but the other WR's could take a slight hit as well.

 

[Faust]

Broncos need to be right about Sanders

By Jeff Legwold | ESPN.com

When the Denver Broncos didn't make wide receiver Eric Decker an offer in free agency, they were making a fairly public admission that they simply wanted to spend their available dollars elsewhere.

And that they could spend those dollars elsewhere to fix some holes in the depth chart and somehow replace Decker in the offense.

For it all to work as they hope, those major investments -- DeMarcus Ware, T.J. Ward and Aqib Talib -- will certainly have to lift the defense. But for the plan to go from drawing board to deep in the postseason, preferably a return trip to the Super Bowl, the Broncos will simply have to be right about Emmanuel Sanders.

The wide receiver was among their top offensive targets when the Broncos made their wish list before free agency opened. They see him as a versatile, fast, quick-twitch receiver who is ready to benefit from Peyton Manning's presence behind center.

Or as John Elway has put it: “When we looked at him, and I've said this to our guys, too, you saw a guy who has only scratched the surface. He's young with a lot of potential, even on top of what he's already done."

Decker's departure leaves a fairly large gap in what the team did on offense last season. At least in the regular season, anyway. Decker's totals dipped in the postseason, as Manning focused elsewhere, but Manning looked Decker's way 137 times in the regular season. Demaryius Thomas was the only Broncos receiver targeted more in 2013. Thomas isn't going anywhere in the pecking order. The Broncos see him as a special player who still has room to grow, even after his 1,430-yard, 14-touchdown season in 2013.

Tight end Julius Thomas was the fourth-most targeted player in the Broncos' offense last season. He missed two games with a knee injury in the regular season, but was far more active in the playoffs. He will be a bigger part of the offense in the coming season.

Wes Welker missed the final three games of the regular season while recovering from a concussion, but he was the third-most targeted player in the offense.

Sanders' ability as a slot receiver, as well as his ability to line up out wide, should help the Broncos create more matchups to get Julius Thomas the ball down the hashmarks. It was Sanders' ability to line up all over the formation, as well as his after-the-catch performance, that made him the Broncos' top target on the offensive side of the ball once free agency opened.

Sanders had a career-best 67 catches last season, but the Broncos believe he can go far north of that total in their offense, given the choices Manning has before the ball is in the air. Still, all of those plans are built around the idea that Sanders has to be up for the job, too.

The Broncos may feel like Sanders is quicker in the short area, faster in the open field and better after the catch than Decker. But Decker was on the finishing end of touchdown passes 24 times in the two seasons he played with Manning.

Some of that was Manning's ability to work the Broncos' scheme and find the favorable matchup. There is a long list of receivers who have put up career-best numbers with Manning. Still, Decker's production will have to be replaced. The Broncos lined up in a three-wide receiver set on 73.6 percent of their offensive snaps last season.

The Broncos lined up in a three-wide set even more than that as the season wore on, including all but one snap against the San Diego Chargers in the divisional round. And even with their intentions to run the ball better next season, Sanders will be key in how successful the Broncos are in making the transition from how the formation looked in 2013 to how it will look in 2014.

Questions surround Welker, who enters the season with two concussions in 2013 to go with a concussion history from before he signed in Denver. There is always a chance he will miss some time in the coming season.

In the end, the New York Jets put a $36.25 million contract in front of Decker and the Broncos signed Sanders to a $15 million deal. The Broncos did their comparison shopping, looked at the balance in the checkbook and made Sanders their choice.

 

[Hot Diggity Dog]

I think it is important to note that the broncos are going to be a more balanced team next year. The passing pie is going to be smaller. I'd count on Sanders being a wr 3.

 

[cloppbeast]

The wide receiver was among their top offensive targets when the Broncos made their wish list before free agency opened. They see him as a versatile, fast, quick-twitch receiver who is ready to benefit from Peyton Manning's presence behind center.

Or as John Elway has put it: “When we looked at him, and I've said this to our guys, too, you saw a guy who has only scratched the surface. He's young with a lot of potential, even on top of what he's already done."

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

So who's right: forum posters or John Elway?

 

[matttyl]

I think it is important to note that the broncos are going to be a more balanced team next year. The passing pie is going to be smaller. I'd count on Sanders being a wr 3.

Likely a smaller pie, but 147/1,836 and 14 from last year's "pie" left with Decker and Moreno. There's a lot of slack to be made up somewhere, even with a smaller pie.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The wide receiver was among their top offensive targets when the Broncos made their wish list before free agency opened. They see him as a versatile, fast, quick-twitch receiver who is ready to benefit from Peyton Manning's presence behind center.

Or as John Elway has put it: When we looked at him, and I've said this to our guys, too, you saw a guy who has only scratched the surface. He's young with a lot of potential, even on top of what he's already done."

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

So who's right: forum posters or John Elway?

Plenty of room in between "good signing for Denver" and "strong FF option."

 

[cloppbeast]

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

Plenty of room in between "good signing for Denver" and "strong FF option."

A good projection depends on an accurate evaluation of opportunity and talent. To draw a FF conclusion, in addition to situation, one must decide: Is said player good, or not?

You have said that you'll 'stand on '[sanders] is not that good''. John Elway does not agree with you.

If Sanders is good, like Elway thinks, he will produce in FF; if you're correct, he won't.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

Plenty of room in between "good signing for Denver" and "strong FF option."

A good projection depends on an accurate evaluation of opportunity and talent. To draw a FF conclusion, in addition to situation, one must decide: Is said player good, or not?

You have said that you'll 'stand on '[sanders] is not that good''. John Elway does not agree with you.

If Sanders is good, like Elway thinks, he will produce in FF; if you're correct, he won't.

I wouldn't expect anyone to take my opinion over John Elway's. Just pointing out that the Broncos can get their $5 million worth out of Sanders without him being a good FF option.

 

[cloppbeast]

I wouldn't expect anyone to take my opinion over John Elway's. Just pointing out that the Broncos can get their $5 million worth out of Sanders without him being a good FF option.

I didn't mean to prove you wrong. Hell, John Elway could just as well be wrong.

I just wanted to alter the mood of this thread by fueling some debate.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I think it is important to note that the broncos are going to be a more balanced team next year. The passing pie is going to be smaller. I'd count on Sanders being a wr 3.

Likely a smaller pie, but 147/1,836 and 14 from last year's "pie" left with Decker and Moreno. There's a lot of slack to be made up somewhere, even with a smaller pie.

In addition to the offense perhaps being more run centric, I think Manning's numbers will naturally come back down to earth after a record setting season - so there may not be as much slack to make up as we think. Also remember that Welker missed 3 games last season, so he'll also be part of making up any slack.

Realistically, I'd project Manning to throw for about 5,100 yards and 40 TDs at most. While most teams don't have the personnel that SEA, the blueprint they laid out (taking away the short passing game) could actually cause those numbers to fall even further.

 

[ClownDogs]

I like sanders. Before A.Brown blew up in PItt, they liked Sanders more and he was given the chance first, but injuries kept him from excelling. I think he will be a WR3 with WR2 upside, just don't see him being near what Decker was, but I could be wrong.

I sold him in a dynasty league, I gave Sanders/2.05 for Fitz and didn't think twice about it.(in case anyone was wondering about his value)

 

[Faust]

Emmanuel Sanders headed for breakout year

By Jamey Eisenberg | Senior Fantasy Writer

The Broncos preseason outlooks are done, and we've already touched on Montee Ball. So let's take a look at Emmanuel Sanders for this season.

Sanders is replacing the departed Eric Decker, who signed with the Jets, and quarterback Peyton Manning said Monday that Sanders can be a legitimate threat.

"He is explosive," Manning said. "You can't hold the ball very long when he is running a route, I learned that. He is excited about being here. Obviously, it is fun to play with guys who are excited about being here with the Denver Broncos. ... I know he's eager to learn. I know he was excited to get started today where he is allowed to meet with the coaches and learn the offense. I look forward to playing with a guy like that. I think he'll be a really nice addition to our football team."

Sanders had an expanded role with the Steelers last season and finished with career highs in catches (67), yards (740) and touchdowns (six). He should have another career year in 2014 as Decker's replacement.

Make no mistake -- Sanders is not Decker, who is 6-foot-3, 214 pounds and plays primarily on the outside. Sanders is 5-foot-11, 180 pounds and can move inside to the slot.

But someone has to pick up the slack for Decker, who averaged 86 catches, 1,176 yards and 12 touchdowns the past two years playing with Manning, and Sanders is the likely candidate. He is in line for a breakout campaign.

I plan to target Sanders as a high-end No. 3 Fantasy receiver in Round 6 in all leagues. Like Manning said, hopefully this season he will be "explosive."

 

[cloppbeast]

"He is explosive," Manning said. "You can't hold the ball very long when he is running a route"

One explanation as to why Sanders didn't succeed in Pittsburgh. Ben specializes in holding on to the ball too long.

 

[duaneok66]

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

Plenty of room in between "good signing for Denver" and "strong FF option."

A good projection depends on an accurate evaluation of opportunity and talent. To draw a FF conclusion, in addition to situation, one must decide: Is said player good, or not?

You have said that you'll 'stand on '[sanders] is not that good''. John Elway does not agree with you.

If Sanders is good, like Elway thinks, he will produce in FF; if you're correct, he won't.

What else would Elway say?

 

[FUBAR]

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

Plenty of room in between "good signing for Denver" and "strong FF option."

A good projection depends on an accurate evaluation of opportunity and talent. To draw a FF conclusion, in addition to situation, one must decide: Is said player good, or not?

You have said that you'll 'stand on '[sanders] is not that good''. John Elway does not agree with you.

If Sanders is good, like Elway thinks, he will produce in FF; if you're correct, he won't.

What else would Elway say?

It's not what he said that matters, it's that he went out and got him when other options were available.

Maybe I'm biased but I think Sanders can be very good. Maybe he won't duplicate decker's stats, but I'll gladly take him as my wr2

 

[cloppbeast]

What else would Elway say?

Sometimes you tell a girl you love her just to get down her pants. But with the good ones, you mean it.

 

[duaneok66]

There's a lot of pessimism about Sanders on this thread, as if the book has already been written that he's an average player. The Broncos obviously don't share that opinion. They think they just got a deal on a quality player.

Plenty of room in between "good signing for Denver" and "strong FF option."

A good projection depends on an accurate evaluation of opportunity and talent. To draw a FF conclusion, in addition to situation, one must decide: Is said player good, or not?

You have said that you'll 'stand on '[sanders] is not that good''. John Elway does not agree with you.

If Sanders is good, like Elway thinks, he will produce in FF; if you're correct, he won't.

What else would Elway say?

It's not what he said that matters, it's that he went out and got him when other options were available.

Maybe I'm biased but I think Sanders can be very good. Maybe he won't duplicate decker's stats, but I'll gladly take him as my wr2

I agree with you - the fact that he "went out and got him" indicates he believes in Sanders. The actual quote doesn't really mean anything.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

He's actually a free agent in my 10 team dynasty league (31 man rosters with IDP). At what point in the upcoming rookie/free agent draft should I start thinking about drafting him? Early 2nd round?

Late first.

You get one year maybe two of possible good production. His value hinges on Manning. He's very mediocre with a decent QB like Big Ben. He's a short term lease at best. No way I trade a first unless can compete strongly and need the wr depth. 1.10 would still be top end.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

"He is explosive," Manning said. "You can't hold the ball very long when he is running a route"

One explanation as to why Sanders didn't succeed in Pittsburgh. Ben specializes in holding on to the ball too long.

Is that why Brown sucked last year too?

 

[FUBAR]

He's actually a free agent in my 10 team dynasty league (31 man rosters with IDP). At what point in the upcoming rookie/free agent draft should I start thinking about drafting him? Early 2nd round?

Late first.

You get one year maybe two of possible good production. His value hinges on Manning. He's very mediocre with a decent QB like Big Ben. He's a short term lease at best. No way I trade a first unless can compete strongly and need the wr depth. 1.10 would still be top end.

Keep in mind, he was the #26 WR last year. That's (probably) his floor with Peyton. He probably can produce similar stats with Brock.

A late first is very reasonable.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

"He is explosive," Manning said. "You can't hold the ball very long when he is running a route"

One explanation as to why Sanders didn't succeed in Pittsburgh. Ben specializes in holding on to the ball too long.

Antonio Brown and Mike Wallace seemed to do ok with Ben holding the ball too long.

 

[FUBAR]

"He is explosive," Manning said. "You can't hold the ball very long when he is running a route"

One explanation as to why Sanders didn't succeed in Pittsburgh. Ben specializes in holding on to the ball too long.

Is that why Brown sucked last year too?

Explain please. Why is a top 30 WR who was 2nd on his team considered to "suck" and not succeed?

Don't see anyone claiming Sanders to be the next Randy Moss, but the guy is a solid WR and gets a lot of flack here for no good reason.

 

[cloppbeast]

Antonio Brown and Mike Wallace seemed to do ok with Ben holding the ball too long.

Is that why Brown sucked last year too?

Mike Wallace benefited from Ben holding onto the ball because it took him that long to get open.

Maybe Brown is better at staying open than Sanders.

Some players fit better in a specific system. I believe Sanders will do much better in a timing based offense, rather than the back-yard football played in Pittsburgh.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Antonio Brown and Mike Wallace seemed to do ok with Ben holding the ball too long.

Is that why Brown sucked last year too?

Mike Wallace benefited from Ben holding onto the ball because it took him that long to get open.

Maybe Brown is better at staying open than Sanders.

Some players fit better in a specific system. I believe Sanders will do much better in a timing based offense, rather than the back-yard football played in Pittsburgh.

I think you're taking a Manning offseason "fluff" quote a little too seriously.

I'm not saying Sanders will fail in Denver, in fact it would be silly to suggest that, but I don't think he improves as much as some people seem to think, in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed and that will surely suffer some regression for last year.

I think his 2013 numbers is a good baseline for projections on him - and that isn't really a bad thing.

 

[cloppbeast]

I think you're taking a Manning offseason "fluff" quote a little too seriously.
I'm not saying Sanders will fail in Denver, in fact it would be silly to suggest that, but I don't think he improves as much as some people seem to think, in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed and that will surely suffer some regression for last year.

I think his 2013 numbers is a good baseline for projections on him - and that isn't really a bad thing.

When they use generic buzz words, "explosive dynamic play maker", that's "fluff". It goes in one ear, out the other.

Sometimes, though, a player or coach will say something with some meaning. "You can't hold onto the ball too long when he is running a route", says something specific about the way Sanders plays. The quote stood out to me because I always thought Sanders fit better with a precision, quick decision quarterback - in other words, the opposite of Ben.

And if you use the baseline set last season in Pittsburgh, you might miss the boat. I personally think last year represents his absolute floor playing in Denver.

 

[matttyl]

He's actually a free agent in my 10 team dynasty league (31 man rosters with IDP). At what point in the upcoming rookie/free agent draft should I start thinking about drafting him? Early 2nd round?

Late first.

You get one year maybe two of possible good production. His value hinges on Manning. He's very mediocre with a decent QB like Big Ben. He's a short term lease at best. No way I trade a first unless can compete strongly and need the wr depth. 1.10 would still be top end.

Keep in mind, he was the #26 WR last year. That's (probably) his floor with Peyton. He probably can produce similar stats with Brock.

A late first is very reasonable.

I currently have the 7 and the 14. The 7 seems way too early, but the 14 sounds about right.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I think you're taking a Manning offseason "fluff" quote a little too seriously.
I'm not saying Sanders will fail in Denver, in fact it would be silly to suggest that, but I don't think he improves as much as some people seem to think, in an offense with a lot of mouths to feed and that will surely suffer some regression for last year.

I think his 2013 numbers is a good baseline for projections on him - and that isn't really a bad thing.

When they use generic buzz words, "explosive dynamic play maker", that's "fluff". It goes in one ear, out the other.

Sometimes, though, a player or coach will say something with some meaning. "You can't hold onto the ball too long when he is running a route", says something specific about the way Sanders plays. The quote stood out to me because I always thought Sanders fit better with a precision, quick decision quarterback - in other words, the opposite of Ben.

And if you use the baseline set last season in Pittsburgh, you might miss the boat. I personally think last year represents his absolute floor playing in Denver.

While Big Ben is "famous" for extending the play by scrambling around, you do realize that Pittsburgh, under Haley, ran exactly the type of offense you are decribing as being perfect for Sanders the last two seasons, right? In fact I believe that Sanders complained that he was used more on short quick routes than he was going deep, which he is better suited for (in his mind at least).

If I miss out on a big season from Sanders, so be it. It happens. I just can't get too excited, "knowing" that Manning isn't going to put up back to back record setting seasons at age 38/39 and with Sanders being, the third or fourth option in the passing game.

Denver spent a ton of money on their defense, and has stressed the importance of running the ball more this season. We just may not see the high flying offensive numbers of last season.

With that said, of course with manning, Thomas, Welker, Thomas and Sanders in the mix, the passing game will still be one of the best in the league. Sanders will surely have value in fantasy, but will likely be very inconsitent from week to week.

 

[cloppbeast]

While Big Ben is "famous" for extending the play by scrambling around, you do realize that Pittsburgh, under Haley, ran exactly the type of offense you are decribing as being perfect for Sanders the last two seasons, right? In fact I believe that Sanders complained that he was used more on short quick routes than he was going deep, which he is better suited for (in his mind at least).If I miss out on a big season from Sanders, so be it. It happens. I just can't get too excited, "knowing" that Manning isn't going to put up back to back record setting seasons at age 38/39 and with Sanders being, the third or fourth option in the passing game.

Denver spent a ton of money on their defense, and has stressed the importance of running the ball more this season. We just may not see the high flying offensive numbers of last season.

With that said, of course with manning, Thomas, Welker, Thomas and Sanders in the mix, the passing game will still be one of the best in the league. Sanders will surely have value in fantasy, but will likely be very inconsitent from week to week.

Don't confuse 'quick decision' with 'short passes'. Manning throws anticipation passes- whether deep, intermediate, or short. Ben waits to see his receiver open, even on his short passes. It's about the quarterback more than the offense.

Sanders will have much greater efficiency with Manning than Ben, I think we can agree. Denver may not pass the ball as much in 2014; I doubt Manning will match his 660 pass attempts from last season. But let's not exaggerate. They won't all of the sudden start running the Marty-ball offense.

In 2012 when Manning attempted a reasonable 580 passes, he targeted Decker 120 times. With greater efficiency than in Pittsburgh, Sanders would produce like solid WR2 on that quantity of targets. Even if he's not the red-zone threat that is Decker.

 

[bostonfred]

I just can't get too excited, "knowing" that Manning isn't going to put up back to back record setting seasons at age 38/39 and with Sanders being, the third or fourth option in the passing game.

Manning had more pass attempts last year than in 2012, but fewer than 2010 (he sat out 2011). If you project him to drop off to his "average" numbers, it will be about a 5 percent decline in pass attempts.Sanders had 20 percent fewer targets in 2013 than decker. While there's no guarantee sanders replaces deckers target numbers, its not hard to project sanders 2014 getting more targets than sanders 2013. Even with fewer total pass attempts.

It also seems reasonable to project sanders to be more productive per target with manning than with roethlisberger. So its reasonable to say that last year is likely sanders floor for this year, and that we should expect some improvement over last years numbers.

But even more so if you put stock in that quote about needing to get the ball to him quickly. Not only is manning a better qb than big ben, but the offense he ran last year was hugely dependent on quick, short passes to the open guy. The patriots wanted him and signed him to an rfa offer sheet last year, and that's their bread and butter, too. It sounds like a great fit for this offense. Which could mean a significant uptick in production. I don't think deckers numbers are a ceiling (although I would project him lower than that because I think decker is a better player).

 

[Dr. Octopus]

In 2012 when Manning attempted a reasonable 580 passes, he targeted Decker 120 times.

Was Welker on the team then?

Even if we give him 120 targets - He had 112 last year, thus the reason I'd be willing to use last year's numbers as a baseline for his projections. It's too early to put things together at this point, but my guess is 120 is probably too high for Sanders' targets as at best the third option - but likely the 4th option.

I'm not willing to agree that he'll be any more efficient with his targets in Denver than he was in Pittsburgh. I think you exagerate Big Ben's (lack of) ability to anticpate and throw a WR open. I think you are overblowing his reputation for extending the play - it's not like that's the scenario every time they drop back to pass. That Antonio Brown guy was pretty efficent last season afterall. We can agree to disagree there though.

 

[bostonfred]

In 2012 when Manning attempted a reasonable 580 passes, he targeted Decker 120 times.

Was Welker on the team then?

Decker had 137 targets last year.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

But even more so if you put stock in that quote about needing to get the ball to him quickly. Not only is manning a better qb than big ben, but the offense he ran last year was hugely dependent on quick, short passes to the open guy. The patriots wanted him and signed him to an rfa offer sheet last year, and that's their bread and butter, too. It sounds like a great fit for this offense.

Once again - an offense dependant on quick, short passes is exactly the offense that Pittsburgh ran under Todd Haley the last two seasons. In fact a big deal was made by Ben the first year under Haley because he preffered Arians' deep passing attack, but Ben bought into it last season and was very efficient running it. Look at what Anotnio Brown and even a "washed up" Jerricho Cotchery did last season.

Yes, Manning is surely better than Roethlisberger - but last year is a little too fresh in everyone's mind. Teams like San Diego and Seattle showed teams how they can disrupt the Denver offense with Manning no longer being able to throw deep consistently. I don't think Sanders is as good as Decker either and don't see him getting all of Decker's targets, as long as Welker stays healthier this season.