Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

ANARCHY LEAGUE 2


David Yudkin

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

TEs are 2 pts per reception not 5 right?

80 receptions = 160 points.

That's as much as a RB with 1300 yards, 5 TDs.

And that's before you count the TE's yardage and TDs.

Big TEs are huge in this format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TEs are 2 pts per reception not 5 right?

80 receptions = 160 points.

That's as much as a RB with 1300 yards, 5 TDs.

And that's before you count the TE's yardage and TDs.

Big TEs are huge in this format.

True, but I they're also deeper this year and Gates at 1.06 is a stretch in that case, IMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TEs are 2 pts per reception not 5 right?

80 receptions = 160 points.

That's as much as a RB with 1300 yards, 5 TDs.

And that's before you count the TE's yardage and TDs.

Big TEs are huge in this format.

True, but I they're also deeper this year and Gates at 1.06 is a stretch in that case, IMO.

Believe you me, I was having SERIOUS problems drafting Shockey at 1.12. I have this big hang up on drafting TEs too early. But in a league like this, where TE receptions are 2 points each, it was either him or Rudi Johnson. Doing some math, and looking over projections from various places, I thought Shockey might hold a bit more value in this type of league.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well gentlemen, unless some one knows OldMilwaukee I think we're done for the day.

He hasn't posted in this thread yet, so we may be in for a wait.

I don't think he's posted in a week.

I guess he must have talked to David in order to get in.

Maybe OldMilwaukee went fishing.

joffer u didn't get the memo on TE scoring? I mean those guys are going to catch like 30 more passes than the next tier of Tes right?

:pics:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well gentlemen, unless some one knows OldMilwaukee I think we're done for the day.

He hasn't posted in this thread yet, so we may be in for a wait.

I don't think he's posted in a week.

I guess he must have talked to David in order to get in.

Maybe OldMilwaukee went fishing.

joffer u didn't get the memo on TE scoring? I mean those guys are going to catch like 30 more passes than the next tier of Tes right?

:pics:

and 64 RBs are going to count every week
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and 64 RBs are going to count every week

That doesn't change the differentials. 32+ TEs are going to count every week. The #30 TE had 24 receptions for 229 yards and 2 TDs; he was outscored by 266 points by Antonio Gates; that's as many points as Edgerrin James scored in this format. You could get 20 points on the year from a backup running back who only plays in week 17, and with Gates you'd still be ahead of the guy who had Edgerrin James and Desmond Clark.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and 64 RBs are going to count every week

That doesn't change the differentials. 32+ TEs are going to count every week. The #30 TE had 24 receptions for 229 yards and 2 TDs; he was outscored by 266 points by Antonio Gates; that's as many points as Edgerrin James scored in this format. You could get 20 points on the year from a backup running back who only plays in week 17, and with Gates you'd still be ahead of the guy who had Edgerrin James and Desmond Clark.

there goes my whole strategy of drafting the 32nd ranked TE ;)

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey. they seemed early.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey. they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey.  they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Gates also outscored Tomlinson, so why'd you take LT2?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey. they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Gates also outscored Tomlinson, so why'd you take LT2?

I don't project Gates to repeat his 2005; in fact, I have Gonzalez and Shockey rated ahead of him. But if you project Gates to repeat his 2005, he absolutely deserves consideration in the top 3 in this format; he certainly performed at that level by VBD in 2005, with the only obvious outperformers being Steve Smith and Shaun Alexander. (Gates' precise VBD depends on how you set your baselines).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey. they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Did you notice the TE's on at least one of the teams that won last year Cal?. I am not sure exactly who they were both they were both terrible. I will check around and try and find but i would think it should put any of this thinking to rest.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey. they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Did you notice the TE's on at least one of the teams that won last year Cal?. I am not sure exactly who they were both they were both terrible. I will check around and try and find but i would think it should put any of this thinking to rest.

I don't know if you have standing to use the term "thinking."

Let us know how your stud QB strategy goes this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey.  they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Did you notice the TE's on at least one of the teams that won last year Cal?. I am not sure exactly who they were both they were both terrible. I will check around and try and find but i would think it should put any of this thinking to rest.

I don't know if you have standing to use the term "thinking."

Let us know how your stud QB strategy goes this year.

:own3d:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not as skeptical about the Gates pick as i am with Gonzo and Shockey.  they seemed early.

Shockey scored 274 points, Gonzo 258 in this format last year. Rudi Johnson, taken right after those two, scored 239.

For reference, the #64 RB scored 51, the #32 TE 76.

Gates also outscored Tomlinson, so why'd you take LT2?

I don't project Gates to repeat his 2005; in fact, I have Gonzalez and Shockey rated ahead of him. But if you project Gates to repeat his 2005, he absolutely deserves consideration in the top 3 in this format; he certainly performed at that level by VBD in 2005, with the only obvious outperformers being Steve Smith and Shaun Alexander. (Gates' precise VBD depends on how you set your baselines).

i think i feel more confident that i can find two TEs that will catch 45-50 passes in the mid rounds than trying to scrape the bottom of the barrel for RBs. it is interesting though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and 64 RBs are going to count every week

That doesn't change the differentials. 32+ TEs are going to count every week. The #30 TE had 24 receptions for 229 yards and 2 TDs; he was outscored by 266 points by Antonio Gates; that's as many points as Edgerrin James scored in this format. You could get 20 points on the year from a backup running back who only plays in week 17, and with Gates you'd still be ahead of the guy who had Edgerrin James and Desmond Clark.

This is all meaningless IMO and all TE picked this early are wasted picks and i dont care what the projected math says. All I needed to do was chckk last years winners..you tell me who won and lost by this

SCHOBEL,MATT CIN

TROUPE,BEN TEN won league

WIGGINS,JERMAINE MIN

VS

CLARK,DALLAS IND lost by almost 400

GATES,ANTONIO SD

one of these teams beat the other by 400 points in league one

now this one is really good

CAMPBELL,MARK BUF won league

CLARK,DESMOND

VS

JOHNSON,ERIC SF

MCMICHAEL,RANDY Lost by 400

WITTEN,JASON

and

GATES,ANTONIO SD Lost by 165

POLLARD,MARCUS

and

COOLEY,CHRIS WAS lost by 400

GONZALEZ,TONY

now you tell us now Cal about the numbers...there meaningless at ths time of year and seem even more useless in this format. These numbers are facts. Projecting last years numbers into this years projected numbers is impossible and not the way to go about drafting in this format IMO. Just by looking at these winning and losing TE's from last years teams. I mean it could not get anymore lopsided than these players who were on the winning and losing teams last year. Just has to mean take all the numbers out and toss them in this format and taking TE's early just might be a big waste of picks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now you tell us now Cal about the numbers...there meaningless at ths time of year and seem even more useless in this format. These numbers are facts. Projecting last years numbers into this years projected numbers is impossible and not the way to go about drafting in this format IMO. Just by looking at these winning and losing TE's from last years teams. I mean it could not get anymore lopsided than these players who were on the winning and losing teams last year. Just has to mean take all the numbers out and toss them in this format and taking TE's early just might be a big waste of picks?

For one thing, Wiggins and Troupe were TE11 and TE13, so that owner had above-average TEs. For another, you can't look at the results of two 16-team, 18-player leagues based on the performance of two players on each roster, and draw any meaningful conclusions from that "analysis." The concept you are missing (in this case) is "statistically insignificant."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought we were on an 8 hour window? Aren't we past that?

Timer IS NOT on (and won't be until NEXT week). The time per pick at that time will be a 4 hour window. I only started the draft early because some people wanted to get a jump on things.

FWIW David, Old Mil only has 1 post in any of the Anarchy threads and it was the one where he said he was in. I hope he figures out that the league has started by next Monday, but I'm sort of guessing he forgot he was in the league.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought we were on an 8 hour window?  Aren't we past that?

Timer IS NOT on (and won't be until NEXT week). The time per pick at that time will be a 4 hour window. I only started the draft early because some people wanted to get a jump on things.

FWIW David, Old Mil only has 1 post in any of the Anarchy threads and it was the one where he said he was in. I hope he figures out that the league has started by next Monday, but I'm sort of guessing he forgot he was in the league.

He emailed me with his info . . . I will email him and see what's up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought we were on an 8 hour window? Aren't we past that?

Timer IS NOT on (and won't be until NEXT week). The time per pick at that time will be a 4 hour window. I only started the draft early because some people wanted to get a jump on things.

FWIW David, Old Mil only has 1 post in any of the Anarchy threads and it was the one where he said he was in. I hope he figures out that the league has started by next Monday, but I'm sort of guessing he forgot he was in the league.

He emailed me with his info . . . I will email him and see what's up.

Ahh...OK. I just noticed that he hadn't posted in the Rules Discussion thread of this one.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI --

I got an email from Old Milwaukee's wife today:

"This is the wife of Old Milwaukee...

He is in Syracuse due to a sudden tragic death in the family. He is

returning home to Rochester Monday morning. I let him know it was his

"turn" but I don't know if he will be able to do anything about it today.

Sorry, I know this either holds everyone up, or I imagine, you might eliminate

him."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI --

I got an email from Old Milwaukee's wife today:

"This is the wife of Old Milwaukee...

He is in Syracuse due to a sudden tragic death in the family. He is

returning home to Rochester Monday morning. I let him know it was his

"turn" but I don't know if he will be able to do anything about it today.

Sorry, I know this either holds everyone up, or I imagine, you might eliminate

him."

We can wait. We're not even officially started yet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got here, give me a few and we will roll. Sorry for the tardiness, more info to come!

Sorry

Sorry to hear about that. No problem with the tardiness at all. I was just concerned you didn't know you were in the league. We had that happen in one of the WSLs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Old Milwaukee, sorry for airing your personal problems here by copying and pasting your wife's email as to why you haven't been able to keep up. But I felt everyone should know, and so we can cut you a LOT of slack. ;)

I hope everything works out for you and your family. As I told your wife, fantasy football should always be a very distant second (or twentieth for that matter) to your friends and family...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MAN was I fighting myself for my second pick. No top RBs left, as expected, so I was fighting over which RB to take at this point. I actually went with a guy I have ranked lower than others I was considering for a variety of reasons. Probably the key reason is that to win a league like this, with interesting scoring rules, sharks for owners, and a whopping 16 teams, I think you either have to get a) lucky on some players, b) do something a little different than the norm, or c) both A and B. So, in picking Shockey, I went against the norm. I look back at it now and kinda wish I had gone with Rudi Johnson instead, and prayed Shockey was still available to me in the 2nd round, but hey, you have to take risks to win!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...