Dynasty Rankings (7 Viewers)

thriftyrocker · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
thriftyrocker said:

EBF said:

Let's say you're sitting there with Shonn Greene at the bottom of a deep RB roster that includes 6 superior long term options. Meanwhile your starting WRs are Brian Finneran and Dwayne Jarrett. Someone offers you Michael Jenkins for Shonn Greene. Should you take this deal?

Click to expand...

There are better trade targets at WR for win-now owners than Michael Jenkins. No one has argued there is a better short term target at RB than Ricky. Just similar ones a notch or two lower.

Click to expand...

Not really the point. Ricky isn't a fair price for Shonn Greene just like Michael Jenkins isn't a fair price for Shonn Greene. Either pay less for Ricky or pay more for a more valuable option (Ray Rice, Chris Johnson, DeAngelo Williams, etc).

You should always find the best deal possible. Do you really think people are arguing against trying to get a better deal? If the deal on the table helps you and you can't get a better deal from this or any other owner, it is a price worth paying. There are few players at this time of year which are ripe for dealing. You have to trade future for now somehow. Certainly Rice is a better target than Ricky, but how do you expect to get him without hurting the other parts of your starting lineup? I think "pay more for Rice, etc." will likely leave your team decimated unless you've got an unusual roster full of untapped youth (and still managed to get in playoff position). Maybe you can swing D. Brown + Greene + Crabtree or Harvin for Rice, but even if you have that much youth, the Rice owner probably is in his own playoff push and will need Rice.I think "pay less for Ricky" is possible but a tough sell - either you're going to give up next year's 1st instead of Greene (which could get you Matthews or Gerhart) or you're going to ask for a project player or 2nd/3rd round pick from the Ricky end (which is not worth arguing over if it starts to lessen the chance of the deal going through).

Herm23 · Nov 23, 2009

SayWhat? said:
Herm23 said:

Why is it such a forgone conclusion that Ricky Williams will only contribute 5-6 more weeks of usefulness over his career? Sure, he may only be an RB1 over the remaining 5-6 weeks of this season, but I'm struggling to find what has everyone so sure he will be a complete waste of a roster space next year? While Ronnie Brown was still active and playing at the peak of his abilities this season, Ricky was at the very worst an every week flex play, and was actually much closer to a high end RB2 every week. Sure, he's 32, but he also plays in a VERY running back friendly offense, shares the load (or even more accurately, takes somewhat of a backseat) with an elite level running back in Ronnie Brown saving much wear and tear on his body, and appears to have his life straightened out and has repeatedly talked about how he wants to play football for quite some time yet. I think it is actually more likely that he performs as an RB1 down the stretch this season and then goes back to being a decent RB2 or Flex play for the bulk of next season, given everything he has working in his favor.

At the same time, Shonn Green is almost assuredly going to be stuck behind Thomas Jones on the depth chart again next year (and that doesn't even touch on Leon Washington's potential return). This likely means he again will see very sparse carries and won't have any value as a weekly play at all (not RB1, not RB2, not even Flex). So really, we aren't just talking about a 5-6 week rental when trading Ricky Williams for Shonn Green, you are realistically talking about a massive upgrade for the remaining 5-6 weeks this season plus a solid upgrade for a full season next year. With that in mind, I think this is a relative no brainer- if you are in the title hunt and feel another top level running back would put you over the edge, you make this deal every time. Sure, it would always be nice to pay the minimum possible to acquire talent, but if you can't get the owner to bite, Shonn Green is not an overly expensive price to pay. Shonn Greene has shown nothing to make anyone believe he is a transcendent talent (we haven't seen anything to really believe he is every down starter material yet, for that matter), nor is it even close to assured he will EVER be useful as a RB1, RB2, or Flex, this year, next year, or beyond. The value is about right- the equivalent of a 1.06 draft pick (in a relatively weak draft class) for a solid upgrade for 1 and 1/3 season.

Click to expand...

That's assuming that you're replacing Shonn Greene with Ricky Williams in your lineup, when in fact if you feel you're one piece away from a championship then it's probably not Shonn Greene who's production Ricky will supplant in your lineup. I think the odds are extremely remote that substituting Ricky over your worst current RB or Flex will make the difference in whether your walk away with a title this year. If you did deal Greene for Williams, then I'm assuming that your end result will many more times than not mirror what your result would've been without making a deal of this sort. You either win the title and would've without Ricky, or your lose it and would've without Ricky. Then following this season you're hoping that a 33 year-old Ricky can give you any sort of starter-worthy production next year. After that, it's a near certainty that a 34 year-old Ricky, or any RB for that matter, is going to give you nothing. So the price for the off chance that Ricky is your difference maker this year is pick 1.05-1.07 in a rookie draft? No thanks.

I am operating under the assumption that anyone looking to make a deal like this absolutely needs the help at either an RB1, RB2, or Flex spot. In that sense, I am assuming that Ricky Williams would be a very key addition and very much part of what could be a championship formula for a team. Obviously if a team already has solid running backs, they will have no need to go out and find one and this would all be a moot point anyway. Yes, I believe Ricky Williams has the potential to be a very substantial upgrade over an awful lot of other RB2 and Flex options out there, so much so that he CERTAINLY could shift the balance of power in fantasy football leagues for teams of need. If we operate under the assumption that teams interested in acquiring Ricky do in fact need him and that he would represent a decent/significant upgrade to their lineup (and really, we pretty much have to as this argument is utterly pointless otherwise), then to say that not trading for Ricky would produce the same result as trading for Ricky this season is quite ignorant.So in actuality, the price is 1.05-1.07 for the very strong chance that Ricky is a difference maker this year AND represents an upgrade to your roster for the entirety of next year. Like I said before, this seems very much like a no-brainer to me (again, assuming you are a team in need and not just looking to add depth). The general rule of thumb for dynasty leagues is to look no further than 3 years down the road and short term championship runs trump long term planning (in most cases). In this situation, not only would you get a decent boost to your title hopes this year, you would get an upgrade to your roster strength for the entirety of next season to boot.

As to the age argument, unlike Shonn Green, Ricky Williams is, in fact, a transcendent talent and has proven to be so every step of the way and at every level. While the accepted age for which running backs begin to slow is 29-30, it is commonly accepted that this can be delayed for the elite of the elite. I think people forget just how talented Ricky is/was because of the headcase issues (which he seems past at this point). While I wouldn't count on him for anything close to RB1 production next year, I don't think 850-1000 yards and 6-10 TD's are out of the question at all (as a matter of fact, that's pretty well in line with what I would expect out of him next year), which is solid for RB2/Flex play. Combine that with the fact that Shonn Green is most likely looking at a true backup role again next year and his projected statline is probably going to be much closer to something like 300-400 yards and 1-3 TD's (with no use in a lineup at all) and it becomes a very nice upgrade for any roster next season.

SayWhat? · Nov 23, 2009

one time said:
SayWhat? said:

Herm23 said:

Why is it such a forgone conclusion that Ricky Williams will only contribute 5-6 more weeks of usefulness over his career? Sure, he may only be an RB1 over the remaining 5-6 weeks of this season, but I'm struggling to find what has everyone so sure he will be a complete waste of a roster space next year? While Ronnie Brown was still active and playing at the peak of his abilities this season, Ricky was at the very worst an every week flex play, and was actually much closer to a high end RB2 every week. Sure, he's 32, but he also plays in a VERY running back friendly offense, shares the load (or even more accurately, takes somewhat of a backseat) with an elite level running back in Ronnie Brown saving much wear and tear on his body, and appears to have his life straightened out and has repeatedly talked about how he wants to play football for quite some time yet. I think it is actually more likely that he performs as an RB1 down the stretch this season and then goes back to being a decent RB2 or Flex play for the bulk of next season, given everything he has working in his favor.

At the same time, Shonn Green is almost assuredly going to be stuck behind Thomas Jones on the depth chart again next year (and that doesn't even touch on Leon Washington's potential return). This likely means he again will see very sparse carries and won't have any value as a weekly play at all (not RB1, not RB2, not even Flex). So really, we aren't just talking about a 5-6 week rental when trading Ricky Williams for Shonn Green, you are realistically talking about a massive upgrade for the remaining 5-6 weeks this season plus a solid upgrade for a full season next year. With that in mind, I think this is a relative no brainer- if you are in the title hunt and feel another top level running back would put you over the edge, you make this deal every time. Sure, it would always be nice to pay the minimum possible to acquire talent, but if you can't get the owner to bite, Shonn Green is not an overly expensive price to pay. Shonn Greene has shown nothing to make anyone believe he is a transcendent talent (we haven't seen anything to really believe he is every down starter material yet, for that matter), nor is it even close to assured he will EVER be useful as a RB1, RB2, or Flex, this year, next year, or beyond. The value is about right- the equivalent of a 1.06 draft pick (in a relatively weak draft class) for a solid upgrade for 1 and 1/3 season.

Click to expand...

That's assuming that you're replacing Shonn Greene with Ricky Williams in your lineup, when in fact if you feel you're one piece away from a championship then it's probably not Shonn Greene who's production Ricky will supplant in your lineup. I think the odds are extremely remote that substituting Ricky over your worst current RB or Flex will make the difference in whether your walk away with a title this year. If you did deal Greene for Williams, then I'm assuming that your end result will many more times than not mirror what your result would've been without making a deal of this sort. You either win the title and would've without Ricky, or your lose it and would've without Ricky. Then following this season you're hoping that a 33 year-old Ricky can give you any sort of starter-worthy production next year. After that, it's a near certainty that a 34 year-old Ricky, or any RB for that matter, is going to give you nothing. So the price for the off chance that Ricky is your difference maker this year is pick 1.05-1.07 in a rookie draft? No thanks.

Click to expand...

So you would never EVER trade JaMarcus Russell, Anthony Gonzalez, Robert Meachem, Laurence Maroney, Matt Leinert, Vince Young, Eric Shelton, Braylon Edwards, Mike Williams, Julius Jones, Reggie Williams, Kellen Winslow, Carson Palmer, Willis McGahee, or Byron Leftwich if you had a crummy RB #2 and had a good shot at the title? Rookie picks, if not top 3, are VERY over-valued. The best time to trade them is while people still have last years amazing class in mind.

It's my belief that the end result of whether or not I'm going to win a title this will be the same ~90%+ of the time whether or not I acquired Ricky Williams. So no, then I would never EVER trade a RB prospect that I was high enough on to take at the 1.06 spot of the draft just a few months prior for the 10% chance that Ricky makes a difference this year. And I think that's what you'll find far more often than not, that whether or not you have Ricky Williams over ________ (name your marginal starter here) during your fantasy playoffs this season will not have mattered come seasons end. Either you win it and would've won it without him, or lose it and would've lost without him. If you think that Greene doesn't have a decent chance to be fantasy relevant, then sure, by all means make the trade. And that almost certainly has to be the assumption you have if you would deal a Shonn Greene for Ricky Williams.

SayWhat? · Nov 23, 2009

Herm23 said:
I am operating under the assumption that anyone looking to make a deal like this absolutely needs the help at either an RB1, RB2, or Flex spot. In that sense, I am assuming that Ricky Williams would be a very key addition and very much part of what could be a championship formula for a team. Obviously if a team already has solid running backs, they will have no need to go out and find one and this would all be a moot point anyway. Yes, I believe Ricky Williams has the potential to be a very substantial upgrade over an awful lot of other RB2 and Flex options out there, so much so that he CERTAINLY could shift the balance of power in fantasy football leagues for teams of need. If we operate under the assumption that teams interested in acquiring Ricky do in fact need him and that he would represent a decent/significant upgrade to their lineup (and really, we pretty much have to as this argument is utterly pointless otherwise), then to say that not trading for Ricky would produce the same result as trading for Ricky this season is quite ignorant.

So in actuality, the price is 1.05-1.07 for the very strong chance that Ricky is a difference maker this year AND represents an upgrade to your roster for the entirety of next year. Like I said before, this seems very much like a no-brainer to me (again, assuming you are a team in need and not just looking to add depth). The general rule of thumb for dynasty leagues is to look no further than 3 years down the road and short term championship runs trump long term planning (in most cases). In this situation, not only would you get a decent boost to your title hopes this year, you would get an upgrade to your roster strength for the entirety of next season to boot.

As to the age argument, unlike Shonn Green, Ricky Williams is, in fact, a transcendent talent and has proven to be so every step of the way and at every level. While the accepted age for which running backs begin to slow is 29-30, it is commonly accepted that this can be delayed for the elite of the elite. I think people forget just how talented Ricky is/was because of the headcase issues (which he seems past at this point). While I wouldn't count on him for anything close to RB1 production next year, I don't think 850-1000 yards and 6-10 TD's are out of the question at all (as a matter of fact, that's pretty well in line with what I would expect out of him next year), which is solid for RB2/Flex play. Combine that with the fact that Shonn Green is most likely looking at a true backup role again next year and his projected statline is probably going to be much closer to something like 300-400 yards and 1-3 TD's (with no use in a lineup at all) and it becomes a very nice upgrade for any roster next season.

Ignorant? How so? Let's think about this for a second. Lets say that your RB2 from a production standpoint is Reggie Bush and that his usage/production will remain constant through year-end. He's currently the 29th highest scoring RB in my non-ppr league with an average of 8.4ppg. Ricky Williams is #11, with an average of 14ppg. With Ronnie out, lets assume that Ricky's production moves in line with Adrian Peterson, averaging 18.0ppg. (As an aside, I'm of the opinion that Ricky produces marginally better than his current 14ppg, but not in line with the top studs.) Disregarding injury potential, because we could pick any low RB2 or high RB3, how often is that this assumed 6-11ppg increase is going to make a difference in whether or not you win a title? For that "upgrade" to have made a difference with Ricky over Bush in your lineup you would've had to have lost your playoff game or games by between 6-11 points, on average. I just checked my two weakest teams (playoff teams both with records of 6-4, solid but not stacked) where this sort of upgrade would make me quite happy. I've lost 3 out of those 20 games by between 0-11 points on the year, in leagues with starting lineups of 10. That's 15% of the games where an upgrade of that magnitude would've actually affected the outcome of my game by giving me a win when instead I lost.

Obviously results like this would vary team by team and are somewhat situationally dependent, but I'll stand by my assumption that FAR more time than not replacing _________ (name your weak starter) with Ricky won't ultimately affect the outcome of whether or not you walk away with a title this year. And the bottom line is that that is why you would ever consider making a deal of this type. Not because you're assuming Ricky will give you "850-1000 yards and 6-10 TD's" next year and be a marginal flex starter.

Anyways, this debate has gotten enough attention that it probably deserves it's own thread as a case study since it's starting to clutter by far the best thread on this board.

EBF · Nov 23, 2009

Herm23 said:
So really, we aren't just talking about a 5-6 week rental when trading Ricky Williams for Shonn Green, you are realistically talking about a massive upgrade for the remaining 5-6 weeks this season plus a solid upgrade for a full season next year.

So many assumptions in this post. I think my head is going to explode. 1. We don't know what Shonn Greene will do next season. It would be a terrible mistake to assume that he won't be productive. Could he be stuck behind Thomas Jones? Sure. Are there any number of scenarios where he could leapfrog Jones and produces top 15 numbers? Sure. There are many potential outcomes here. Look at LeSean McCoy, Ray Rice, and Rashard Mendenhall. None of them were obvious starters six months ago. Guess what? Things move quickly in the NFL. Use your imagination. Thomas Jones is old. He could get hurt. He could lose a step. He could be cut or traded. Either way, we can't presume to know what Shonn Greene's role will be next season. There's a significant non-zero probability that he will be very productive (that's not to mention 2011 and beyond). 2. We don't know what Ricky will do next season. He'll be 33 years old. Do you know how many productive 33 year old RBs there are in the NFL right now? Hint: zero. He's older than dirt and there's a significant chance that he'll be splitting carries next season. I don't think we can assume that he'll be anything more than a bye week filler beyond this year. Could he be more than that? Sure. Could he be less? Sure. He could be Fred Taylor or Shaun Alexander in the blink of an eye.Bottom line in this whole conversation is that it's all about probabilities. I've done the math when it comes to draft picks. Third round RBs become productive starters about 30-35% of the time. There have been some great gems in that bunch (Ahman Green, Brian Westbrook, Frank Gore). Would you rather have a 30-35% chance at a guy who could produce RB1 numbers for 1-5 seasons or a 90% chance at a guy who could produce RB1 numbers for 5 weeks? To me the expected value of the generic third round RB prospect far exceeds the expected value of the 32 year old rental RB. It's not very close.

Herm23 · Nov 23, 2009

SayWhat? said:
one time said:

SayWhat? said:

Herm23 said:

Why is it such a forgone conclusion that Ricky Williams will only contribute 5-6 more weeks of usefulness over his career? Sure, he may only be an RB1 over the remaining 5-6 weeks of this season, but I'm struggling to find what has everyone so sure he will be a complete waste of a roster space next year? While Ronnie Brown was still active and playing at the peak of his abilities this season, Ricky was at the very worst an every week flex play, and was actually much closer to a high end RB2 every week. Sure, he's 32, but he also plays in a VERY running back friendly offense, shares the load (or even more accurately, takes somewhat of a backseat) with an elite level running back in Ronnie Brown saving much wear and tear on his body, and appears to have his life straightened out and has repeatedly talked about how he wants to play football for quite some time yet. I think it is actually more likely that he performs as an RB1 down the stretch this season and then goes back to being a decent RB2 or Flex play for the bulk of next season, given everything he has working in his favor.

At the same time, Shonn Green is almost assuredly going to be stuck behind Thomas Jones on the depth chart again next year (and that doesn't even touch on Leon Washington's potential return). This likely means he again will see very sparse carries and won't have any value as a weekly play at all (not RB1, not RB2, not even Flex). So really, we aren't just talking about a 5-6 week rental when trading Ricky Williams for Shonn Green, you are realistically talking about a massive upgrade for the remaining 5-6 weeks this season plus a solid upgrade for a full season next year. With that in mind, I think this is a relative no brainer- if you are in the title hunt and feel another top level running back would put you over the edge, you make this deal every time. Sure, it would always be nice to pay the minimum possible to acquire talent, but if you can't get the owner to bite, Shonn Green is not an overly expensive price to pay. Shonn Greene has shown nothing to make anyone believe he is a transcendent talent (we haven't seen anything to really believe he is every down starter material yet, for that matter), nor is it even close to assured he will EVER be useful as a RB1, RB2, or Flex, this year, next year, or beyond. The value is about right- the equivalent of a 1.06 draft pick (in a relatively weak draft class) for a solid upgrade for 1 and 1/3 season.

Click to expand...

That's assuming that you're replacing Shonn Greene with Ricky Williams in your lineup, when in fact if you feel you're one piece away from a championship then it's probably not Shonn Greene who's production Ricky will supplant in your lineup. I think the odds are extremely remote that substituting Ricky over your worst current RB or Flex will make the difference in whether your walk away with a title this year. If you did deal Greene for Williams, then I'm assuming that your end result will many more times than not mirror what your result would've been without making a deal of this sort. You either win the title and would've without Ricky, or your lose it and would've without Ricky. Then following this season you're hoping that a 33 year-old Ricky can give you any sort of starter-worthy production next year. After that, it's a near certainty that a 34 year-old Ricky, or any RB for that matter, is going to give you nothing. So the price for the off chance that Ricky is your difference maker this year is pick 1.05-1.07 in a rookie draft? No thanks.

Click to expand...

So you would never EVER trade JaMarcus Russell, Anthony Gonzalez, Robert Meachem, Laurence Maroney, Matt Leinert, Vince Young, Eric Shelton, Braylon Edwards, Mike Williams, Julius Jones, Reggie Williams, Kellen Winslow, Carson Palmer, Willis McGahee, or Byron Leftwich if you had a crummy RB #2 and had a good shot at the title? Rookie picks, if not top 3, are VERY over-valued. The best time to trade them is while people still have last years amazing class in mind.

Click to expand...

It's my belief that the end result of whether or not I'm going to win a title this will be the same ~90%+ of the time whether or not I acquired Ricky Williams. So no, then I would never EVER trade a RB prospect that I was high enough on to take at the 1.06 spot of the draft just a few months prior for the 10% chance that Ricky makes a difference this year. And I think that's what you'll find far more often than not, that whether or not you have Ricky Williams over ________ (name your marginal starter here) during your fantasy playoffs this season will not have mattered come seasons end. Either you win it and would've won it without him, or lose it and would've lost without him. If you think that Greene doesn't have a decent chance to be fantasy relevant, then sure, by all means make the trade. And that almost certainly has to be the assumption you have if you would deal a Shonn Greene for Ricky Williams.

I will continue to say you are foolish and stubborn to say that Ricky Williams will not change the title chances of a fantasy team. There aren't a lot of players available that are capable of 100+ yard, multiple TD games on any given Sunday at this point without paying a kings ransom. Players who have very high floors AND very high ceilings from week to week are the exact type of player that win you playoff games- you need guys that you know won't lay an egg on any given week AND have a good chance to explode. Ricky Williams fits that category almost exactly for the remainder of this season and it is almost a certainty that anyone who tries to acquire him would be doing so because they currently are forced to play a player that does not. By definition, acquiring Ricky would then present a substantial upgrade to that teams roster for the playoffs and would very much increase their opportunity to win a championship.I also think the part in bold is a very dangerous way to think about dynasty leagues and can lead you to routinely be a "paper champ" year in and year out without any actual championship banners to your name. You do NOT need to think that Shonn Green will be a complete bust for this trade to make sense and benefit you. Even if you KNEW Shonn Green was going to be a productive NFL starter 2-3 years from now (which is very much up for debate and an entirely separate argument), it would still make sense to trade his production that is still 2-3 years away to gain Ricky Williams production now and for next year. The now of Ricky Williams production gives you an increased opportunity to win a championship (and winning championships is the whole point of this fantasy football thing, afterall), while the next year of Williams production gives you a full season to find a way to replace Shonn Green (which any astute fantasy owner is capable of).

SayWhat? · Nov 23, 2009

Herm23 said:
I will continue to say you are foolish and stubborn to say that Ricky Williams will not change the title chances of a fantasy team.

Wow. I've never once stated that Ricky Williams will not change the title chances of a fantasy team. Obviously substituting Ricky in your lineup over a marginal starter (read: Bush from my post above) will give you a better chance on average in any given week considering he's bound to be more productive on average than Bush is. What I'm trying to say, that you're obviously not getting, is that the odds of Ricky in your lineup over a player like Bush actually affecting whether or not your win a title aren't significantly enough in your favor to be worth giving up a solid RB prospect in a great situation like Shonn Greene. You can talk about Ricky's value for 2010 all you want and make whatever assumptions you want, but the bottom line is that you're risking a top 20-25 dynasty RB for a one month rental of Ricky Williams. If you want to talk foolish, that may be the definition.

Herm23 · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Herm23 said:

So really, we aren't just talking about a 5-6 week rental when trading Ricky Williams for Shonn Green, you are realistically talking about a massive upgrade for the remaining 5-6 weeks this season plus a solid upgrade for a full season next year.

Click to expand...

So many assumptions in this post. I think my head is going to explode. 1. We don't know what Shonn Greene will do next season. It would be a terrible mistake to assume that he won't be productive. Could he be stuck behind Thomas Jones? Sure. Are there any number of scenarios where he could leapfrog Jones and produces top 15 numbers? Sure. There are many potential outcomes here. Look at LeSean McCoy, Ray Rice, and Rashard Mendenhall. None of them were obvious starters six months ago. Guess what? Things move quickly in the NFL. Use your imagination. Thomas Jones is old. He could get hurt. He could lose a step. He could be cut or traded. Either way, we can't presume to know what Shonn Greene's role will be next season. There's a significant non-zero probability that he will be very productive (that's not to mention 2011 and beyond). 2. We don't know what Ricky will do next season. He'll be 33 years old. Do you know how many productive 33 year old RBs there are in the NFL right now? Hint: zero. He's older than dirt and there's a significant chance that he'll be splitting carries next season. I don't think we can assume that he'll be anything more than a bye week filler beyond this year. Could he be more than that? Sure. Could he be less? Sure. He could be Fred Taylor or Shaun Alexander in the blink of an eye.

You are correct that there are a lot of assumptions, but then again, any fantasy move worth anything HAS to be based on assumptions. Once you wait to see how things play out, you will be too late and the deal will be off the table. Disregarding any part of this argument, either for or against trading for Ricky, simply because it requires assumptions would be unwise.As to your point #1- no, we don't know what Shonn Green will do next season. However, given all the talk about bringing back Thomas Jones AND the fact that Leon Washington is still a presence and may factor in means that the odds favor Shonn Green taking a backseat yet again. Could that change? Absolutely, but the at this point, the odds are stacked against Green being a starting level running back as early as 2010. I have a list of running backs for you as well- Jerious Norwood, Donald Brown, Kevin Jones, Jonathan Stewart, Marshawn Lynch, Cedric Benson (pre Bengals), and a list a mile long that I wont get into. Do you know what all of them have in common? They were players that were expected to step into starting roles and be productive, and for whatever reason it just didn't materialize (or in Donald Brown's case, it isn't happening nearly as fast as expected). For every Mendenhall or Ray Rice you can give me, I can list 10 players who had the opposite happen. Is making a deal like this an exact science? Certainly not. However, risking waiting on a players production to materialize 1, 2, or 3 years down the road (when all historical evidence suggests that he is more likely to flop when he doesn't have top pedigree or measurables) at the expense of improving title chances in the current season and the immediate following season is a low odds proposition to me.In regards to your point #2- age is a concern with Ricky, for sure- he will be 33 next season. However, as I already stated, Ricky is a transcendent talent and is certainly not your average back. For all Shaun Alexander's gaudy stats, I believe Ricky Williams has always been a more talented and dynamic runner, and he has certainly proven to be more durable than Fred Taylor. While there may not be any 33+ running backs playing now, that is more a product of not having any transcendent talents currently in the 33-35 year old range. History suggests that players of elite level ARE capable of producing nicely at the age of 33- Emmit Smith, Walter Payton, Erik Dickerson, Tony Dorsett, and others all produced at levels of 800+ yards and 4+ TD's at the age of 32 or older. Is Ricky quite in that class? Probably not, although tough to tell given the lack of fluidity of his playing career (his pedigree, measurables, and stats in seasons he did play suggest he may have been had his career not been interrupted). However, lesser players such as Thomas Jones, Fred Taylor, Jerome Bettis and a long list of others all have also produced at 800+ yards and 4+ TD levels past the age of 31 or 32. Given the lack of abuse on Ricky's body due to his weed imposed exile plus the very running back friendly and stat boosting Wildcat offense, I see 800'ish yards and 6-8 TD's as a very reasonable, attainable, and even realistic expectation. Do you logically see Shonn Green coming even CLOSE to those numbers next year? I certainly don't, barring an unexpected injury which is too fluky to even bother predicting.

EBF · Nov 23, 2009

Herm23 said:
Given the lack of abuse on Ricky's body due to his weed imposed exile, I see 800'ish yards and 6-8 TD's as a very reasonable, attainable, and even realistic expectation. Do you logically see Shonn Green coming even CLOSE to those numbers next year? I certainly don't, barring an unexpected injury which is too fluky to even bother predicting.

800 yards and 4 TDs isn't going to help you win your league or even make the playoffs. So if that's Ricky's upside for next season (probably) splitting time with Ronnie as a 33 year old RB then I think you're almost arguing that Ricky will be functionally worthless next season. I tend to agree.Will Greene outproduce him? Maybe. Maybe not. Doesn't really matter because he'll have more trade value a month from now, a year from now, and indefinitely once the next 5 games are over. You will be laughed out of the building if you try to trade Ricky Williams for Shonn Greene in the offseason. No one is adding anything new to this debate. Some people think it's a good idea to trade a high tier prospect for a 5 week rental. I'm not one of those people. I've been playing dynasty long enough to know that moves like this are massive value dumps. There's not much anyone can say to change my mind. I've seen it. I've done it. I know it doesn't work.

one time · Nov 23, 2009

one time said:
EBF said:

benm3218 said:

I understand this argument. But, I think that if you feel that Ricky puts you over the top and wins you the league you do the deal. It may be a long term deal that isn't in your favor, but FFB changes so much from year to year that a win this year would make up for it to me.This is of course only if you think that Ricky GIVES you a championship this year. F&L is endorsing Ricky as that kind of a RB1 difference maker this year. (or thats how I read it) So, if I was close to a championship, I'd trade Greene and his future for my win now. But, that is just me. (I'd do it quick too)

Click to expand...

Many an owner has used this reasoning when reaching for a clearly-declining Marshall Faulk, Priest Holmes, Tiki Barber, or LaDainian Tomlinson in the early rounds of a dynasty startup when young nucleus players are still available. "Yeah I know he's 400 years old and he's probably only going to play for 3 more weeks before his skeleton turns to dust, but...I could win the title this year!" It could work out. Just saying...I've been playing dynasty for about 6-7 years now and I've seen many deals of this variety take place (even made a few myself). What usually happens is the big acquisition doesn't make the impact his owner anticipated and the owner eventually regrets sacrificing long term value for a stop-gap solution. You can call it a "win now" move. I like my new term "lose later." I think the overall value equation favors the prospect side of the deal by a wide margin. Trust me, you don't want to be the guy who gives up Frank Gore or Ray Rice for a 32 year old RB. Is there a best-case scenario that favors the Ricky side of the deal? Sure. Ricky could win you the title this year and Greene could flop miserably ala Musa Smith. Not far-fetched.

Click to expand...

EBF, the main problem I see here is that 1)Faulk/Holes/Barber/LT a year or two before their demise cost either a 1st or 2nd round pick in a start up league. In this instant, they are meant to be your nucleus. If you are trading Greene for RW, you are trading a spare part with potential. You only do this if you are on the cusp and really need something to put you over. No one is advocating trading a Chris Johnson for LT at the beginning of this year because you think LT will give you a good shot at the title this year. We are saying trade away a mid-late 1st round pick if you need a push at RB.2) You talk about giving up Frank Gore or Ray Rice for RW but that is using the one or two instances where this trade could backfire where and there is a much better chance that a mid-late 1st round pick busts than becomes a top 5 RB. I really think last years amazing crop of Rookie RBs is really making some biased opinions. I went back the past few years in my Dynasty league and these were all the 1.4-1.10 draft picks Brandon Jackson, JaMarcus Russell, Anthony Gonzalez, Robert Meachem, Michael Bush, Kenny Irons, Tedi Ginn|||LenDale White, Laurence Maroney, Matt Leinert, Vince Young, Vernon Davis, Jerious Norwood, Chad Jackson|||Cedric Benson, Eric Shelton, Braylon Edwards, Mike Williams, Troy Williamson, Mark Clayton, Ryan Moats.||| Fitzgerald, Julius Jones, Reggie Williams, Kellen Winslow, Eli Manning, Tatum Bell, Michael Clayton||| Justin Fargas, Carson Palmer, Willis McGahee, Byron Leftwich, Andre Johnson, Larry Johnson, Labrandon Toefield.The only people I would not trade for RW right now (not even accounting for the fact that some of these rookies you had to wait 1-2 years on before they showed up) would be Vernon Davis, Cedric Benson, Braylon Edwards, Fitzgerald, Kellen Winslow, Eli Manning, Palmer, Andre Johnson, (Larry johnson recently lost value but had a really good few year span). 9/40 picks wound up being nearly worthless. Notice that there is only 1-2 RB in 14 total picked that I would not trade a championship for. Benson you would have dropped when he was out of the league and Johnson is worthless now.WRs have a MUCH better hit rate than RBs at that point in the draft.

Agreed about drafts being a crap shoot for my previous explanation given here...

belljr · Nov 23, 2009

Is Jason Avant worth rostering? I don't think he'll ever be a #1 or #2 but a low end #3 at some point. Or is just the situation he is in?

EBF · Nov 23, 2009

Herm23 said:
Even if you KNEW Shonn Green was going to be a productive NFL starter 2-3 years from now (which is very much up for debate and an entirely separate argument), it would still make sense to trade his production that is still 2-3 years away to gain Ricky Williams production now and for next year.

I couldn't disagree with this line of thinking more. How does it make sense to trade away years of production for weeks of production? How is that going to help your dynasty team 2-3 years from now when Shonn Greene could be in your starting lineup if you hadn't spazzed out and traded him for 5 weeks of 32 year old Ricky Williams?What amazes me about some of these dynasty discussions is the almost complete disregard for the future. Guess what? If your league is remotely stable then you're going to have a team next year. And the next year. And the next year. And in all of those seasons you're going to want to win the league. And in all of those seasons you're going to need good players to win the league. Yet somehow people continually suggest that it's correct to dump long term value for a short term bump.Like I said, I've seen it. I've done it. It doesn't work.

Herm23 · Nov 23, 2009

SayWhat? said:
Herm23 said:

I will continue to say you are foolish and stubborn to say that Ricky Williams will not change the title chances of a fantasy team.

Click to expand...

Wow. I've never once stated that Ricky Williams will not change the title chances of a fantasy team. Obviously substituting Ricky in your lineup over a marginal starter (read: Bush from my post above) will give you a better chance on average in any given week considering he's bound to be more productive on average than Bush is. What I'm trying to say, that you're obviously not getting, is that the odds of Ricky in your lineup over a player like Bush actually affecting whether or not your win a title aren't significantly enough in your favor to be worth giving up a solid RB prospect in a great situation like Shonn Greene. You can talk about Ricky's value for 2010 all you want and make whatever assumptions you want, but the bottom line is that you're risking a top 20-25 dynasty RB for a one month rental of Ricky Williams. If you want to talk foolish, that may be the definition.

And I see it much more as a "rental" for the last third of this season plus all of next season (with next season being an important part of the puzzle). Add that to the fact that, in your own words, Ricky increases your chances to win in any given week, and like I said, this is an easy decision for teams in need. Let's also not make the mistake of anointing Shonn Greene as a top 20-25 dynasty RB...that is not at all what you are risking. What is actually being risked is the POTENTIAL that Shonn Greene will be a top 20-25 RB, which is a very crucial distinction to make. In a game such as fantasy football where luck plays such a big factor, all you can do is maximize your chances to succeed week in and week out. If you are a contending team in need of an RB2 or Flex player for the remainder of this season, acquiring Ricky Williams very much does that, and in this particular example would only cost you the minimal cost of the POTENTIAL for Shonn Green to overcome the MANY obstacles in his way (2 running backs to compete with, no 1st round pedigree, no real outstanding measurables, etc...). Does having Ricky over Reggie Bush ensure you will win the title? No, in fantasy football nothing is a sure thing. However, it damn sure greatly increases your chances for a relatively small cost. The icing on the cake is that you would still have Ricky Williams to use next year while you replace that POTENTIAL in the form of another RB you draft or trade for.At this point we are rehashing arguments and going around in circles, so unless there is new information to provide or another angle of this that hasn't been considered (I only jumped in because nobody was talking about Ricky's potential value NEXT year compared to Shonn Greene, which I do feel is an important part of the argument), perhaps we should agree to disagree.

corpcow · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
benm3218 said:

I understand this argument. But, I think that if you feel that Ricky puts you over the top and wins you the league you do the deal. It may be a long term deal that isn't in your favor, but FFB changes so much from year to year that a win this year would make up for it to me.This is of course only if you think that Ricky GIVES you a championship this year. F&L is endorsing Ricky as that kind of a RB1 difference maker this year. (or thats how I read it) So, if I was close to a championship, I'd trade Greene and his future for my win now. But, that is just me. (I'd do it quick too)

Click to expand...

Many an owner has used this reasoning when reaching for a clearly-declining Marshall Faulk, Priest Holmes, Tiki Barber, or LaDainian Tomlinson in the early rounds of a dynasty startup when young nucleus players are still available. "Yeah I know he's 400 years old and he's probably only going to play for 3 more weeks before his skeleton turns to dust, but...I could win the title this year!" It could work out. Just saying...I've been playing dynasty for about 6-7 years now and I've seen many deals of this variety take place (even made a few myself). What usually happens is the big acquisition doesn't make the impact his owner anticipated and the owner eventually regrets sacrificing long term value for a stop-gap solution. You can call it a "win now" move. I like my new term "lose later." I think the overall value equation favors the prospect side of the deal by a wide margin. Trust me, you don't want to be the guy who gives up Frank Gore or Ray Rice for a 32 year old RB. Is there a best-case scenario that favors the Ricky side of the deal? Sure. Ricky could win you the title this year and Greene could flop miserably ala Musa Smith. Not far-fetched.

Let's be fair here - Ricky isn't "clearly declining" - if anything, I think he's looked almost as good as he did when he was in his prime. Yes, he's 32, but he also hasn't carried a full load since 2003, so he's relatively fresher than an equivalent 32 yr old RB.

corpcow · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Herm23 said:

Even if you KNEW Shonn Green was going to be a productive NFL starter 2-3 years from now (which is very much up for debate and an entirely separate argument), it would still make sense to trade his production that is still 2-3 years away to gain Ricky Williams production now and for next year.

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree with this line of thinking more. How does it make sense to trade away years of production for weeks of production? How is that going to help your dynasty team 2-3 years from now when Shonn Greene could be in your starting lineup if you hadn't spazzed out and traded him for 5 weeks of 32 year old Ricky Williams?What amazes me about some of these dynasty discussions is the almost complete disregard for the future. Guess what? If your league is remotely stable then you're going to have a team next year. And the next year. And the next year. And in all of those seasons you're going to want to win the league. And in all of those seasons you're going to need good players to win the league. Yet somehow people continually suggest that it's correct to dump long term value for a short term bump.Like I said, I've seen it. I've done it. It doesn't work.

I am guilty of overvaluing youth to a fault, but I'll say it again - you can't just dismiss the rest of his roster. I think Brown, Williams and Moreno are all much better prospects than Green. In this case, he's NOT mortgaging his future, he's just cashing in one of his future insurance policies for cash today to help him buy th ehouse.

Fear & Loathing · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
The point of this tangent is that overall value considerations (rather than short term need) should drive most of your personnel decisions in dynasty leagues. Let's say you're sitting there with Shonn Greene at the bottom of a deep RB roster that includes 6 superior long term options. Meanwhile your starting WRs are Brian Finneran and Dwayne Jarrett. Someone offers you Michael Jenkins for Shonn Greene. Should you take this deal? I would say no. Jenkins upgrades your starting lineup and increases your chances of winning the league, but Greene for Jenkins is a massive value dump. You could get a better value for Greene at some point now or in the future. Roster composition should certainly be a consideration in your decision making process because it partially determines a player's practical value, but overall value should still be the driving factor. He who compiles the most overall value on his dynasty roster wins because he can readily convert that overall value into practical value.

Fear & Loathing · Nov 23, 2009

corpcow said:
EBF said:

benm3218 said:

I understand this argument. But, I think that if you feel that Ricky puts you over the top and wins you the league you do the deal. It may be a long term deal that isn't in your favor, but FFB changes so much from year to year that a win this year would make up for it to me.This is of course only if you think that Ricky GIVES you a championship this year. F&L is endorsing Ricky as that kind of a RB1 difference maker this year. (or thats how I read it) So, if I was close to a championship, I'd trade Greene and his future for my win now. But, that is just me. (I'd do it quick too)

Click to expand...

Many an owner has used this reasoning when reaching for a clearly-declining Marshall Faulk, Priest Holmes, Tiki Barber, or LaDainian Tomlinson in the early rounds of a dynasty startup when young nucleus players are still available. "Yeah I know he's 400 years old and he's probably only going to play for 3 more weeks before his skeleton turns to dust, but...I could win the title this year!" It could work out. Just saying...I've been playing dynasty for about 6-7 years now and I've seen many deals of this variety take place (even made a few myself). What usually happens is the big acquisition doesn't make the impact his owner anticipated and the owner eventually regrets sacrificing long term value for a stop-gap solution. You can call it a "win now" move. I like my new term "lose later." I think the overall value equation favors the prospect side of the deal by a wide margin. Trust me, you don't want to be the guy who gives up Frank Gore or Ray Rice for a 32 year old RB. Is there a best-case scenario that favors the Ricky side of the deal? Sure. Ricky could win you the title this year and Greene could flop miserably ala Musa Smith. Not far-fetched.

Click to expand...

Let's be fair here - Ricky isn't "clearly declining" - if anything, I think he's looked almost as good as he did when he was in his prime. Yes, he's 32, but he also hasn't carried a full load since 2003, so he's relatively fresher than an equivalent 32 yr old RB.

Right. Clearly declining?As a part-time player through nine weeks, Ricky is on pace for 1,422 total yards and 16 TDs this season. He's averaging a gaudy 5.3 YPC and 10.6 yards per reception. He's also among Football Outsiders' and Profootballfocus.com's leaders as the most effective per-touch backs in the league. Again, nobody is saying to overvalue aging RBs in a startup draft. Nobody is saying you should make a habit of approaching trades without regard to age. What they're saying is they prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible. Me, I like the championship banners.

Herm23 · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Herm23 said:

Even if you KNEW Shonn Green was going to be a productive NFL starter 2-3 years from now (which is very much up for debate and an entirely separate argument), it would still make sense to trade his production that is still 2-3 years away to gain Ricky Williams production now and for next year.

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree with this line of thinking more. How does it make sense to trade away years of production for weeks of production? How is that going to help your dynasty team 2-3 years from now when Shonn Greene could be in your starting lineup if you hadn't spazzed out and traded him for 5 weeks of 32 year old Ricky Williams?What amazes me about some of these dynasty discussions is the almost complete disregard for the future. Guess what? If your league is remotely stable then you're going to have a team next year. And the next year. And the next year. And in all of those seasons you're going to want to win the league. And in all of those seasons you're going to need good players to win the league. Yet somehow people continually suggest that it's correct to dump long term value for a short term bump.Like I said, I've seen it. I've done it. It doesn't work.

Well for starters, if I were to win the title because I traded for Ricky's production this year, I would be able to use the championship banner to dry the tears caused by not having Shonn Green in 2-3 years. There are so many things that could destroy a teams nucleus in 2-3 years that eschewing a somewhat large increase to title opportunity this year simply to maintain the possibility of a productive team 2 or 3 years down the road is ludicrous and a sure way to rarely, if ever, win titles in my opinion. What if you have Peyton Manning and he gets hurt? What if you have AD and he tears up his knee and is never the same? There are countless things that can go wrong. While there are things that can go wrong over the remainder of this season to implode a team, the odds of that happening are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than of it happening over the course of the next 2-3 years. Nobody is saying it is correct to dump long term value for short term gain as a whole. What they are saying is that this is a fairly unique situation and Ricky Williams provides SIGNIFICANT short term gain (as well as what I will continue to say is decent gain next year), while Shonn Greene only provides marginal long term value and based on odds, may never pan out at all. You may have seen it, done it, and failed before, but that doesn't mean you should write it off altogether.

EBF · Nov 23, 2009

Fear & Loathing said:
What they're saying is they prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible. Me, I like the championship banners.

That sounds great in theory, but what often happens in practice is that the team making the "win now" move doesn't win the league and eventually suffers the consequences of dealing away a quality prospect for a short term star. I've seen it many times. Roddy White for Jamal Lewis. Chris Johnson for Brian Westbrook. Michael Turner for Jamal Lewis. Larry Johnson for Reuben Droughns. Aaron Rodgers for Drew Bledsoe. These are actual trades that happened in my leagues. I'm sure all of the owners who sold away their prospects for immediate help "prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible." That's why they would undo these trades in a heartbeat if they had the ability. It's not accurate to suggest that the short view is going to win you more games than the long view. It's a case by case thing that depends heavily on what you're buying and what you're giving up. Obviously in this case I think the potential downside of losing a top RB prospect like Greene or Brown for an ancient RB with questionable long term prospects is a -EV proposition. I'm actually surprised there's so much support for the Ricky side of this debate. I think the "what have you done for me lately" mindset is playing a prominent role. That's a phenomenon I try to exploit in dynasty leagues where many owners tend to undervalue prospects during the incubation stage of their careers.

one time · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Fear & Loathing said:

What they're saying is they prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible. Me, I like the championship banners.

Click to expand...

That sounds great in theory, but what often happens in practice is that the team making the "win now" move doesn't win the league and eventually suffers the consequences of dealing away a quality prospect for a short term star. I've seen it many times. Roddy White for Jamal Lewis. Chris Johnson for Brian Westbrook. Michael Turner for Jamal Lewis. Larry Johnson for Reuben Droughns. Aaron Rodgers for Drew Bledsoe. These are actual trades that happened in my leagues. I'm sure all of the owners who sold away their prospects for immediate help "prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible." That's why they would undo these trades in a heartbeat if they had the ability. It's not accurate to suggest that the short view is going to win you more games than the long view. It's a case by case thing that depends heavily on what you're buying and what you're giving up. Obviously in this case I think the potential downside of losing a top RB prospect like Greene or Brown for an ancient RB with questionable long term prospects is a -EV proposition. I'm actually surprised there's so much support for the Ricky side of this debate. I think the "what have you done for me lately" mindset is playing a prominent role. That's a phenomenon I try to exploit in dynasty leagues where many owners tend to undervalue prospects during the incubation stage of their careers.

What years did those trades go down? Roddy didn't do much his first year or two. Trading Chris Johnson before he played a down for Westbrook was an OK move that works out more often than not that backfired. Once upon a time Lewis was a young stud while turner was just a back up behind one of the best RBs of all time. Rodgers looked like poop his first two years and going into the start of last year was getting drafted in the bottom two-thirds of QBs. The time when these trades went down play a HUGE factor as I would bet most were at troughs for the younger players (playing time but not delivering, looks horrible in practice, or hasnt had a snap yet). Of these I find the chris johnson trade a not so good one but all of them had merit once upon a time.

one time · Nov 23, 2009

Im very excited to see the Texans play tonight as I know most people in this thread despise Slaton and I liked him when I saw him last year. That and the Texans are a fun team to watch.

WKTSWAY · Nov 23, 2009

In a league I had Ronnie Brown go down, I tried hard to get a trade done to acquire Ricky Williams. I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

The most I offered the Ricky owner was my 2nd rounder next year and Garcon, but he wouldn't budge. No idea why he wouldn't want to move him as a non-playoff team, but whatever.

He also had Thomas Jones and said he would move him, so I offered James Jones and my 2nd next year for Jones and he accepted. Jones plays the #24, 31, 30, 25, and 14 ranked run Ds in weeks 12-16 (playoffs 14-16)

So my roster for the playoffs unless something else happens:

Palmer/Garrard

Ray Rice

Thomas Jones

Fitz

VJack

Jennings

Gates

Carney

That's with Sproles, Garcon, Harvin and Nicks on my bench. I also used all the freed up roster spots when I traded for Fitz to get Cartwright and Hillard if I still need RB help.

Hopefully making this trade helps me win it this year, and I don't think I gave up too much of my future to get it. Sure, I don't have any draft picks coming into this next season, but I have enough youth right now to still be a contender next year. Maybe in the offseason I can get another good young RB with some of my WRs.

todisco1 · Nov 23, 2009

WKTSWAY said:
I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

thecardiackid · Nov 23, 2009

todisco1 said:
WKTSWAY said:

I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Click to expand...

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

agreed.my cost for fitz about a month ago was Jennings + Britt (no future picks). and that was offered to me. i didn't have the heart to counter w/ less. :banned:

Anthony Borbely · Nov 23, 2009

todisco1 said:
WKTSWAY said:

I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Click to expand...

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

I would pay that all day for Fitz. You're talking about someone who is a virtual lock to be a top 5 WR for a long time.

WKTSWAY · Nov 23, 2009

todisco1 said:
WKTSWAY said:

I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Click to expand...

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

I think VJack, Jennings, Bennett, Harvin, Nicks, Garcon (now Fitz) qualifies as stacked at WR

Fear & Loathing · Nov 23, 2009

Anthony Borbely said:
todisco1 said:

WKTSWAY said:

I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Click to expand...

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

Click to expand...

I would pay that all day for Fitz. You're talking about someone who is a virtual lock to be a top 5 WR for a long time.

The only way to get a player like Fitz is to overpay with roster depth. It's still a great trade.

Deuceman · Nov 23, 2009

todisco1 said:
WKTSWAY said:

I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Click to expand...

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

I'll pay that much too...........Good deal

Anthony Borbely · Nov 23, 2009

Fear & Loathing said:
Anthony Borbely said:

todisco1 said:

WKTSWAY said:

I think I have a chance to win now and just traded some of my WR depth (Boldin and MSW plus my 1st and 3rd rounder next year) for Fitz.

Click to expand...

Wow, that is a lot to aquire Fitz. I know he's as good as it gets, but I probably wouldn't pull that kind of deal unless I was absolutely stacked at WR.

Click to expand...

I would pay that all day for Fitz. You're talking about someone who is a virtual lock to be a top 5 WR for a long time.

Click to expand...

The only way to get a player like Fitz is to overpay with roster depth. It's still a great trade.

The thing is...while this is overpaying, check back in a couple of years and it will look like a steal.

DoubleG · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Herm23 said:

Even if you KNEW Shonn Green was going to be a productive NFL starter 2-3 years from now (which is very much up for debate and an entirely separate argument), it would still make sense to trade his production that is still 2-3 years away to gain Ricky Williams production now and for next year.

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree with this line of thinking more. How does it make sense to trade away years of production for weeks of production? How is that going to help your dynasty team 2-3 years from now when Shonn Greene could be in your starting lineup if you hadn't spazzed out and traded him for 5 weeks of 32 year old Ricky Williams?What amazes me about some of these dynasty discussions is the almost complete disregard for the future. Guess what? If your league is remotely stable then you're going to have a team next year. And the next year. And the next year. And in all of those seasons you're going to want to win the league. And in all of those seasons you're going to need good players to win the league. Yet somehow people continually suggest that it's correct to dump long term value for a short term bump.

Like I said, I've seen it. I've done it. It doesn't work.

First off, you are forgetting one very important aspect of this trade - the actual roster of the person who originally posted the question.2-3 years from now, when Ricky is irrelevant the owner in question will likely still have:

K. Moreno, D. Williams, D. Brown, and possibly M. Barber III will still be relveant...plus any RBs he has drafted in the meantime. Presuming he can start 2 RBs, which of the first 3 RBs will S. Greene likely be outproducing? Many would suggest that all 3 will be starters on their respective teams (1 of them is already, 1 is very close to being considered the starter and the 3rd is splitting time)

And please stop saying you've seen it and it doesn't work. Several of us have seen it work. I rode an aging Joe Horn to a title in 2004. 2 years ago I had starting RBs of Jamal Lewis and Earnest Graham - and have a title to show for that one too. Picking up an occasional older player in a dynasty league where youth is sometime over-valued is also a strategy that works. Yes, on a dynatsy team it's nice to have Vincent Jacskon but for a much lower price you can likely trade for Hines Ward and still get WR1 production. Or if you need a solid #2/#3 WR - sure it'd be fantastic to land Mario Manningham, but Driver or Derick Mason come much cheaper for the same output.

As everyone has said - this is NOT a blueprint for building a team. But to plug in an older veteran who can produce can take you deep in the playoffs can and does work. And to cite a few more examples: it seems to be working for the Minnesota Vikings, it worked nicely for the Arizona Cardinals last year, and New England has done okay since picking up that old WR from the Raiders.

FUBAR · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Fear & Loathing said:

What they're saying is they prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible. Me, I like the championship banners.

Click to expand...

That sounds great in theory, but what often happens in practice is that the team making the "win now" move doesn't win the league and eventually suffers the consequences of dealing away a quality prospect for a short term star. I've seen it many times. Roddy White for Jamal Lewis. Chris Johnson for Brian Westbrook. Michael Turner for Jamal Lewis. Larry Johnson for Reuben Droughns. Aaron Rodgers for Drew Bledsoe. These are actual trades that happened in my leagues. I'm sure all of the owners who sold away their prospects for immediate help "prefer winning titles over building the prettiest roster possible." That's why they would undo these trades in a heartbeat if they had the ability. It's not accurate to suggest that the short view is going to win you more games than the long view. It's a case by case thing that depends heavily on what you're buying and what you're giving up. Obviously in this case I think the potential downside of losing a top RB prospect like Greene or Brown for an ancient RB with questionable long term prospects is a -EV proposition. I'm actually surprised there's so much support for the Ricky side of this debate. I think the "what have you done for me lately" mindset is playing a prominent role. That's a phenomenon I try to exploit in dynasty leagues where many owners tend to undervalue prospects during the incubation stage of their careers.

Fair points but I'm fairly certain you can also find many deals where the prospect given ended up being scrap.

TheWick · Nov 23, 2009

Everyone keep your eyes on James Casey tonight...with the Daniels contract and injury situation he could become very relevant very soon

FUBAR · Nov 23, 2009

EBF said:
Herm23 said:

Even if you KNEW Shonn Green was going to be a productive NFL starter 2-3 years from now (which is very much up for debate and an entirely separate argument), it would still make sense to trade his production that is still 2-3 years away to gain Ricky Williams production now and for next year.

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree with this line of thinking more. How does it make sense to trade away years of production for weeks of production? How is that going to help your dynasty team 2-3 years from now when Shonn Greene could be in your starting lineup if you hadn't spazzed out and traded him for 5 weeks of 32 year old Ricky Williams?What amazes me about some of these dynasty discussions is the almost complete disregard for the future. Guess what? If your league is remotely stable then you're going to have a team next year. And the next year. And the next year. And in all of those seasons you're going to want to win the league. And in all of those seasons you're going to need good players to win the league. Yet somehow people continually suggest that it's correct to dump long term value for a short term bump.Like I said, I've seen it. I've done it. It doesn't work.

IMO it depends on the league, if it's a highly competitive league and I'm almost good enough to win it this year but need that RB production, I probably do the deal. More likely if most of my starters are aging. This just might be the best chance I have to win the league and won't see the same chances soon. I guess if I "knew" Green would be a stud I wouldn't do it but I don't, too many RBs look decent their first year and don't do much later. He hasn't wowed me.

SSOG · Nov 24, 2009

Fear & Loathing said:
SSOG said:

There's nothing wrong with trading Shonn Greene. Like you said, he's replaceable. There's something wrong with getting tunnel vision for a 32 year old RB and overpaying for him when there are other "win-now" RBs out there that will serve you just as well for a fraction of the cost (starting with Tomlinson and Thomas Jones). As I've been saying, if a last place owner has Ricky Williams, he's going to be a lot more motivated to sell than you should be to buy. You're bargaining from a position of power.

Fantasy football isn't a binary game- the question isn't "Ricky or no one". There are limitless possibilities. If one possibility doesn't represent value, then it's in your best interest to forget it and find another that does.

Click to expand...

You're missing my point. When I make trades like this, I go and get the player that I have targeted -- not players who might fit into a similar category based on age and past history. I haven't targeted Tomlinson or Jones because I don't trust them down the stretch. I absolutely trust Ricky down the stretch this season, and I expect him to outperform both Tomlinson and Jones. What I've been saying all along is that for Weeks 12-17 of 2009, Ricky Williams is a difference maker.

You're missing my point. There's more than one way to build a champion. If the value isn't there for Ricky, get Thomas Jones or Tomlinson. If you don't trust Thomas Jones or Tomlinson, then trade for SJax. If SJax's owner isn't selling, look into buying Pierre Thomas. If Pierre Thomas costs too much, then ignore the RB2 position and shore up your WR3 position, instead. There are far too many options out there to lock yourself into thinking that one particular player is the difference and overpaying by that much.There are some players that you overpay for. Larry Fitzgerald, Calvin Johnson, Steven Jackson... these guys you overpay for. Ricky Williams? No. Hell, Williams could score 200 points over the next 5 weeks, but he might put up a 0 in week 16 and cost you a championship. Or, as I said, he might get injured. He might perform as RB12- a valuable starter, but not a difference maker. The team might get Hilliard more involved over the long week. As I said, I think the difference in championship odds between "team sans Ricky" and "team with Ricky" is maybe 3%. Maybe 5%. Not big at all.

corpcow said:
I think it's worth stating that this isn't always the case. Sometimes, value drives those decisions. There are times where I took a player I wasn't in love with because he had the most value of those available at that spot. This probably means I was shopping the pick, but if I do have to pick I will usually take the player with the most perceived value there, just with the intention of trying to trade him later.

This argument doesn't hold water with me. If the only reason you drafted him was for his perceived value, then what possible reason could you have to sell him so far below his perceived value?

EBF said:
Boom. SSOG always gets it.

I like to look at my dynasty rosters in terms of overall talent. What matters initially isn't so much the distribution of that overall talent, but the sum total. It's conceivable that drafting 18 QBs with your 18 picks in an 18 round dynasty startup could be the correct move. Why? Because rosters aren't locked. They're fluid. You don't need to draft a starting lineup. You can trade for one. You can convert those QB assets into WR/RB/TE assets, so there's really no need to take a value loss just to "fill a need."

To use a more reasonable example, let's say you're on the clock in the 8th round of a dynasty startup draft. So far you've taken 2 QBs, 1 RB, 3 WRs, and 1 TE. You badly need to plug your RB2 hole, but the only RBs left on the board are Stacey Mack and Troy Hambrick. Meanwhile you see a young QB named Tom Brady sitting there in the player pool. You're already stocked at QB, but you think Brady has superstar potential and you decide he's easily the best player left. Do you draft Hambrick over Brady simply to fill a need? Of course not. You take Brady knowing that you'll eventually be able to trade him for a RB much better than Hambrick or Mack.

I think I've used this example already in this thread, but in my initial dynasty draft, I took Cutler early (around round 6-7, iirc). Despite loving my QB1, Ben Roethlisberger presented too much value a couple of rounds later, so I was the first team to take a QB2. Several rounds later, Matt Schaub was just screaming value, so I became the first team to take a QB3, too (before some teams even had a QB2). Two years later, Jay Cutler became Jonathan Stewart and Matt Schaub became Vincent Jackson. The only way it could have possibly worked out any better is if I'd been smart enough to be the first team to draft a QB4, too, and I'd taken Aaron Rodgers while I was at it.

Herm23 said:
Why is it such a forgone conclusion that Ricky Williams will only contribute 5-6 more weeks of usefulness over his career? Sure, he may only be an RB1 over the remaining 5-6 weeks of this season, but I'm struggling to find what has everyone so sure he will be a complete waste of a roster space next year? While Ronnie Brown was still active and playing at the peak of his abilities this season, Ricky was at the very worst an every week flex play, and was actually much closer to a high end RB2 every week. Sure, he's 32, but he also plays in a VERY running back friendly offense, shares the load (or even more accurately, takes somewhat of a backseat) with an elite level running back in Ronnie Brown saving much wear and tear on his body, and appears to have his life straightened out and has repeatedly talked about how he wants to play football for quite some time yet. I think it is actually more likely that he performs as an RB1 down the stretch this season and then goes back to being a decent RB2 or Flex play for the bulk of next season, given everything he has working in his favor.

At the same time, Shonn Green is almost assuredly going to be stuck behind Thomas Jones on the depth chart again next year (and that doesn't even touch on Leon Washington's potential return). This likely means he again will see very sparse carries and won't have any value as a weekly play at all (not RB1, not RB2, not even Flex). So really, we aren't just talking about a 5-6 week rental when trading Ricky Williams for Shonn Green, you are realistically talking about a massive upgrade for the remaining 5-6 weeks this season plus a solid upgrade for a full season next year. With that in mind, I think this is a relative no brainer- if you are in the title hunt and feel another top level running back would put you over the edge, you make this deal every time. Sure, it would always be nice to pay the minimum possible to acquire talent, but if you can't get the owner to bite, Shonn Green is not an overly expensive price to pay. Shonn Greene has shown nothing to make anyone believe he is a transcendent talent (we haven't seen anything to really believe he is every down starter material yet, for that matter), nor is it even close to assured he will EVER be useful as a RB1, RB2, or Flex, this year, next year, or beyond. The value is about right- the equivalent of a 1.06 draft pick (in a relatively weak draft class) for a solid upgrade for 1 and 1/3 season.

So, you're saying that if a mid first round pick nets you 1 year worth of a quality contributor, you're happy with that? How on earth could you ever build a dynasty team if your first rounder is only netting you 1 year worth of a quality piece? You'd need 7 first round picks a year (a year's worth of quality QB production, a year's worth of production from your RB1, a year's worth of production from your RB2, a year's worth of production from your WR1...) in order to remain competitive at that rate!Maybe I'm overconfident in my drafting prowess, but I'm expecting a heck of a lot more than a single season of productivity on average from my 1st rounders.

editor47 · Nov 24, 2009

i would rather have RW for Greene than Pierre Thomas for a bag of balls at this point.

MountainMan0726 · Nov 24, 2009

Jared Cook, TE, Tennessee Titans - What's the story with this guy? It's very difficult to find any news or insight on him. I know he was dealing with an ankle injury, but wasn't that sustained in the preseason? His athleticism and size have me drooling from a Dynasty perspective, but after 11 games of warming my bench I'm wondering if he's going to show us anything this year. Titans fans, is this all the ankle? Trouble with the playbook?

Early in the season I remember reading quotes from Jeff Fisher about how they "stole this guy" and how he was a first round talent. I read about him catching everything in training camp, "spoiling quarterbacks" since he'd catch bad passes. Fisher's eyes lighting up when watching film, thinking of how to unleash Cook.

Very confusing. And mildly frustrating.

ckl81 · Nov 24, 2009

Fear & Loathing said:
djmich said:

Rodeojones said:

F/L. Interested in hearing your reasoning behind the low ranking for Brandon Marshall. As of Nov 11, you have him at #19. Thanks.

Click to expand...

High Knucklehead Factor

Click to expand...

I don't want him on my roster, so I don't value him highly. I wouldn't want to be left holding the bag when his value drains next time he gets arrested, or even worse.

Let's talk hypothetically. Let's say that the knucklehead factor were to magically disappear (I know it can't, but I'm trying to gauge everyone's estimation of Marshall's pure WR talent level) and he was a great teammate, and impeccably behaved, although assuming that his workout regimen/training remained at it's current level. Where would Marshall fall in the rankings then? Is he on the same talent level as Colston/Roddy/Jennings in terms of FF production capability? Seems like that would be the case, although he's not as much of a burner and is more of a high reception/YAC guy. Would be interested to hear people's thoughts.

valhallan · Nov 24, 2009

MountainMan0726 said:
Jared Cook, TE, Tennessee Titans - What's the story with this guy? It's very difficult to find any news or insight on him. I know he was dealing with an ankle injury, but wasn't that sustained in the preseason? His athleticism and size have me drooling from a Dynasty perspective, but after 11 games of warming my bench I'm wondering if he's going to show us anything this year. Titans fans, is this all the ankle? Trouble with the playbook?

Early in the season I remember reading quotes from Jeff Fisher about how they "stole this guy" and how he was a first round talent. I read about him catching everything in training camp, "spoiling quarterbacks" since he'd catch bad passes. Fisher's eyes lighting up when watching film, thinking of how to unleash Cook.

Very confusing. And mildly frustrating.

I'm confused too. People will come in here and say rookie TEs rarely produce, but that's just not the case. Virtually all blue chip TEs showed us something in their rookie seasons. As a reference, here are F&L's latest top 20 TEs and their rookie numbers:
Year Rec Yds TDWitten 2003 35 347 1Gates 2003 24 389 2Clark 2003 29 340 1Daniels 2006 34 352 5Cooley 2004 37 314 6Olsen 2007 39 391 2Gonzo 1997 33 368 2Celek 2007 16 178 1Winslow II 2004* 5 50 Z.Miller 2007 44 444 3Keller 2008 48 535 3Carlson 2008 55 627 5H.Miller 2005 39 459 6Finley 2008 6 74 1Davis 2006 20 265 3Shockey 2002 74 894 2Scheffler 2006 18 286 4Heap 2001 16 206 1Shiancoe 2003 10 56 2Cook 2009 7 45 Average 29.5 331 2.5 * injured week 2So that's only five of F&L's top 20 under 200 yards their rookie season and of those five, one played only two games (Winslow) and one is Jared Cook. Shiancoe and Celek were not considered likely future fantasy starters. Finley may be the most apt comparison to Cook, as he was another very athletic TE taken in the 3rd round. I'm not sure this tells us anything specifically about Cook, but it does show that the frequent refrain we hear regarding Cook that "rookie TEs rarely produce" is quite obviously fallacious. For well over half of the top 20, we knew right away they were future fantasy starters. I suppose I'm willing to wait for Cook, but this utter lack of production does not put him on the track 75% of the top TEs have taken. Maybe it's the injury, but he has suited up for 9 games and has not been on the injury report since week 2.

WFR · Nov 24, 2009

TheWick said:
Everyone keep your eyes on James Casey tonight...with the Daniels contract and injury situation he could become very relevant very soon

I thought he looked pretty good!Would like to hear anyone else's comments on him.I would love for him to eventually replace Winslow in my lineup as I have doubts about Kellen's long-term durability.He doesn't need to be OD but if he can get me a consistent 5-7 points each week he'll satisfy my needs for a TE2 and I'll sell-high on Winslow.

GreatLakesMike · Nov 24, 2009

WFR said:
TheWick said:

Everyone keep your eyes on James Casey tonight...with the Daniels contract and injury situation he could become very relevant very soon

Click to expand...

I thought he looked pretty good!Would like to hear anyone else's comments on him.I would love for him to eventually replace Winslow in my lineup as I have doubts about Kellen's long-term durability.He doesn't need to be OD but if he can get me a consistent 5-7 points each week he'll satisfy my needs for a TE2 and I'll sell-high on Winslow.

I've been trying to sell Winslow for a while now, and I'm not even getting a sniff. No one is interested. Houston is a TE friendly offense, and with Daniels contract situation and injury, it appears that Casey might be a nice stash.

SSOG · Nov 24, 2009

ckl81 said:
Let's talk hypothetically. Let's say that the knucklehead factor were to magically disappear (I know it can't, but I'm trying to gauge everyone's estimation of Marshall's pure WR talent level) and he was a great teammate, and impeccably behaved, although assuming that his workout regimen/training remained at it's current level. Where would Marshall fall in the rankings then? Is he on the same talent level as Colston/Roddy/Jennings in terms of FF production capability? Seems like that would be the case, although he's not as much of a burner and is more of a high reception/YAC guy. Would be interested to hear people's thoughts.

Top 8. Possibly top 5. Then again, I haven't dropped him as far due to knuckleheadedness as F&L has in the first place.

valhallan said:
I'm not sure this tells us anything specifically about Cook, but it does show that the frequent refrain we hear regarding Cook that "rookie TEs rarely produce" is quite obviously fallacious. For well over half of the top 20, we knew right away they were future fantasy starters. I suppose I'm willing to wait for Cook, but this utter lack of production does not put him on the track 75% of the top TEs have taken. Maybe it's the injury, but he has suited up for 9 games and has not been on the injury report since week 2.

30/331/2.5 is producing? That would have ranked as TE28 last year, TE27 the year before, TE22 the year before that, TE22 the year before that, and TE25 the year before that. I hardly call what basically amounts to a high-end TE3 "productive".

valhallan · Nov 24, 2009

SSOG said:
valhallan said:

I'm not sure this tells us anything specifically about Cook, but it does show that the frequent refrain we hear regarding Cook that "rookie TEs rarely produce" is quite obviously fallacious. For well over half of the top 20, we knew right away they were future fantasy starters. I suppose I'm willing to wait for Cook, but this utter lack of production does not put him on the track 75% of the top TEs have taken. Maybe it's the injury, but he has suited up for 9 games and has not been on the injury report since week 2.

Click to expand...

30/331/2.5 is producing? That would have ranked as TE28 last year, TE27 the year before, TE22 the year before that, TE22 the year before that, and TE25 the year before that. I hardly call what basically amounts to a high-end TE3 "productive".

OK, thanks for adding nothing to conversation by twisting one word into a context obviously different than the one in which it was used. I said "they showed us something". The emphasis on "something" should indicate a sense of "more than nothing". Next, I said "produce", I did not say "productive". Given the tone and content of my post, it was pretty clear that "produce" is in reference to the difference between Cook's 7-45-0 rookie line (perhaps easily considered "nothing") and the average rookie line of 29.5-331-2.5 (perhaps considered "something").

Further, I made no reference to their year-end rankings. I did not say or indicate they were TE1s or TE2s. Rather, I said they were "future fantasy starters". One should quite easily take that as an admission that they weren't "current" fantasy starters.

So now that we've conquered the semantics, any thoughts Cook and his severe dearth of statistics?

thriftyrocker · Nov 24, 2009

valhallan said:
So now that we've conquered the semantics, any thoughts Cook and his severe dearth of statistics?

Guy is a project. He was not on the same level of readiness that Pettigrew was. I am more surprised he looked ok in flashes during the preseason than that he has ridden the bench. Being a great, even next level, athlete doesn't necessarily mean you beat out two veterans. The three highlighted things below reek of "won't see the field early". How can he play for the Titans and not block? He can't. The ankle injury killed any hopes of learning on the job. NFLDraftScout.com:

Negatives: Not necessarily the sum of his parts. Often lined up wide in the Gamecocks' offense and may struggle to acclimate to a more pro-style offense. Relies on his athleticism rather than technique to get off the line of scrimmage. Tends to freelance a bit as a route-runner. Can make the spectacular catch, but is prone to lapses in concentration. Marginal effort and effectiveness as a blocker, especially in close quarters.

GreatLakesMike · Nov 24, 2009

How long does it traditionally take TE's to develop?

DoubleG · Nov 24, 2009

GreatLakesMike said:
How long does it traditionally take TE's to develop?

It depends on how often you work out. :confused:

Sorry, I couldn't help it. It just shot in there...like the Stay-Puft Marshmellow Man.

thevidon · Nov 24, 2009

GreatLakesMike said:
How long does it traditionally take TE's to develop?

It kinda depends on the type. Some TE's come out of college and they are great blockers, but lacking in receiving skills. These guys usually can come in and perform their roles well pretty early as a rookie. The other type of TE, the receiver (who we look for in FF) take longer to develop. They are usually more athletic and suffer through similar growing pains to WR's - but I think they can usually start to pick it up in year 2 (as opposed to 3 for WRs) because they are facing LB's in coverage not CB's generally. The knucklehead receiver type (hello Vernon Davis) take even longer........

SSOG · Nov 24, 2009

valhallan said:
OK, thanks for adding nothing to conversation by twisting one word into a context obviously different than the one in which it was used.

I said "they showed us something". The emphasis on "something" should indicate a sense of "more than nothing". Next, I said "produce", I did not say "productive". Given the tone and content of my post, it was pretty clear that "produce" is in reference to the difference between Cook's 7-45-0 rookie line (perhaps easily considered "nothing") and the average rookie line of 29.5-331-2.5 (perhaps considered "something").

Further, I made no reference to their year-end rankings. I did not say or indicate they were TE1s or TE2s. Rather, I said they were "future fantasy starters". One should quite easily take that as an admission that they weren't "current" fantasy starters.

So now that we've conquered the semantics, any thoughts Cook and his severe dearth of statistics?

I'm not twisting anything. My point is that the overwhelming majority of elite fantasy TEs looked like absolute dreck as rookies and put up absolutely terrible numbers. You're merely arguing about the DEGREE of terribleness which is acceptable from a rookie TE. Which is fine, but to me, terrible is terrible- I'm not going to disqualify Cook from consideration because his numbers are more terrible than his peers.When evaluating rookie TEs, I have two big strategies. The first is to give them all a pass, no matter what they do or how they look. I don't downgrade rookie TEs for any reason. The second strategy is to focus more on per-play metrics than aggregate metrics when deciding which rookie TEs to upgrade and which to keep where I had them before (because, as I said, I don't downgrade rookie TEs). Owen Daniels' aggregate numbers looked very meager after his rookie season (352 yards, 10 yards per reception), but I was sky-high on him because his per-play metrics were significantly better than what I'd expect from a rookie TE.

What does this have to do with Jared Cook? Absolutely nothing. He has 12 targets so far this year. I wouldn't draw any conclusions at all- one way or another- off of a sample of essentially a target a game. The one rookie TE who looks really good, though, is Jermichael Finley, who hasn't just been blowing away the rest of the rookie class, he's also been blowing away runningmate Donald Lee. Now is the time to buy on Finley if you don't already own him.

GreatLakesMike said:
How long does it traditionally take TE's to develop?

Same as WRs- it depends. Some are Vincent Jacksons and take 5 years. Others are Marques Colston and light the league on fire as rookies. I'm not concerned so much with a timeline for when a TE should be developed by as I am with a timeline during which I shouldn't be concerned that the TE isn't developed yet. Depending on what I see, I might start dropping a TE as early as his second year (or, as in most cases, I likely was very low on him to begin with- it's a rare TE that I'm going to be high on entering the league), or I might hold a TE for 5+ years waiting to see if he's ever going to show anything (hello, Vernon Davis).

ckl81 · Nov 24, 2009

SSOG said:
ckl81 said:

Let's talk hypothetically. Let's say that the knucklehead factor were to magically disappear (I know it can't, but I'm trying to gauge everyone's estimation of Marshall's pure WR talent level) and he was a great teammate, and impeccably behaved, although assuming that his workout regimen/training remained at it's current level. Where would Marshall fall in the rankings then? Is he on the same talent level as Colston/Roddy/Jennings in terms of FF production capability? Seems like that would be the case, although he's not as much of a burner and is more of a high reception/YAC guy. Would be interested to hear people's thoughts.

Click to expand...

Top 8. Possibly top 5. Then again, I haven't dropped him as far due to knuckleheadedness as F&L has in the first place.

It's nice to hear that reassurance from you SSOG. I think Marshall's really talented as well, and if not for his acting up, he could be an unstoppable force. Although I don't necessarily agree with his shoving match with Moreno this past week on the Denver sideline, his post-game interview had him saying the following:

The turnover, which came just ahead of the two-minute warning, was reviewed and upheld. With that, Marshall -- the Broncos' volatile playmaker -- put his facemask directly into Moreno's facemask and let the rookie have it verbally.Moreno physically pushed back, and two of the Broncos' most explosive players nearly came to blows. Afterward, both of them called it a momentary exchange of heated emotion. But neither offered an apology."I don't regret anything. This is a playoff game," said Marshall, who approached this contest that would break a first-place tie between the two division rivals as such. "This is probably the most frustrating game I've ever played in. I approached it like it was a playoff game. I'm frustrated that we lost."I think everybody needs to look at themselves first. I'm going back and looking at film from last year, see if I've changed anything, and go from there."The Moreno fumble? "Those are plays that kill drives," Marshall said.And what did Marshall tell Moreno when the two were facemask-to-faceask?"That we need to pick it up.""There were guys on the sideline that weren't angry, who didn't have a lot of emotion. And they need to look at themselves in the mirror," Marshall said. "This is a game where you've got to have it. And none of us can make any terrible plays."

I gotta say, I like the fire he's showing. Maybe next year, if he lands somewhere else and has a change of scenery and/or a better situation, he could rise up the the elite level.At least, that's what I'm hoping.

ThreeThousand · Nov 24, 2009

Not that it changes your analysis any, but Jermichael Finley is a sophomore, not a rookie.

SSOG · Nov 24, 2009

ckl81 said:
It's nice to hear that reassurance from you SSOG. I think Marshall's really talented as well, and if not for his acting up, he could be an unstoppable force. Although I don't necessarily agree with his shoving match with Moreno this past week on the Denver sideline, his post-game interview had him saying the following:

The turnover, which came just ahead of the two-minute warning, was reviewed and upheld. With that, Marshall -- the Broncos' volatile playmaker -- put his facemask directly into Moreno's facemask and let the rookie have it verbally.Moreno physically pushed back, and two of the Broncos' most explosive players nearly came to blows. Afterward, both of them called it a momentary exchange of heated emotion. But neither offered an apology."I don't regret anything. This is a playoff game," said Marshall, who approached this contest that would break a first-place tie between the two division rivals as such. "This is probably the most frustrating game I've ever played in. I approached it like it was a playoff game. I'm frustrated that we lost."I think everybody needs to look at themselves first. I'm going back and looking at film from last year, see if I've changed anything, and go from there."The Moreno fumble? "Those are plays that kill drives," Marshall said.And what did Marshall tell Moreno when the two were facemask-to-faceask?"That we need to pick it up.""There were guys on the sideline that weren't angry, who didn't have a lot of emotion. And they need to look at themselves in the mirror," Marshall said. "This is a game where you've got to have it. And none of us can make any terrible plays."

Click to expand...

I gotta say, I like the fire he's showing. Maybe next year, if he lands somewhere else and has a change of scenery and/or a better situation, he could rise up the the elite level.At least, that's what I'm hoping.

My completely speculative take on the situation is that there's a better than 50% chance that Marshall re-ups with Denver and sticks around.

ThreeThousand said:
Not that it changes your analysis any, but Jermichael Finley is a sophomore, not a rookie.

Thanks, didn't realize that.

Dynasty Rankings (7 Viewers)

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread