Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty Rankings


Recommended Posts

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
I'd put Tanny over Vick, Rivers, Cutler, Flacco. Foles is right about where I'd rank him. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ETA: Steven Jackson?! You don't mean that.

BOOM! Roasted. Basically all 4 I don't want to own until I have to. They are not the same tier but the same type of player and outlook. High risk, high upside, small window. MJD has a clear advantage in upside and window but not in risk. I agree MJD is a good opportunity buy and certainly would target him over the other 3 mentioned if I had a dying need.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ETA: Steven Jackson?! You don't mean that.

BOOM! Roasted. Basically all 4 I don't want to own until I have to. They are not the same tier but the same type of player and outlook. High risk, high upside, small window. MJD has a clear advantage in upside and window but not in risk. I agree MJD is a good opportunity buy and certainly would target him over the other 3 mentioned if I had a dying need.
I agree with most of this. The only difference is how valuable the high risk, high upside, small window is. That could depend on our different leagues and rosters, though. So maybe we're not far apart. I will be buying where I can, however.
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.
Catch rate is an archaic stat. Drop rate for a receiver far more useful to isolate the receiver. Edited by I was in the pool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catch rate is an archaic stat. Drop rate for a receiver far more useful to isolate the receiver.

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 agree that drop rate is big. But catch rate has some use, in context. Wayne and Decker both played the same position, in the same system, with the same player throwing the ball. 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.
I don't get the continuing Finley love at all. The situation has been absolutely golden for him, but he's been brutal for all but one game of the past TWO+ YEARS. He's due a huge roster bonus early in 2013 and I highly doubt GB pays it. If he can't produce with Aaron Rodgers and a slew of WR injuries in GB, I don't like his chances somewhere else. Edited by Coeur de Lion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an example, look at Fitzgerald's catch rate. That brings a lot of QB influence into equation. Use QB accuracy% to see quality of targets for a receiver, then drop rate for WR.

I agree that there are better stats; just think it has it's place. Especially with so much context. Even drop rate isn't perfect. "Catchable" will never be anything but a subjective call, and if a player - say TO - is able to make targets "catchable" that other WRs can't - due to creating space, etc - it's not entirely accurate to suggest he is less productive or less likely to catch the average target than Michael Crabtree, who doesn't drop many balls, but is not as capable of providing "catchable target" windows for his QB. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you guys rank R.Wilson compared to this years class? Would you take him over Geno, Barkley, and T.Wilson?

I would.
Me too. Not sure if that says more about Wilson, or Geno/Barkley/Wilson.
I'd take Wilson easily. Heck I have 1.01 next year... and I've considered offering it up for Wilson. I was trying to get him for most of this season but the owner has been really stubborn and now his value is probably going to blow up. We'll see though.And I think that says a lot about Wilson, and that he's a lot closer to Luck/RG3 than most people think. Geno/Barkley/Wilson aren't close to the three guys from last season.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where would you guys rank Tannehill and Foles among QBs ?

I've not done rankings but Tannehill is going to be a stud with some more growth and weapons. Still not sure I'd want to put my trust in him to be my starter next season but that could change depending on what weapons they add for him. I think I'm ready to move him ahead of a high upside guy like a Jake Locker as an example, just think he's going to prove to a far more consistent player.As a Vick owner and long time believer in the Andy Reid QB friendly system I roster Foles in a few places right now. I imagine I'll be cutting him in all of those places when I have to trim my roster during the off season. The QB friendly system won't be in place and he looks like a middling talent. I'm not convinced he'll be Philly's starting QB next year but if you are in a league that you can never find even a terrible starting QB on the waivers than and only than would I keep him. I view him along as the same type of talent as a Sanchez, Gabbert and these kinds of guys at one time or another are almost always on the waiver wire in the leagues I'm in.
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.
I don't get the continuing Finley love at all. The situation has been absolutely golden for him, but he's been brutal for all but one game of the past TWO+ YEARS. He's due a huge roster bonus early in 2013 and I highly doubt GB pays it. If he can't produce with Aaron Rodgers and a slew of WR injuries in GB, I don't like his chances somewhere else.
I think the bolded is the reason for the Finley love that still exsists. For the last two years owners were hoping the potential would pay off - now they hope it pays off in a different offense. For whatever reason, Finley's abilities do not translate into the Packers offense very well. I am not sure if it's schematic in nature or related to how he is perceived by his QB/OC.

There are those that think he has the talent to be a borderline #1 TE - but at this point it would take a change of scenery to accomplish it. What would happen to his value if he went to Chicago? Or Philly? Or Arizona? New England's offense is TE-friendly enough to support two talented fantasy TEs - I think there are offenses that are TE-friendly enough to make Finley FF viable as a borderline TE1 given his age and abilities, but some of it depends on his maturity (which is also part of the problem). I do not think that can happen if he remains in Green Bay.

Edited by DoubleG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for funsies:1. Rice2. Richardson3. Peterson4. McCoy5. Martin6. Charles7. Spiller8. Foster9. Forte10. Mathews11. LynchThat's a rough first pass, and I'm not sure how I feel about it yet. Anything stand out as particularly glaring?

I like Matthews' talent (and I'm an owner in several leagues), but I just can't see having him above Lynch at this point. Yes, SD is a mess in general now, but Matthews also hasn't impressed me on the field this year. And on the injury front, it's been one thing after another.Lynch is only 18 months older than Matthews (he'll be 27 next April, while Matthews will be 26 next Oct), has been extremely productive, is on a team that will ride him and looks on the upswing, and despite one of the heaviest workloads over the last two years has actually held up and looked good under the load. Edited by corpcow
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.
I don't get the continuing Finley love at all. The situation has been absolutely golden for him, but he's been brutal for all but one game of the past TWO+ YEARS. He's due a huge roster bonus early in 2013 and I highly doubt GB pays it. If he can't produce with Aaron Rodgers and a slew of WR injuries in GB, I don't like his chances somewhere else.
I think the bolded is the reason for the Finley love that still exsists. For the last two years owners were hoping the potential would pay off - now they hope it pays off in a different offense. For whatever reason, Finley's abilities do not translate into the Packers offense very well. I am not sure if it's schematic in nature or related to how he is perceived by his QB/OC.

There are those that think he has the talent to be a borderline #1 TE - but at this point it would take a change of scenery to accomplish it. What would happen to his value if he went to Chicago? Or Philly? Or Arizona? New England's offense is TE-friendly enough to support two talented fantasy TEs - I think there are offenses that are TE-friendly enough to make Finley FF viable as a borderline TE1 given his age and abilities, but some of it depends on his maturity (which is also part of the problem). I do not think that can happen if he remains in Green Bay.

I personally don't see any way that leaving a top shelf passing system and a HOF QB helps his stat line, but to each his own. Pretty sure Rodgers and the GB coaches are smart enough to know exactly how to use their weapons correctly -- if Finley deserved more targets he'd be getting them. He doesn't get features because he's just not very good. If he ends up somewhere like Arizona (bad enough to hold down Larry friggin Fitzgerald's #s) he'll be utterly worthless.
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.

He doesn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finley has hands of stone.

That's a bit of a problem for a TE.

That sounds like a decent reason...except that it's not really true. :shrug:

He is in the middle of the pack (16th out of 36 active TEs who have at least 30 targets) in TE Catch% (linky-style). He does have 6 drops - which puts him with 3 fewer than Graham, and less than Pettigrew, Celek, Bennet and Myers - all of whom I presumed to have good hands.

I'm not defending the guy - frankly, I think he's got some knucklhead factor working, and doesn't have the bes work ethic. I'm just not sure why he isn't utilized in the offense more. Is it because there is simply too many mouths to feed? Is it because the team (either the coaches or the QB) are tired of his immaturity and just want him gone? Not sure. That's part of the reason for the post. I don't think it's a lack of skill, though.

Edited by DoubleG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finley has hands of stone.

That's a bit of a problem for a TE.

That sounds like a decent reason...except that it's not really true. :shrug:

He is in the middle of the pack (16th out of 36 active TEs who have at least 30 targets) in TE Catch% (linky-style). He does have 6 drops - which puts him with 3 fewer than Graham, and less than Pettigrew, Celek, Bennet and Myers - all of whom I presumed to have good hands.

I'm not defending the guy - frankly, I think he's got some knucklhead factor working, and doesn't have the bes work ethic. I'm just not sure why he isn't utilized in the offense more. Is it because there is simply too many mouths to feed? Is it because the team (either the coaches or the QB) are tired of his immaturity and just want him gone? Not sure. That's part of the reason for the post. I don't think it's a lack of skill, though.

My issue with Finley is that he just isn't a good TE. If you rated TEs soley on recieving skills, I'm sure he'd be a top 10 guy. The problem is that he is a sub par blocker and isn't a good fit in a lot of normal formations teams run. So fine, the packers split him out wide and use him as that 3-4 WR, but his skills aren't so good that he is better than a 3-4 WR on most teams. His lack of blocking skills is what will keep him off the field for a balanced attack team.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for funsies:1. Rice2. Richardson3. Peterson4. McCoy5. Martin6. Charles7. Spiller8. Foster9. Forte10. Mathews11. LynchThat's a rough first pass, and I'm not sure how I feel about it yet. Anything stand out as particularly glaring?

I like Matthews' talent (and I'm an owner in several leagues), but I just can't see having him above Lynch at this point. Yes, SD is a mess in general now, but Matthews also hasn't impressed me on the field this year. And on the injury front, it's been one thing after another.Lynch is only 18 months older than Matthews (he'll be 27 next April, while Matthews will be 26 next Oct), has been extremely productive, is on a team that will ride him and looks on the upswing, and despite one of the heaviest workloads over the last two years has actually held up and looked good under the load.
Lynch runs too hot and cold for me, from carry to carry, week to week, and season to season. I also don't think he's as talented as his numbers. I think he is now what he has always been his entire career- a solid if unspectacular back capable of putting up great volume stats when given a chance. I think a lot of people forgot that's what he was and had him too low earlier in his career. I think a lot of people are forgetting that's what he is and have him too high today. As for Mathews... the talent is there. The production is there. So far, the health isn't there, and the situation isn't there. I'm happy to bet on his health and situation being short term setbacks, because I think he's one of the 5 most talented backs in the league 25 and under. People are too quick to bury young backs who hit a rough patch. Ironically, your guy Lynch is the poster boy for this phenomenon. There was a reason Mathews was a consensus top5 dynasty back before the season.Edit: completely honestly, what's the difference between Lynch and Chris Ivory, other than the fact that one of them gets a workhorse workload and the other doesn't? Edited by SSOG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finley has hands of stone.

That's a bit of a problem for a TE.

That sounds like a decent reason...except that it's not really true. :shrug:

He is in the middle of the pack (16th out of 36 active TEs who have at least 30 targets) in TE Catch% (linky-style). He does have 6 drops - which puts him with 3 fewer than Graham, and less than Pettigrew, Celek, Bennet and Myers - all of whom I presumed to have good hands.

I'm not defending the guy - frankly, I think he's got some knucklhead factor working, and doesn't have the bes work ethic. I'm just not sure why he isn't utilized in the offense more. Is it because there is simply too many mouths to feed? Is it because the team (either the coaches or the QB) are tired of his immaturity and just want him gone? Not sure. That's part of the reason for the post. I don't think it's a lack of skill, though.

Pettigrew and Bennett do not have strong hands and neither does Finley. I question the person compiling these stats if he only has Finley with 6 on the year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask a stupid question.

How do I get hold of this VBD data that everyone talking about. Like ADP has been over 100 virtually his whole career ???

I remember reading many years ago a posts from SSOG about how Gates VBD was through the roof time and time again.

Thanks in Advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finley has hands of stone.

That's a bit of a problem for a TE.

That sounds like a decent reason...except that it's not really true. :shrug:

He is in the middle of the pack (16th out of 36 active TEs who have at least 30 targets) in TE Catch% (linky-style). He does have 6 drops - which puts him with 3 fewer than Graham, and less than Pettigrew, Celek, Bennet and Myers - all of whom I presumed to have good hands.

I'm not defending the guy - frankly, I think he's got some knucklhead factor working, and doesn't have the bes work ethic. I'm just not sure why he isn't utilized in the offense more. Is it because there is simply too many mouths to feed? Is it because the team (either the coaches or the QB) are tired of his immaturity and just want him gone? Not sure. That's part of the reason for the post. I don't think it's a lack of skill, though.

Pettigrew and Bennett do not have strong hands and neither does Finley. I question the person compiling these stats if he only has Finley with 6 on the year.

Here's one page: drops - but they all refer to STATS which is pretty much it when it comes to sports statistics. :shrug: Edited by DoubleG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely honestly, what's the difference between Lynch and Chris Ivory, other than the fact that one of them gets a workhorse workload and the other doesn't?

Nothing except talent. Edited by rude classless thugs
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.
EBF love the read :goodposting: Edited by new-guru
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask a stupid question. How do I get hold of this VBD data that everyone talking about. Like ADP has been over 100 virtually his whole career ???I remember reading many years ago a posts from SSOG about how Gates VBD was through the roof time and time again. Thanks in Advance.

Pro football reference has it. Go to the player page, scroll to the bottom, and there's a chart with his career VBD ranks. On occasion you'll encounter a glitch (for some bizarre reason, ADP doesn't seem to exist this season), but it's the best in-one-place reference around.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely honestly, what's the difference between Lynch and Chris Ivory, other than the fact that one of them gets a workhorse workload and the other doesn't?

Nothing except talent.
Not much talent difference there, except possibly in "health" (Lynch has a lot of "health" skill, Ivory gets an incomplete because we haven't had a chance to see).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely honestly, what's the difference between Lynch and Chris Ivory, other than the fact that one of them gets a workhorse workload and the other doesn't?

Nothing except talent.
Yea, that and about 4600 career rushing yards. Lynch was a first round pick. Has been a starter in the NFL for about 5 years total. If you manage to keep a starting job at the highest level of the game for that long, you're probably pretty good at what you do. Everyone knows that opportunity = production, but there's a reason why some players always get that opportunity while others don't. Lynch gets the volume precisely because he's a very good back.

I'd say the same thing about guys like McGahee, Benson, Mendenhall, and Greene. Most people would call them average backs, but you don't get 250-300 touches over multiple seasons if you're an average back. They might be average starters, but that's something else entirely. Guys like this might never make the Pro Bowl, but they're good enough to hold down a starting job for multiple seasons and emerge as a starter elsewhere if they get run out of town. Meanwhile, a guy like Ivory might not ever be a starter in his whole NFL career. That's the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely honestly, what's the difference between Lynch and Chris Ivory, other than the fact that one of them gets a workhorse workload and the other doesn't?

Nothing except talent.
Not much talent difference there, except possibly in "health" (Lynch has a lot of "health" skill, Ivory gets an incomplete because we haven't had a chance to see).
If you honestly believe that Ivory is just as talented a player as Lynch, then there is nothing more that can be said in this discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely honestly, what's the difference between Lynch and Chris Ivory, other than the fact that one of them gets a workhorse workload and the other doesn't?

Nothing except talent.
Yea, that and about 4600 career rushing yards. Lynch was a first round pick. Has been a starter in the NFL for about 5 years total. If you manage to keep a starting job at the highest level of the game for that long, you're probably pretty good at what you do. Everyone knows that opportunity = production, but there's a reason why some players always get that opportunity while others don't. Lynch gets the volume precisely because he's a very good back.

I'd say the same thing about guys like McGahee, Benson, Mendenhall, and Greene. Most people would call them average backs, but you don't get 250-300 touches over multiple seasons if you're an average back. They might be average starters, but that's something else entirely. Guys like this might never make the Pro Bowl, but they're good enough to hold down a starting job for multiple seasons and emerge as a starter elsewhere if they get run out of town. Meanwhile, a guy like Ivory might not ever be a starter in his whole NFL career. That's the difference.

The fact that Mendenhall is a healthy scratch for the second straight week reveals the truth. The only thing special about him is how he managed to be in the right place at the right time. Ditto that for Greene, or Knowshon. These guys aren't better than Ivory, or Pierre Thomas, etc. They're just a lot luckier in their landing spots.

Not that I'd ever lump Lynch in with that trio. He's way better, and a legitimate NFL starter. He's just not as talented as his numbers suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Mendenhall is a healthy scratch for the second straight week reveals the truth. The only thing special about him is how he managed to be in the right place at the right time. Ditto that for Greene, or Knowshon. These guys aren't better than Ivory, or Pierre Thomas, etc. They're just a lot luckier in their landing spots.

If Mendenhall was as bad as you're suggesting he wouldn't have been a starter on a playoff team for three years. And that's kind of the point that I'm illustrating. Teams don't just hand long term starting jobs to bad players. So anyone who manages to survive for 3-4 years as a starter in the NFL is probably very good at what he does. Guys like Mendenhall, Benson, McGahee, Greene, and Lynch are kind of like the RB versions of Flacco, Cutler, Palmer, and Alex Smith. They aren't good enough to hold down a starting job on every team, but they're good enough to start somewhere. That's why teams keep trotting them out there. Anyone who says guys like this are average has a skewed frame of reference. They might be average in comparison to all of the other starting players in the NFL, but that is pretty select company. You have to be pretty special to be a long term starter in the NFL. If you're a mediocre player, you'll be found out and benched within a year or two. That's just how the league works. The same applies to all of the other positions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Mendenhall is a healthy scratch for the second straight week reveals the truth. The only thing special about him is how he managed to be in the right place at the right time. Ditto that for Greene, or Knowshon. These guys aren't better than Ivory, or Pierre Thomas, etc. They're just a lot luckier in their landing spots.

If Mendenhall was as bad as you're suggesting he wouldn't have been a starter on a playoff team for three years. And that's kind of the point that I'm illustrating. Teams don't just hand long term starting jobs to bad players. So anyone who manages to survive for 3-4 years as a starter in the NFL is probably very good at what he does. Guys like Mendenhall, Benson, McGahee, Greene, and Lynch are kind of like the RB versions of Flacco, Cutler, Palmer, and Alex Smith. They aren't good enough to hold down a starting job on every team, but they're good enough to start somewhere. That's why teams keep trotting them out there. Anyone who says guys like this are average has a skewed frame of reference. They might be average in comparison to all of the other starting players in the NFL, but that is pretty select company. You have to be pretty special to be a long term starter in the NFL. If you're a mediocre player, you'll be found out and benched within a year or two. That's just how the league works. The same applies to all of the other positions.
You know the old joke about the bear chasing the two guys, and one saying to the other "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you"? Well, to start in the NFL, you don't have to be great, you just have to be better than the other guys on the roster. That's how Mendenhall was a long-term starter (only had to beat out a thoroughly uninspiring Redman and a fat/lazy/unmotivated Dwyer- and now can't even do that), while Chris Ivory rides the pine (fighting for carries with Ingram, Sproles, and Pierre Thomas).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Mendenhall is a healthy scratch for the second straight week reveals the truth. The only thing special about him is how he managed to be in the right place at the right time. Ditto that for Greene, or Knowshon. These guys aren't better than Ivory, or Pierre Thomas, etc. They're just a lot luckier in their landing spots.

If Mendenhall was as bad as you're suggesting he wouldn't have been a starter on a playoff team for three years. And that's kind of the point that I'm illustrating. Teams don't just hand long term starting jobs to bad players. So anyone who manages to survive for 3-4 years as a starter in the NFL is probably very good at what he does. Guys like Mendenhall, Benson, McGahee, Greene, and Lynch are kind of like the RB versions of Flacco, Cutler, Palmer, and Alex Smith. They aren't good enough to hold down a starting job on every team, but they're good enough to start somewhere. That's why teams keep trotting them out there. Anyone who says guys like this are average has a skewed frame of reference. They might be average in comparison to all of the other starting players in the NFL, but that is pretty select company. You have to be pretty special to be a long term starter in the NFL. If you're a mediocre player, you'll be found out and benched within a year or two. That's just how the league works. The same applies to all of the other positions.
You know the old joke about the bear chasing the two guys, and one saying to the other "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you"? Well, to start in the NFL, you don't have to be great, you just have to be better than the other guys on the roster. That's how Mendenhall was a long-term starter (only had to beat out a thoroughly uninspiring Redman and a fat/lazy/unmotivated Dwyer- and now can't even do that), while Chris Ivory rides the pine (fighting for carries with Ingram, Sproles, and Pierre Thomas).
Yea, but the difference between guys like Mendenhall/Benson/McGahee/Lynch is that they're going to win a lot of those races, whereas guys like Ivory, Choice, and M Bush are probably destined to always be a bride's maid and never a bride. Unless you are the best player in the league at your position, you would not be a starter on every team in the NFL. However, that doesn't mean you couldn't be a starter for a lot of the teams. And that's basically how I feel about the likes of Benson, Mendenhall, Lynch, and McGahee. They're not among the top 5 workhorse backs in the NFL, but they're in the 10-25 range and that means they're good enough to start for a lot of teams. People often lose sight of this when one of these guys is in the process of losing his job. I've seen this pattern happen so many times that I've started to recognize it before it even plays out. McGahee was written off when he was run out of Buffalo after two consecutive seasons of 3.8 YPC. Lynch was written off when he was run out Buffalo after losing his job to Fred Jackson. Benson was written off in Chicago and Cincinnati. Similar story with Thomas Jones. And now the same is happening with Mendenhall. Most FF owners are so myopic and stuck in the present that they struggle to maintain perspective during the natural highs and lows of a career. Hence why so many dynasty rankings are really just a glorified reflection of whatever is going on at that exact moment in time. I got Thomas Jones for a song after his season with the Buccaneers because people had convinced himself that he was a bust. I could've had Lynch in the 8th round of a 14 team startup a couple years ago when he was completely out of fashion. I had the opportunity to get Benson for a 2nd round rookie pick in a 14 team dev league when he first signed with the Bengals. I'm sure McGahee would've been dirt cheap after the Bills drafted Lynch. Most recently, I got Moreno for very low prices in a couple leagues prior to McGahee's injury. This offseason I will be sending out some offers for Mendenhall. What I've learned over the years is that you don't sell guys like this when they hit a rough patch in their career. You buy them. Because a guy who was good enough to earn a first round pick and secure a prominent role with one team has a pretty good chance to pop up again elsewhere if things turn sour for him. Edited by EBF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Mendenhall is a healthy scratch for the second straight week reveals the truth. The only thing special about him is how he managed to be in the right place at the right time. Ditto that for Greene, or Knowshon. These guys aren't better than Ivory, or Pierre Thomas, etc. They're just a lot luckier in their landing spots.

If Mendenhall was as bad as you're suggesting he wouldn't have been a starter on a playoff team for three years. And that's kind of the point that I'm illustrating. Teams don't just hand long term starting jobs to bad players. So anyone who manages to survive for 3-4 years as a starter in the NFL is probably very good at what he does. Guys like Mendenhall, Benson, McGahee, Greene, and Lynch are kind of like the RB versions of Flacco, Cutler, Palmer, and Alex Smith. They aren't good enough to hold down a starting job on every team, but they're good enough to start somewhere. That's why teams keep trotting them out there. Anyone who says guys like this are average has a skewed frame of reference. They might be average in comparison to all of the other starting players in the NFL, but that is pretty select company. You have to be pretty special to be a long term starter in the NFL. If you're a mediocre player, you'll be found out and benched within a year or two. That's just how the league works. The same applies to all of the other positions.
You know the old joke about the bear chasing the two guys, and one saying to the other "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you"? Well, to start in the NFL, you don't have to be great, you just have to be better than the other guys on the roster. That's how Mendenhall was a long-term starter (only had to beat out a thoroughly uninspiring Redman and a fat/lazy/unmotivated Dwyer- and now can't even do that), while Chris Ivory rides the pine (fighting for carries with Ingram, Sproles, and Pierre Thomas).
Yea, but the difference between guys like Mendenhall/Benson/McGahee/Lynch is that they're going to win a lot of those races, whereas guys like Ivory, Choice, and M Bush are probably destined to always be a bride's maid and never a bride. Unless you are the best player in the league at your position, you would not be a starter on every team in the NFL. However, that doesn't mean you couldn't be a starter for a lot of the teams. And that's basically how I feel about the likes of Benson, Mendenhall, Lynch, and McGahee. They're not among the top 5 workhorse backs in the NFL, but they're in the 10-25 range and that means they're good enough to start for a lot of teams. People often lose sight of this when one of these guys is in the process of losing his job. I've seen this pattern happen so many times that I've started to recognize it before it even plays out. McGahee was written off when he was run out of Buffalo after two consecutive seasons of 3.8 YPC. Lynch was written off when he was run out Buffalo after losing his job to Fred Jackson. Benson was written off in Chicago and Cincinnati. Similar story with Thomas Jones. And now the same is happening with Mendenhall. Most FF owners are so myopic and stuck in the present that they struggle to maintain perspective during the natural highs and lows of a career. Hence why so many dynasty rankings are really just a glorified reflection of whatever is going on at that exact moment in time. I got Thomas Jones for a song after his season with the Buccaneers because people had convinced himself that he was a bust. I could've had Lynch in the 8th round of a 14 team startup a couple years ago when he was completely out of fashion. I had the opportunity to get Benson for a 2nd round rookie pick in a 14 team dev league when he first signed with the Bengals. I'm sure McGahee would've been dirt cheap after the Bills drafted Lynch. Most recently, I got Moreno for very low prices in a couple leagues prior to McGahee's injury. This offseason I will be sending out some offers for Mendenhall. What I've learned over the years is that you don't sell guys like this when they hit a rough patch in their career. You buy them. Because a guy who was good enough to earn a first round pick and secure a prominent role with one team has a pretty good chance to pop up again elsewhere if things turn sour for him.
I don't disagree with any of this. I disagree that there's a dramatic talent difference between some of the average starters and the best backups.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a non-ideal back who'll never be used as a workhorse, Jamaal Charles sure looks like someone who is being used as a workhorse. After today's game, he's back over 5 ypc and back on pace for 1500 rushing yards. Hope everyone took the opportunity to buy before the window closed again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finley has hands of stone.

That's a bit of a problem for a TE.

That sounds like a decent reason...except that it's not really true. :shrug:

He is in the middle of the pack (16th out of 36 active TEs who have at least 30 targets) in TE Catch% (linky-style). He does have 6 drops - which puts him with 3 fewer than Graham, and less than Pettigrew, Celek, Bennet and Myers - all of whom I presumed to have good hands.

I'm not defending the guy - frankly, I think he's got some knucklhead factor working, and doesn't have the bes work ethic. I'm just not sure why he isn't utilized in the offense more. Is it because there is simply too many mouths to feed? Is it because the team (either the coaches or the QB) are tired of his immaturity and just want him gone? Not sure. That's part of the reason for the post. I don't think it's a lack of skill, though.

Pettigrew and Bennett do not have strong hands and neither does Finley. I question the person compiling these stats if he only has Finley with 6 on the year.

Here's one page: drops - but they all refer to STATS which is pretty much it when it comes to sports statistics. :shrug:
Just saying the numbers don't match the eyes, Pettigrew and Finley especially have hands issues. Bennett seems like more of a focus issue - wrong routes, stopping routes, inconsistent effort. Basically, the reasons Dallas didn't blink about letting him walk. Won't argue against his numbers, but something doesn't smell right with the other 2. The ball hits the turf way too frequently when the ball gets to them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask a stupid question. How do I get hold of this VBD data that everyone talking about. Like ADP has been over 100 virtually his whole career ???I remember reading many years ago a posts from SSOG about how Gates VBD was through the roof time and time again. Thanks in Advance.

Pro football reference has it. Go to the player page, scroll to the bottom, and there's a chart with his career VBD ranks. On occasion you'll encounter a glitch (for some bizarre reason, ADP doesn't seem to exist this season), but it's the best in-one-place reference around.
Thank You. Thank You. Time to waste the next week crunching those numbers. Cheers Again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that Mendenhall is a healthy scratch for the second straight week reveals the truth. The only thing special about him is how he managed to be in the right place at the right time. Ditto that for Greene, or Knowshon. These guys aren't better than Ivory, or Pierre Thomas, etc. They're just a lot luckier in their landing spots.

If Mendenhall was as bad as you're suggesting he wouldn't have been a starter on a playoff team for three years. And that's kind of the point that I'm illustrating. Teams don't just hand long term starting jobs to bad players. So anyone who manages to survive for 3-4 years as a starter in the NFL is probably very good at what he does. Guys like Mendenhall, Benson, McGahee, Greene, and Lynch are kind of like the RB versions of Flacco, Cutler, Palmer, and Alex Smith. They aren't good enough to hold down a starting job on every team, but they're good enough to start somewhere. That's why teams keep trotting them out there. Anyone who says guys like this are average has a skewed frame of reference. They might be average in comparison to all of the other starting players in the NFL, but that is pretty select company. You have to be pretty special to be a long term starter in the NFL. If you're a mediocre player, you'll be found out and benched within a year or two. That's just how the league works. The same applies to all of the other positions.
You know the old joke about the bear chasing the two guys, and one saying to the other "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you"? Well, to start in the NFL, you don't have to be great, you just have to be better than the other guys on the roster. That's how Mendenhall was a long-term starter (only had to beat out a thoroughly uninspiring Redman and a fat/lazy/unmotivated Dwyer- and now can't even do that), while Chris Ivory rides the pine (fighting for carries with Ingram, Sproles, and Pierre Thomas).
Yea, but the difference between guys like Mendenhall/Benson/McGahee/Lynch is that they're going to win a lot of those races, whereas guys like Ivory, Choice, and M Bush are probably destined to always be a bride's maid and never a bride. Unless you are the best player in the league at your position, you would not be a starter on every team in the NFL. However, that doesn't mean you couldn't be a starter for a lot of the teams. And that's basically how I feel about the likes of Benson, Mendenhall, Lynch, and McGahee. They're not among the top 5 workhorse backs in the NFL, but they're in the 10-25 range and that means they're good enough to start for a lot of teams. People often lose sight of this when one of these guys is in the process of losing his job. I've seen this pattern happen so many times that I've started to recognize it before it even plays out. McGahee was written off when he was run out of Buffalo after two consecutive seasons of 3.8 YPC. Lynch was written off when he was run out Buffalo after losing his job to Fred Jackson. Benson was written off in Chicago and Cincinnati. Similar story with Thomas Jones. And now the same is happening with Mendenhall. Most FF owners are so myopic and stuck in the present that they struggle to maintain perspective during the natural highs and lows of a career. Hence why so many dynasty rankings are really just a glorified reflection of whatever is going on at that exact moment in time. I got Thomas Jones for a song after his season with the Buccaneers because people had convinced himself that he was a bust. I could've had Lynch in the 8th round of a 14 team startup a couple years ago when he was completely out of fashion. I had the opportunity to get Benson for a 2nd round rookie pick in a 14 team dev league when he first signed with the Bengals. I'm sure McGahee would've been dirt cheap after the Bills drafted Lynch. Most recently, I got Moreno for very low prices in a couple leagues prior to McGahee's injury. This offseason I will be sending out some offers for Mendenhall. What I've learned over the years is that you don't sell guys like this when they hit a rough patch in their career. You buy them. Because a guy who was good enough to earn a first round pick and secure a prominent role with one team has a pretty good chance to pop up again elsewhere if things turn sour for him.
Nice job trading Gabbert for Moreno EBF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask a stupid question. How do I get hold of this VBD data that everyone talking about. Like ADP has been over 100 virtually his whole career ???I remember reading many years ago a posts from SSOG about how Gates VBD was through the roof time and time again. Thanks in Advance.

Pro football reference has it. Go to the player page, scroll to the bottom, and there's a chart with his career VBD ranks. On occasion you'll encounter a glitch (for some bizarre reason, ADP doesn't seem to exist this season), but it's the best in-one-place reference around.
Thank You. Thank You. Time to waste the next week crunching those numbers. Cheers Again.
Send my apologies to your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/husband/parents/children/family. They won't be seeing you again for a while.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really tempted to place Newton back as my #1 dynasty QB. He will finish the season in the top 5 for the 2nd time in his only 2 seasons in the NFL.

-RG3 is really starting to scare me with his running style; I think he will be forced to change it, which could result fewer goal line looks.

-Rodgers just turned 29, and I know that is not old, and I know he has 8 seasons left, but he is no longer young for his position. If you don't look beyond X years, that that won't matter. But I tend to value the players projected career and give guys like Luck, Newton, and RG3 a boost.

-Luck belongs in the conersation, and I think he is safer than Newton, but I think Newton offers a potential peak that Luck doesn't, due to the rushing totals.

Where do you guys rank Newton, in terms of dynasty value?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't see this Bernard Pierce highlight until today:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/0ap2000000101228/RB-Pierce-18-yd-run

Pretty athletic play. This guy is looking like one of the best backups in the league. Considering where Hillman and Pead went in rookie drafts this past year, Pierce was a great value. He looks like a real player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really tempted to place Newton back as my #1 dynasty QB. He will finish the season in the top 5 for the 2nd time in his only 2 seasons in the NFL. -RG3 is really starting to scare me with his running style; I think he will be forced to change it, which could result fewer goal line looks. -Rodgers just turned 29, and I know that is not old, and I know he has 8 seasons left, but he is no longer young for his position. If you don't look beyond X years, that that won't matter. But I tend to value the players projected career and give guys like Luck, Newton, and RG3 a boost.-Luck belongs in the conersation, and I think he is safer than Newton, but I think Newton offers a potential peak that Luck doesn't, due to the rushing totals. Where do you guys rank Newton, in terms of dynasty value?

Rodgers is still #1 imo. He's got 6-ish years of good/great production left, carries the greatest market value right now (in my leagues at least) and judging by Tom Brady's valuation in most leagues at the age of 35, Rodgers will hold his value for a long time as long as he keeps producing (which is the case for any great QB, young or old) so their will be ample opportunity to trade him for a younger model at a later date. Rodgers also has the least worrisome question marks for those that are risk averse. RG3 is my #2 followed by Cam. Luck is a close 4th. Edited by Ernol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers, RG3, and Luck are in their own tier.

Then Brady and Brees.

Then Stafford, Ryan, and Cam.

Probably Peyton, Romo, and Big Ben next but it gets cloudier in now vs. later. i.e. if I need a starter I want them, but if I have one of the top guys I want Kaepernick, Wilson, Tannehill, etc. instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers is still #1 imo. He's got 6-ish years of good/great production left, carries the greatest market value right now (in my leagues at least) and judging by Tom Brady's valuation in most leagues at the age of 35, Rodgers will hold his value for a long time as long as he keeps producing (which is the case for any great QB, young or old) so their will be ample opportunity to trade him for a younger model at a later date. Rodgers also has the least worrisome question marks for those that are risk averse. RG3 is my #2 followed by Cam. Luck is a close 4th.

Very solid. I would be lying if I said I wouldn't have traded Cam for RG3 and Rodgers at one point this year, despite valuing him #1 going into the season. Now, however, in the leagues in which I do own Cam, I wouldn't make those moves now. The last month has been reinvigorating for me as a Cam owner; I've been reminded of the potential he offers every week. I know there are many theories out there, but a simple change in the running game philosophy seems to have sparked a major improvement in this offense. I have to think that positive factor will remain through the rest of this season, and into next, with potential for the situation around him to further improve, as he improves as a player. I valued RG3 as #1 until recently, and I still love the kid. I don't know how certain I am in this claim - it's easy to feel great about Cam right now - but, again, I wouldn't make that swap. Not only his Cam better built to take the hits, he has been much better at avoiding them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers, RG3, and Luck are in their own tier. Then Brady and Brees.Then Stafford, Ryan, and Cam.Probably Peyton, Romo, and Big Ben next but it gets cloudier in now vs. later. i.e. if I need a starter I want them, but if I have one of the top guys I want Kaepernick, Wilson, Tannehill, etc. instead.

I like the groupings here. Probably would throw Payton in with Brady and Brees and call it the win now group. Cam, Stafford, and Ryan would be the solid foundation group. Throw in Eli with Romo and Ben.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers, RG3, and Luck are in their own tier. Then Brady and Brees.Then Stafford, Ryan, and Cam.Probably Peyton, Romo, and Big Ben next but it gets cloudier in now vs. later. i.e. if I need a starter I want them, but if I have one of the top guys I want Kaepernick, Wilson, Tannehill, etc. instead.

I like the groupings here. Probably would throw Payton in with Brady and Brees and call it the win now group. Cam, Stafford, and Ryan would be the solid foundation group. Throw in Eli with Romo and Ben.
For the record, Cam is outscoring the "win now group" after scoring on par with them (above their 3 year average) last season.
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...