Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty Rankings


Recommended Posts

If you asked me to use career VBD to compare Hernandez to other players, I would take the top 20 dynasty options at TE, come up with a baseline age (average age) and production (average TE12 production over the last 5 years, adjusted to account for increase it league passing totals). I would then project Hernandez' career production, multiply it by projected years remaining, and devide that number by by baseline career point total. I would do that with the players I was comparing him to and compare that number.

Obviously, you can't be too specific projecting 5+ years out, so I would use rough, top 5 TE numbers. Then I can see how, roughly, 8 years of top 5 TE production compares to 2 years of top 7 RB production in a given setting.

Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then I have no idea why you find it so useful. Hernandez, like every other player in the NFL, has non-quantifiable characteristics that VBD can't explain.

Read Dodd's article on it. I don't have the link, but a simple Google search will pull it up. VBD, as it relates to dynasty formats, is not a formula that tells you who to draft, how to rank, or anything along those lines. The average dynasty owner, I have found, doesn't have much context of positional value in a given format (ouside of a re-draft setting). Take two random players like Frank Gore and Jason Witten. How do you rank them? Most fantasy owners will see that "both are productive, but older, Witten lasts longer, but Gore plays RB, which I need", etc, and see it is a close call. But a VBD calculation can show how much their value changes between league formats.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take two random players like Frank Gore and Jason Witten. How do you rank them? Most fantasy owners will see that "both are productive, but older, Witten lasts longer, but Gore plays RB, which I need", etc, and see it is a close call. But a VBD calculation can show how much their value changes between league formats.

Entirely depends on my team makeup. If I have a Graham or Hernandez already on my roster I'm not considering Witten. If I'm in the midst of a playoff push with mediocrity at TE and the Witten owner is out of it I'll drop a feeler to see if there's anything there. If I have a need at RB and the Gore owner is out of the playoff push I'd drop him a note too. Unfortunately in my win-now league the Gore owner is right there too so I had to go to plan B's, which is how I ended up with Turner.If we're talking 2013 only then I am not trading for either one of them until February. Gore's near the cliff and a bad injury in the next few weeks could derail everything, I don't want to be left holding the bag if that happens. If he makes it through the rest of the season relatively unscathed and there's no offseason surgery talk I will absolutely be pitching his owner an offer. He's going to get the RB near the cliff discount anyway, so there's no sense rushing into it. Similar story with Witten, and I would rather have 1 year of healthy Gore than an unknown umber of years from Witten. I have no idea if VBD agrees with that or not, don't really care, my successful teams usually have strong RB scoring and Gore would help accomplish that goal. I also don't think it would cost an arm and a leg to acquire him, even if he only helps for a year. Therefore, I can continue to build around him and also better my chances of winning short term too. I failed in one league this year in large part because of TE scoring (2nd to last - everything else except for DE was average or better), so Witten could help too. Ideally, I would love to add both. The Witten owner in that particular league doesn't trade though so I must look elsewhere. I wouldn't hesitate to bring a guy like him on board though. Like Gore, if he were on a team that traded he would not break the bank to acquire and I could look to build around him too.That's my long winded way of saying I don't get how VBD helps my decision making in either case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's my long winded way of saying I don't get how VBD helps my decision making in either case.

I don't know how to explain it better than I have. If it's not for you, it's not for you. But I don't understand how knowing how 2 years of top 12 RB production compares to 4 years of top 5 TE production wouldn't help your cause.ETA: This is why it matters. I can look and conclude that just ONE more year of MJD (top 6) production will help me win more than 7 years of Torrey Smith (WR2) production in some leagues. Yet, in others, that is not the case. That is where there is value. The calculation is reliant on my projections, but so is every action I take, whether I write the projections down or not doesn't change that. When your league treats TEs as WRs, the average owner knows that the value of WRs drops, but they don't have a strong grasp on how much. History can show you how valuable players meeting a certain criteria have been to your league; QB5 compared to TE2; RB14 compared to WR10. Et cetera. Then you don't have to rely on "Witten or Gore? Well, do I need a TE or RB?" You'll provide yourself with a historic guideline that will tell you what they are worth, based on the projections you have for each player. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And no, as you have pointed out, VBD is not going to tell me if Percy Harvin is more or less likely than MJD to get hurt. But it can help you understand that MJD does not get hurt more than the average RB, but Harvin does get hurt more often than the average WR, so what value is there in valuing Harvin more because he is safer in that regard?

And, in the end, no number is going to determine how to adjust Dez Bryant's value due to his personal issues. We still have to make that call. That doesn't discredit any historic study of positional value in your league.

GPS isn't going to drive the car for you, tell you when you need gas, or tell if the road was just closed; doesn't mean it doesn't serve a purpose.

Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We must be thinking of different scoring/formats as the VBD I use has the top-10 RBs a similar value structure to the top-10 WRs....outside the actual no.1 RB which would be difficult to predict for a singular spot. I am using AVT for the average VBD for that projection. That would change as future years shift those numbers one way or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the concussion brothers, Jahvid Best and Austin Collie. Are these guys done for good? Or do they come back and play. I've got both stashed away on a team is pretty well stocked. Their upside, should they return to the field, seems phenomenal.

Collie makes too much sense on Denver. Decker's hands aren't what Manning wanted/expected, Collie can take the load off Decker's plate and allow Decker to not take on so much, may benefit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that they are even rosterable at this point, in most leagues. I personally would rather use the space on underafted free agents after the rookie draft this off-season. I would be shocked if either of them turned in a completely healthy 16 game season from here on out. No doctor and not going off of anything but my thoughts on their history, so I'd glady change that stance with valid news. But right now, no thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collie makes too much sense on Denver. Decker's hands aren't what Manning wanted/expected, Collie can take the load off Decker's plate and allow Decker to not take on so much, may benefit.

Decker has a 63.6% catch rate, and 58% SR. I don't think Collie would be an upgrade to Decker even if they played the same position, which they don't. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We must be thinking of different scoring/formats as the VBD I use has the top-10 RBs a similar value structure to the top-10 WRs....outside the actual no.1 RB which would be difficult to predict for a singular spot. I am using AVT for the average VBD for that projection. That would change as future years shift those numbers one way or another.

I have a few different league formats just bewteen my leagues, so I wouldn't doubt it. In standard formats, however, I don't play in any that reward a top 10 WR as highly a top 10 RB. PPR formats that start 3 WRs, absolutely.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collie makes too much sense on Denver. Decker's hands aren't what Manning wanted/expected, Collie can take the load off Decker's plate and allow Decker to not take on so much, may benefit.

Decker has a 63.6% catch rate, and 58% SR. I don't think Collie would be an upgrade to Decker even if they played the same position, which they don't.
Last I checked he was in the top 3 in drops, when I've watched Denver this year I've seen too much of it too, which is unusual for Decker. That's why I think giving him less responsibilities may make him a better real life player. There's nothing behind him and Demaryius, so another threat could help take the load off and make the whole offense stronger. Collie's a nice dice roll.ETA - I have no interest in taking a flier on Best though Edited by MAC_32
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that they are even rosterable at this point, in most leagues. I personally would rather use the space on underafted free agents after the rookie draft this off-season. I would be shocked if either of them turned in a completely healthy 16 game season from here on out. No doctor and not going off of anything but my thoughts on their history, so I'd glady change that stance with valid news. But right now, no thank you.

Collie's injury that put him on IR was not concussion related. Both have tremendous risk of course but both have way more potential than an UDFA.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collie's injury that put him on IR was not concussion related. Both have tremendous risk of course but both have way more potential than an UDFA.

Just this year I've grabbed Richardson and Bryce Brown. Others in my leagues have grabbed Hilton, Morris, Ballard, Foles, etcetera. Collie's IR injury wasn't a concussion, but he did suffer one in the pre-season. And Best is "hoping" he's not done playing football all together. Once it relies less on hope, I would value him some. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last I checked he was in the top 3 in drops, when I've watched Denver this year I've seen too much of it too, which is unusual for Decker. That's why I think giving him less responsibilities may make him a better real life player.

They play a different position; he wouldn't have less responsibility. Less attention, maybe, if teams paid extra position to the slot. And every year good players lead the NFL in drops; have you looked at his drop/target rate? That could mean something, but blanket drops is not something I put stock in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last I checked he was in the top 3 in drops, when I've watched Denver this year I've seen too much of it too, which is unusual for Decker. That's why I think giving him less responsibilities may make him a better real life player.

They play a different position; he wouldn't have less responsibility. Less attention, maybe, if teams paid extra position to the slot. And every year good players lead the NFL in drops; have you looked at his drop/target rate? That could mean something, but blanket drops is not something I put stock in.
I take drops with a large grain of salt, from what I've seen lots of players that I think have drop issues don't end up on those drop lists, some players end up on there that I think are sure handed. It all confuses me. But I have noticed a lot of catches Decker has to make falling to the turf this year, so him being on that list doesn't surprise me and Peyton looking elsewhere the last few weeks doesn't either.And by less responsibility, I didn't mean less snaps. Collie's an inside guy, Decker's an outside. I think Decker would be the 1st or 2nd look on his routes less often, I think they'd switch it up to make him a bail out/deep option more often instead. Collie would be one of his first reads more often, he really doesn't have that guy this year. Manning thrives on the short stuff a lot more than many realize and his two primary WR's are better down the field. A guy like Collie would fit in perfectly, if he could stay healthy obviously.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take drops with a large grain of salt, from what I've seen lots of players that I think have drop issues don't end up on those drop lists, some players end up on there that I think are sure handed. It all confuses me. But I have noticed a lot of catches Decker has to make falling to the turf this year, so him being on that list doesn't surprise me and Peyton looking elsewhere the last few weeks doesn't either.And by less responsibility, I didn't mean less snaps. Collie's an inside guy, Decker's an outside. I think Decker would be the 1st or 2nd look on his routes less often, I think they'd switch it up to make him a bail out/deep option more often instead. Collie would be one of his first reads more often, he really doesn't have that guy this year. Manning thrives on the short stuff a lot more than many realize and his two primary WR's are better down the field. A guy like Collie would fit in perfectly, if he could stay healthy obviously.

I'm not arguing that a healthy Collie wouldn't be a reception monster in Denver; I think he would. I just don't think Decker's play is a reason for the Broncos to look for more weapons. The fact that two of his drops were on primetime TV and would have been TDs doesn't mean he doesn't have good hands; he does. Just like Dez Bryant had poor hands in the opinions of many, based on a 3 game stretch, much of it on national TV.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collie's injury that put him on IR was not concussion related. Both have tremendous risk of course but both have way more potential than an UDFA.

Just this year I've grabbed Richardson and Bryce Brown. Others in my leagues have grabbed Hilton, Morris, Ballard, Foles, etcetera.
Those guys were all drafted. :confused:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collie's injury that put him on IR was not concussion related. Both have tremendous risk of course but both have way more potential than an UDFA.

Just this year I've grabbed Richardson and Bryce Brown. Others in my leagues have grabbed Hilton, Morris, Ballard, Foles, etcetera.
Those guys were all drafted. :confused:
Oh. Sorry. I meant undrafted in my leagues, not in the NFL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collie's injury that put him on IR was not concussion related. Both have tremendous risk of course but both have way more potential than an UDFA.

Just this year I've grabbed Richardson and Bryce Brown. Others in my leagues have grabbed Hilton, Morris, Ballard, Foles, etcetera.
Those guys were all drafted. :confused:
Oh. Sorry. I meant undrafted in my leagues, not in the NFL.
Ok. All of those guys were actually drafted in rookie drafts in all five of my dynasty leagues (maybe not all of them in all of them, but for the most part...) but I get your point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last I checked he was in the top 3 in drops, when I've watched Denver this year I've seen too much of it too, which is unusual for Decker.

It's really not.

I got blasted for saying it this past offseason, but there has never been a scouting report on a player that was more opposite the truth than that of Decker. Coming out of school he was touted as a possession guy that had good hands and ball skills, but couldn't get separation. Reality is that he is actually pretty good at getting separation, but has below average hands and utterly horrific ball skills. If there is a defender anywhere near him, he will not come down with the ball. If he has to adjust to the ball in the air at all, he will not come down with it. If he's anywhere even close to the sidelines, he will either land well out of bounds or drop the ball.

His strengths are exactly what was listed as his weaknesses on the scouting report, and his weaknesses are exactly what was listed as his strengths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last I checked he was in the top 3 in drops, when I've watched Denver this year I've seen too much of it too, which is unusual for Decker.

It's really not.

I got blasted for saying it this past offseason, but there has never been a scouting report on a player that was more opposite the truth than that of Decker. Coming out of school he was touted as a possession guy that had good hands and ball skills, but couldn't get separation. Reality is that he is actually pretty good at getting separation, but has below average hands and utterly horrific ball skills. If there is a defender anywhere near him, he will not come down with the ball. If he has to adjust to the ball in the air at all, he will not come down with it. If he's anywhere even close to the sidelines, he will either land well out of bounds or drop the ball.

His strengths are exactly what was listed as his weaknesses on the scouting report, and his weaknesses are exactly what was listed as his strengths.

He made an awesome goal line grab with a defender all over him a couple weeks ago.

He was consistently open deep for Orton/Tebow, when that is what was asked of him. His catch rate is very solid and he racks up first downs.

I respect the call, but respectfully disagree here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was consistently open deep for Orton/Tebow, when that is what was asked of him. His catch rate is very solid and he racks up first downs.

That really just supprts what I was saying. The scouting report says that getting open is his biggest weakness, and I say that it's actually his greatest strength. Sounds like you're agreeing with me on that.His catch rate is high because he gets open a lot, but his ball skills and hands are quite bad when he's not open.

He made an awesome goal line grab with a defender all over him a couple weeks ago.

And Tim Tebow has thrown dozens of perfect passes, but that doesn't make him an accurate QB when you factor in the rest of his passes.Between Tebow and Peyton the Broncos have been my favorite team to watch over the last two years. I've nary missed a game of theirs. When he's in any kind of traffic but in position to make a play on the ball, or when he's in any kind of situation that would make a catch even remotely difficult (IE near the sideline) he fails to come down with the ball far more often than an average receiver.I'm not saying he's a bad receiver. To the contrary, I think he's a good receiver, especially with a QB like Peyton that can hit him out of his breaks. All I'm saying is that the reason he's successful (good at getting open even though he's lacking in ball skills) is the exact opposite of what the scouting report said about him (good ball skills but can't get open). I think part of the reason Decker still has that "possession receiver" stigma is because that's what people were told about him, and probably partially because, quite frankly, he's white.ETA: Decker's catch rate also gets a boost from playing with Peyton Manning. His is actually tied for the lowest among Broncos that I could find (I couldn't find Matt Willis')Stokely: 77%Dreessen: 68%Demaryius: 67%Decker: 63%Tamme: 63%His catch rate is actually lower than DT's even though DT is getting a lot more downfield throws. DT's YPC is 4 yards higher than Decker's and he still has a higher catch rate. Edited by FreeBaGeL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some of these individuals have been discussed separately but would like to bring them together as "groups". Curious who everyone is targeting/holding/selling from the tandems below:

Sanu/Marvin Jones (Have Sanu in a couple of leagues, couldn't get Jones but see Sanu as a sell and Jones as a buy?)

Streater/Criner (I am holding both where I can but have Streater more often - not sure who to buy)

Blackmon/Shorts (I have Shorts in my main league, Blackmon's price still seems higher than my real value though I like him - buy both?)

This leaves out the obvious and/or not the best situations but maybe worth discussing(?):

Litte/Josh Gordon - buy Gordon/sell Little

Hankerson/Aldrick Robinson - I am still buying on Hankerson and think the price point is about right - Robinson still a good end of bench flier?

Some other young guys to target and the price is getting close to right from what I have seen?

Lafell, Jon Baldwin (discussed ad naseaum, so no reason to rehash), E. Sanders (really think Wallace is gone after Sanders stayed healthy all year - good PPR NFL #2)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His catch rate is actually lower than DT's even though DT is getting a lot more downfield throws. DT's YPC is 4 yards higher than Decker's and he still has a higher catch rate.

His catch rate on the season is now 66%. Reggie Wayne's - who also played flanker in this offense - in his final 3 years with Manning, was 63%, 65%, and 58%. His deep % was right around Decker's too.I just don't buy that he has below average hands and poor body control. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some of these individuals have been discussed separately but would like to bring them together as "groups". Curious who everyone is targeting/holding/selling from the tandems below:Sanu/Marvin Jones (Have Sanu in a couple of leagues, couldn't get Jones but see Sanu as a sell and Jones as a buy?)Streater/Criner (I am holding both where I can but have Streater more often - not sure who to buy)Blackmon/Shorts (I have Shorts in my main league, Blackmon's price still seems higher than my real value though I like him - buy both?)This leaves out the obvious and/or not the best situations but maybe worth discussing(?):Litte/Josh Gordon - buy Gordon/sell LittleHankerson/Aldrick Robinson - I am still buying on Hankerson and think the price point is about right - Robinson still a good end of bench flier?Some other young guys to target and the price is getting close to right from what I have seen?Lafell, Jon Baldwin (discussed ad naseaum, so no reason to rehash), E. Sanders (really think Wallace is gone after Sanders stayed healthy all year - good PPR NFL #2)

Good post. I am really starting to dig Streater, though he seems to drop too many balls. But his skill set seems obvious when I watch him play - if DHB leaves he could have a big role in this offense, maybe even if DHB stays. I'd be buying Streater for sure, and I kinda like Criner too. I love Shorts, he is just dynamite and produced with awful QBs. I think he's a definite buy if an owner thinks he's a flash in the pan. Blackmon I like as well, but he'll be more expensive because of his draft status. Jones/Sanu I have no idea - I know some have been saying Jones has better ball skills, but Sanu was staking a pretty good claim before getting hurt. Josh Gordon will be expensive, and Little will probably command little in trade value, so I'd consider Little a hold. I really liked Hankerson, but other than a few flashes he hasn't quite developed like I thought he would. Light could still turn on, but this year was a disappointment considering the opportunity he had. I'd maybe add Golden Tate to the list - he's developing pretty nicely, doesn't get a lot of catches, but is doing a lot with them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that they are even rosterable at this point, in most leagues. I personally would rather use the space on underafted free agents after the rookie draft this off-season. I would be shocked if either of them turned in a completely healthy 16 game season from here on out. No doctor and not going off of anything but my thoughts on their history, so I'd glady change that stance with valid news. But right now, no thank you.

What if you could stash on IR through the offseason?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to get either Marvin or Sanu.

Double dipped in Criner, he's not going anywhere. Not much interest in Streater, ceiling looks like an inconsistent bench WR. If he gets dropped I'll toss a speculative add, about it.

Staying away from Jacksonville until I see how they address the offseason, rooting for Shorts though.

Not sure who will buy Little and as a Gordon owner good luck trying to get him off my hands.

Passing on Hank and Aldrick, the complimentary WR to Garcon is not on the team right now.

Starting to sour on Sanders, not giving up yet though. Never bought into LaFell or Baldwin, no reason to now.

Tate could be an under the radar buy, see how the next few weeks go and how it effects his value. If consensus is still outside the top 40 I'm on board buying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was never a Tate fan so left him off due to my own bias but you guys are right that he should be included in the discussion. Obviously, with the right size rosters, all these can be holds/guys. MAC - no dispute on Gordon. I have him in only one league but would be tough to make a move there - I think he perceived value has passed his actual value (which is high by itself) though. Tend to agree on the Garcon compliment but I was higher than many on both Hank and Robinson from the get go and they both needed development to begin with.

Souring in Sanders because of injuries, play, both, other? I have a soft spot for the Hawaii and SMU WRs from the James Jones days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that they are even rosterable at this point, in most leagues. I personally would rather use the space on underafted free agents after the rookie draft this off-season. I would be shocked if either of them turned in a completely healthy 16 game season from here on out. No doctor and not going off of anything but my thoughts on their history, so I'd glady change that stance with valid news. But right now, no thank you.

What if you could stash on IR through the offseason?
Then I would certainly do it. If the roster is big enough, I'd take a shot on Collie. Best, only if I have an IR spot and nobody better to use it on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was never a Tate fan so left him off due to my own bias but you guys are right that he should be included in the discussion. Obviously, with the right size rosters, all these can be holds/guys. MAC - no dispute on Gordon. I have him in only one league but would be tough to make a move there - I think he perceived value has passed his actual value (which is high by itself) though. Tend to agree on the Garcon compliment but I was higher than many on both Hank and Robinson from the get go and they both needed development to begin with. Souring in Sanders because of injuries, play, both, other? I have a soft spot for the Hawaii and SMU WRs from the James Jones days.

Gordon's just scratching the surface, only one real year of football and had a year off then didn't get into Browns camp until late. He has flown by everyone's expectations. Superstar potential is over doing it, but he absolutely has star potential, top 10-ish. I think that's priced into his value, doubt you could find a Gordon owner that will see him as anything less than a top 25 guy going into 2013 with top 10 potential. Just look at his avg ppg since he got the starting job week 5.I was worried about Sanders' health coming out of school, just the way he played. I was hoping he would develop a special level of play to make dealing with the injuries easier to stomach. Hasn't happened. He's a good #2/#3 WR that's on and off the field, a dime a dozen. If I can combine him with Reggie Bush and another piece for a better RB I will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be selling Peterson "All Day" in dynasty. Of course, I said the same thing last year and he proved me wrong by bouncing back with an absolutely monster season, but I'll let someone else in my league pin his hopes on a 28 year old RB next year. He probably only has 1.5-2 years of his peak left. If he doesn't win you the title in those two years, you'll regret picking him. I took Brian Westbrook with an early pick at a similar juncture of his career and always regretted it. Peterson is a much more talented athlete, but 1700+ carries is 1700+ carries. He's two years away from being Steven Jackson, if he's lucky.

Respect your opinion immensely EBF, but I'd like to know if there is any RB you would have 'ridden into the sunset' i.e. their early thirties. This is hypothetical and I'm mainly just looking backwards at guys like Barry, Emmitt, or maybe Curtis Martin. It seems to me that Peterson is a once in lifetime talent and comparing him to SJax in 2yrs is just wrong. Opinions vary but sometimes it's just plain to see that some players are just special. This past year for ADP has been epic, and I truly believe we're seeing something historic. All players have shelf lives, and I'm sure you could sell him EXTREMELY high, but SJAX ain't no ADP:)Disclaimer: Been lurking this thread from the get go, so I can take any 'tough love' or flaming coming my way. I rode Barry into the sunset and don't regret it one bit....I think ADP is similar.
I wouldn't be surprised if you're completely right. Obviously he's a freak athlete. One of the best talents of his generation. It's just not my style at all to pay a high price for a 28 year old RB, which is what he'll be soon. The "I'll take the points now" approach has never worked for me. I've seen it work for other owners, but it's not my game. A few years back I did a startup where I planned to take MJD in the first round and Calvin in the 2nd. I positioned myself just right to land both of those guys. But then Brian Westbrook fell to me in the first (this was when he was scoring 30 ppg) and Randy Moss in the 2nd (after his monster Patriots year). I passed on MJD for Westbrook and Calvin for Moss. Scarred me for life. Hindsight makes it obvious how bad those moves were, but at the time Westbrook was legitimately ranked neck-and-neck with MJD and Moss was considered a top 3 dynasty WR. So the "I'll take the points now" argument that people use to pump up guys like Foster and Peterson fall on deaf ears with me. I know from personal experience that you will be absolutely STUCK with the old guy if he slips because nobody will want to pay for him. My Westbrook/Moss team made the playoffs in year one, missed the playoffs at 7-5 in year two, and sucked for years after that before finally rebounding to .500 this season. I can't help but wonder how things would've gone if I just stuck with my initial plan. Anyways, that's kind of a worst-case scenario when it comes to playing the "win now" style, but it does illustrate the sometimes overlooked downside of going with that approach. Just because a guy has been doing it for years doesn't mean he can't hit a wall. Moss was every bit the freak that Peterson is and he went from a consensus top 5 dynasty WR to basically untradeable at warp speed. Even a great player can break down almost overnight and that's why I'd be leery of a guy like Peterson as a dynasty cornerstone despite his rare talent. He'll be awesome for you...until he isn't. And at that point he'll be near worthless, like Tomlinson towards the end of his career. Not to go off on a complete tangent, but the nice thing about going with the youth-heavy approach is that there's less pressure to win right away. If things don't pan out and your team isn't competitive, you might still be poised for success because your best players are all young and still in their prime. But if you draft an old team and you miss on a few picks or a few of your guys hit the wall, all of a sudden you're staring at holes all over your roster because your assets are expiring before your very eyes. I think you can get away with building around old stars, but that approach has just as many pitfalls as the "next big thing" type of strategy where someone drafts every rookie and flashy young player hoping to have a whole team full of stars just entering their prime.
So what would your top 10 be, by position, for dynasty? I'm guessing it would be largely slanted towards youth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what would your top 10 be, by position, for dynasty? I'm guessing it would be largely slanted towards youth.

I don't keep updated dynasty rankings. That's partially out of apathy and partially because I don't really believe in the idea. Dynasty value is not like redraft value. It's much more team-specific. If I had a bad team, I would rather have Michael Floyd than Andre Johnson. If I had a contender, I would rather have Andre Johnson than Michael Floyd. So who do you rank higher? There's no obvious right answer and that demonstrates the problem with dynasty rankings. A general set of rankings just isn't going to do you a ton of good unless you're preparing for a startup draft, and even then your first few picks will start to dictate what you need to do for the rest of the draft. I think it's much more useful to think about players in terms of value per cost. I would not rank Rueben Randle above Randall Cobb, but I think he offers more value relative to the price that it would take to acquire him. So I'd be much more likely to acquire Randle than Cobb. I build my dynasty draft boards more by looking at the guys who offer great value per cost and less by just building a massive list of players and ticking off names. That's also my usual approach to trades. I'm more likely to make a modest offer for someone who isn't highly valued than to make a massive offer for a proven star. So while I'd rank Robert Griffin as a slam dunk top 3 QB, he's not really a desirable trade target because his cost has caught up with his value. The same goes for guys like AJ Green, Trent Richardson, and Andrew Luck. Great players, but impossible to trade for. You'd probably get better value for cost going after someone like Michael Floyd, David Wilson, or Colin Kaepernick. So in a weird way, they are more desirable trade and draft targets. I spend more time thinking about who might present great value per cost than I do trying to split hairs ranking players. Having said that, I do keep a list of untouchable players. Basically the cornerstone guys that you can't trade. My list is...Aaron RodgersRobert GriffinAndrew LuckCam NewtonTrent RichardsonDoug MartinCalvin JohnsonDemaryius ThomasAJ GreenJulio JonesDez BryantJimmy GrahamI'm not moving one of these guys unless I get another one back, except for in extreme cases (for example, I have Cam and Luck on the same roster in one league and am suffering by keeping them both when I could pour the value into a different position).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what would your top 10 be, by position, for dynasty? I'm guessing it would be largely slanted towards youth.

I don't keep updated dynasty rankings. That's partially out of apathy and partially because I don't really believe in the idea. Dynasty value is not like redraft value. It's much more team-specific. If I had a bad team, I would rather have Michael Floyd than Andre Johnson. If I had a contender, I would rather have Andre Johnson than Michael Floyd. So who do you rank higher? There's no obvious right answer and that demonstrates the problem with dynasty rankings. A general set of rankings just isn't going to do you a ton of good unless you're preparing for a startup draft, and even then your first few picks will start to dictate what you need to do for the rest of the draft. I think it's much more useful to think about players in terms of value per cost. I would not rank Rueben Randle above Randall Cobb, but I think he offers more value relative to the price that it would take to acquire him. So I'd be much more likely to acquire Randle than Cobb. I build my dynasty draft boards more by looking at the guys who offer great value per cost and less by just building a massive list of players and ticking off names. That's also my usual approach to trades. I'm more likely to make a modest offer for someone who isn't highly valued than to make a massive offer for a proven star. So while I'd rank Robert Griffin as a slam dunk top 3 QB, he's not really a desirable trade target because his cost has caught up with his value. The same goes for guys like AJ Green, Trent Richardson, and Andrew Luck. Great players, but impossible to trade for. You'd probably get better value for cost going after someone like Michael Floyd, David Wilson, or Colin Kaepernick. So in a weird way, they are more desirable trade and draft targets. I spend more time thinking about who might present great value per cost than I do trying to split hairs ranking players. Having said that, I do keep a list of untouchable players. Basically the cornerstone guys that you can't trade. My list is...Aaron RodgersRobert GriffinAndrew LuckCam NewtonTrent RichardsonDoug MartinCalvin JohnsonDemaryius ThomasAJ GreenJulio JonesDez BryantJimmy GrahamI'm not moving one of these guys unless I get another one back, except for in extreme cases (for example, I have Cam and Luck on the same roster in one league and am suffering by keeping them both when I could pour the value into a different position).
I like the list and theory EBF. Just curious why no Gronk? Concerned about injuries?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for fun, my top tiers look like:

RG3

Rodgers

Newton

Luck

McCoy

Richardson

Green

Calvin

**Very close to adding Dez. Talent/age combination is there; maturity issues prevent it, for now.

Gronk

Graham

I wouldn't draft another player in the first round of a start up; I'd trade up or down if needed.

Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what would your top 10 be, by position, for dynasty? I'm guessing it would be largely slanted towards youth.

I don't keep updated dynasty rankings. That's partially out of apathy and partially because I don't really believe in the idea. Dynasty value is not like redraft value. It's much more team-specific. If I had a bad team, I would rather have Michael Floyd than Andre Johnson. If I had a contender, I would rather have Andre Johnson than Michael Floyd. So who do you rank higher? There's no obvious right answer and that demonstrates the problem with dynasty rankings. A general set of rankings just isn't going to do you a ton of good unless you're preparing for a startup draft, and even then your first few picks will start to dictate what you need to do for the rest of the draft. I think it's much more useful to think about players in terms of value per cost. I would not rank Rueben Randle above Randall Cobb, but I think he offers more value relative to the price that it would take to acquire him. So I'd be much more likely to acquire Randle than Cobb. I build my dynasty draft boards more by looking at the guys who offer great value per cost and less by just building a massive list of players and ticking off names. That's also my usual approach to trades. I'm more likely to make a modest offer for someone who isn't highly valued than to make a massive offer for a proven star. So while I'd rank Robert Griffin as a slam dunk top 3 QB, he's not really a desirable trade target because his cost has caught up with his value. The same goes for guys like AJ Green, Trent Richardson, and Andrew Luck. Great players, but impossible to trade for. You'd probably get better value for cost going after someone like Michael Floyd, David Wilson, or Colin Kaepernick. So in a weird way, they are more desirable trade and draft targets. I spend more time thinking about who might present great value per cost than I do trying to split hairs ranking players. Having said that, I do keep a list of untouchable players. Basically the cornerstone guys that you can't trade. My list is...Aaron RodgersRobert GriffinAndrew LuckCam NewtonTrent RichardsonDoug MartinCalvin JohnsonDemaryius ThomasAJ GreenJulio JonesDez BryantJimmy GrahamI'm not moving one of these guys unless I get another one back, except for in extreme cases (for example, I have Cam and Luck on the same roster in one league and am suffering by keeping them both when I could pour the value into a different position).
I like the list and theory EBF. Just curious why no Gronk? Concerned about injuries?
Yeah, mostly. His impact on the game is undeniable, but he strikes me as the type who will burn brightly for a few years and then fade away. Plays a really physical style and seeks contact. Missed an entire year in college and is hurt again in the NFL. He is a much more dominant player than Jeremy Shockey ever was, but I could see him having a similar career trajectory. When you play a really physical game, you pay a price. I don't see Tony Gonzalez or Jason Witten longevity potential here. Graham looks more like those guys to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers | Luck RG3 Newton | Ryan Stafford | Brees Brady Peyton EliCalvin AJG | Julio Harvin Dez | Thomas Fitz | Cruz Nicks MarshallTR | Martin Rice Foster ADP McCoy Spiller | Charles Murray | MathewsGronk Graham | Hernandez | Rudolph Witten Vernon Gresham | Finley Bennett Allen

Still somewhat a Finley believer? And Mathews seems high too. I'd rather roll the dice on McFadden, or take an older guy like Forte or MJD. I'd take Ridley and Morris over him as well. And I'd take every WR on your list, sans Fitz, over Harvin. Nicks and Harvin could be a tough call, though.Good list though. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still somewhat a Finley believer? And Mathews seems high too. I'd rather roll the dice on McFadden, or take an older guy like Forte.

Really struggled with the last set of TE because basically I don't want any of them. I still like Finley over someone like Pettigrew, Cook, or Fred Davis. Mathews gets a new coach next year. Forte and Lynch are only 1 year older but accumulated workload comes into play. I think Mathews, Forte, Lynch, Johnson, DMC are all the same tier but I would purposefully avoid Forte and Johnson. Edited by thriftyrocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still somewhat a Finley believer? And Mathews seems high too. I'd rather roll the dice on McFadden, or take an older guy like Forte.

Really struggled with the last set of TE because basically I don't want any of them. I still like Finley over someone like Pettigrew, Cook, or Fred Davis. Mathews gets a new coach next year. Forte and Lynch are only 1 year older but accumulated workload comes into play. I think Mathews, Forte, Lynch, Johnson, DMC are all the same tier but I would purposefully avoid Forte and Johnson.
Makes sense, thanks. Safe to assume accumulated workload keeps MJD off the tier?He was a sell for me early in the season. I'd likely look to buy now. Jax looks to be a much better situation than it has been; the offense has been pretty solid. 1 year of top 10 is worth more to me than it is to most, it seems. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes sense, thanks. Safe to assume accumulated workload keeps MJD off the tier?

I would much rather have David Wilson than MJD. He's with Bush and Gore now. And Steven Jackson. RB3.
Wilson is a hard guy for me to rank, but in most cases, I'd lean towards MJD. Again, I like this offense next year, compared to what it has been. MJD is a guy I'm willing to bet on, like ADP, to last longer than the average RB. Anything above and beyond a sinlge top 7-8 season is a bonus. He'll be a good deal more productive than Bush and help you win more in 1-2 years than Bush will in 2-3. MJD still projects to be a 3 down back and a workhorse, and those become more rare every year. I do worry about the draft this year, however, with MJD; it can either help or really hurt him. A young handcuff would improve his value, the way Turbin is a big plus for Lynch owners. However, I wouldn't be shocked if Jax drafted a RB to be more than just a handcuff, even as early as next year.ETA: Steven Jackson?! You don't mean that. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where would you guys rank Tannehill and Foles?

I like Tannehill a good deal more than Foles. Tannehill is likely top 15, Foles top 25; not sold on him starting next year.
Starting at 11Romo Freeman Ben Wilson Dalton Kaepernick Vick | Rivers Cutler Flacco Tannehill Locker | Schaub Bradford | Palmer Weeden Foles Ponder Flynn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...