Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Only reason I didn't include Peyton is because I'm wary his window is only open for 2 more years whereas the others are looking at 3 to 5 to maybe even 7 or so in Brees' case. All bring similar expectations to the table in the interim, but how long will Manning last?
I see your point, but don't know if it is applicable here. Newton's nearly 2 year sample size has been pretty consistant, save an outlier: a few bad games over the first half of the season.'SSOG said:
I see what you're saying; but isn't it equally imbalanced to suggest that 10 rushing yards from a QB is worth less than 10 rushing yards from a RB?
Those poor games to start the season were part of what I was referring to. People were ranking him during a cold streak as if it represented the new normal. Things have equalized a bit, but now the pendulum is starting to swing the other way. Looking at the last 4 games and dismissing his slow start to the season as an "outlier" is ranking him based on his hot streak. Big games, small games, you can't dismiss any of them as outliers or anoint any if them as the new normal. You have to look at the whole body of work. Calvin is another fantastic example of this. After scoring 2 TDs a game for each of the first 4 weeks last year, people were declaring that the new normal and speculating about 30 TD seasons. Wouldn't you know it, though, his TD pace over the last 12 games conformed pretty much exactly to his career averages, not to his "new normal" hot streak. And the opposite was true after his slow start to this season.
Haha just noticed this. It's gonna work, and it is a strategy I totally agree with.
Yes. A good way to balance it isn't to change the points awarded for rush yards...it's to SUBTRACT the points for yards taken in sacks
That wouldn't change things at all. Running QBs would still get an equal bump in value. Even if they score 0 points a game, compared to the average QB who scores -10 points from rushing total, it' still an advantage.
Yep. My first dynasty league. Joined back in 2003 and took William Green over Peyton Manning in the startup draft.
Know your scoring system.I traded Harvin and the 1.04 pick in that league in April this past year to get Andrew Luck. When a QB can drop 65 points in a game, you need a good one.
Yep. My first dynasty league. Joined back in 2003 and took William Green over Peyton Manning in the startup draft.
You inspired me to trade Dez Bryant, my 13 first and 13 2nd for that 1.04 and I took RG3.Working out pretty well for both of us so far.
Running QBs take more sacks, so I think it'd help, but not be enough on its own. I'd say add 1 point per completion and subtract one point per incompletion. Running QBs get fewer attempts (every run is, by definition, not a pass). Doing that would bring Peyton 68 points closer to Griffin this year, for instance.
No love for Pierce? He is my most widely owned dynasty RB besides Daryl Richardson, who was just a waiver pick up. 3rd round pick5'11.6" 218 poundsran 4.49 at the combine and 4.38 at his pro day36.5" vert10'3" broad jump still just 21 years oldLikely a future NFL starter, but costs peanuts because he's on the same team as Ray Rice. Looking at the dynasty RBs right now, he is shaping up to be one of the best value-for-money buys this offseason along with guys like David Wilson, Rashard Mendenhall, and maybe Toby Gerhart.
I like Pierce - happily grabbed him late in a few drafts, feeling all along that he was as good a prospect overall as guys like Pead, Hillman, and James who went a round or two earlier. He definitely has passed the eyeball test for me when I've had a chance to see him play also. He wouldn't come super cheap at all if you're buying him from me, though.Wilson's buy window probably slammed shut this week, obviously.I like Gerhart also. He'll be a UFA after next year, and has the ability to carve out a nice role somewhere.Mendenhall is a crapshoot IMO. First of all he's more expensive than a Gerhart, Pierce type, at least in my leagues. His owners know he's a UFA and want to see where he ends up. Second, his value will be totally dependent on where he lands -- as a Steelers homer who's watched every play of his pro career, he's not good enough to overcome a bad situation and be fantasy-relevant. If he lands in GB or Indy or something, then he's probably a steal at his current price. But he could also go to Arizona or land in a RBBC somewhere (he's just not good enough to automatically get the lion's share regardless), in which case he'll likely be hot garbage. If you can get him cheap enough, sure, but anyone who has held on this long is unlikely to jump ship right before the possible payoff.
Generally agree with nearly everything you write, but don't here.Mendenhall has already overcome a terrible situation and been highly relevant. The Steelers' o-line mostly sucked during his workhorse years.
Do you still have the blog? I am curious to read what you think about this coming class; perhaps you haven't started researching it yet. But, when you do, again, very interested.
To be honest I didn't know there was that much interest in Mendenhall. It seems like one of those situations where you hope and hope he lands in Indy because it's such a great situation. And after he goes there, a few weeks into 2013 you realize he's still just Rashard Mendenhall. Gives me hope that I can sell high.I don't see what the fascination with Gerhart is other than price. He can catch and he can do goalline, but so can Mike Tolbert and Marcel Reese, right? It seems there are a dozen Toby Gerharts and probably none of them are more than injury replacement plays.
The line certainly was a major negative, but overall the situation was pretty good - minimal competition and a good offense that provided him with heavy red zone touches. I think he's a guy a team can "get by with," but he's not a weapon that can dictate to a defense. I think he's most likely to sign a "lead guy in the committee" type contract and end up in that type of role. He's not as bad as some people think, but he's not a difference maker in any way either.
Mendenhall is no worse than guys like Benson, McGahee, and BJGE, who all became starters on new teams after moving on. I think that's likely to happen with him if Pitt lets him walk. There are lots of teams like the Dolphins, Colts, Broncos, Raiders, Lions, Packers, Falcons, Cardinals, and Rams who would love to have a guy like this in their stable. Bear in mind that there was very little excitement about Lynch, Benson, McGahee, etc. when they were at this point in their careers. History repeats itself. Mendy will be just 26 next season and I think he has a decent chance to log more points over the next few years than guys like Forte, Chris Johnson, and MJD. He's just not a hot name right now because of the season he had, which is probably related to him tearing his ACL last December. As for Gerhart, I think he becomes a more attractive acquisition as Peterson increasingly becomes a less attractive one. With Peterson having a monster year and convincing everyone that he'll be a star forever (he won't), Gerhart has become a complete afterthought. I've never been a massive fan of his game, but he might be good enough to start in the NFL. He was a prolific college player, a second round pick, and has been productive thus far in his pro career. He averaged 4.83 YPC last season in games where he had 10+ carries. His contract is due to expire after next season. If he doesn't get another chance in Minnesota between now and then, it's possible that he could emerge as something like a Michael Bush or Andre Brown elsewhere. I would not give up a lot for him, but at this point I don't think the sticker price would be very high.
IMO he'll get another chance because he's capable of handling a big load and he's, at worst, an average NFL starting RB. My own thinking has him nearer to Lynch and McGahee than Benson and BJGE, but it doesn't really matter. Non-elite guys who are solid can put up strong numbers in good situations. And, as EBF points out above, there are some potentially tasty situations out there that might be looking for a RB.'EBF said:
Benson, McGahee, and Jones are solid comparisons to Mendenhall. IMO so are guys like Peyton Hillis and Michael Bush -- all in the range of solid RBs who need things to fall right (limited competition, decent or better offense) to be playable in most fantasy leagues. Mendenhall landing somewhere like Arizona where he has to fight with two other high picks at RB (not to mention the line, etc) is not going to be startable. In GB or Indy he's likely a good RB2, maybe more.Think we agree for the most part on Mendenhall himself, I'm just not seeing him as being undervalued right now with UFA right around the corner. You're not getting him as a throw in, for a mediocre prospect, or even for a late 1st with the way people feel about this draft class.'EBF said:
Lynch is sort of the exception. He has become the focal point of an average to above average offense. The + landing spots for Mendenhall won't give him that. They will make him a cog in a great offense. Benson carried limited trade value even when he was producing because he had 0 upside. A few years of stable RB production is nothing to sneeze at, but it's replaceable. If McGahee was younger and started 2012 the way he started this year, he'd carry a lot of value, so I'm sure that's what you're hoping for. I think McGahee was a better back than Mendenhall, but not much. I agree it's a possibility, but I think I'd lean toward cashing out.'EBF said:
I am not sure that was the case when he first arrived. Nobody new what to expect and Seattle was not nearly as put together as they are now.
Yes I agree. It's what he became as the pieces gelled (or didn't gel) around him. A lot of the good landing spots for Mendenhall are already set in what they do. He's not going to go to Indy and demand a lot of touches. Or GB. He's going to be a cog (at best?). Lynch/Priest Holmes/Turner situations are rare.
I think using total yardage for QBs is a good idea actually.As far as the bolded point about rushing and receiving yardage, the majority of leagues use PPR or some version of PPR, in which receiving yardage is effectively rewarded more than rushing yardage. Some do it for WRs and RBs, some use a sliding scale, some do it for WRs but not RBs... but all of them effectively give more points for receiving yards.
I'd disagree with that. I'm sure the Colts and Packers would love to run the ball more than they do. They just don't have the personnel to do it. There are probably at least ten teams in the NFL where Mendenhall would be the most talented RB on the roster. If he goes to one of those spots, he could have pretty significant value. I actually think he's more likely than not to rush for 1000+ yards again at some point in his career. So if you can get him for the price of a dynasty RB3, which is where a lot of people seem to value him, I'd say it's good business.
I own Wilson in two different dynasty leagues. In the offseason saying nothing crazy happens in the next few weeks, I would not trade Wilson for Ridley, Sproles, Gore, Leshoure, Bradshaw, MJD, Law Firm, Steven Jackson, Daryl Richardson, Shonn Greene...just for some examples.'JFS171 said:
I've never been a big Wilson fan, but I wouldn't sell him for table scraps either, which is basically what I consider guys like Ingram, McFadden, and Pead to be. At the end of the day he's a first round pick on a loaded offense with no obvious long term competitor for the starting RB job. He's ~5-6 years younger than Bradshaw. Andre Brown has always been made out of glass. This is a pretty good situation for a young player to be in. I would hold or buy depending on price. I don't think he will come cheap based on his pedigree and where he went in rookie drafts, but you also won't be able to move him for a more talented player. No real reason to sell unless you think he's a bust and you just want out.
I consider Ingram and Wilson very close in value, actually. Both are in bad situations, both former 1st round picks, both have questions. I am still high on Ingram's talent. Yet, the market dictates Wilson be valued much more; he isn't as far removed from his rookie buzz. I would gladly take advantage of that; Ingram and a late first - sign me up. It's not that I think he is a bust; it's that I am not as sold on him being the next Spiller as the market seems to be. I could come to find my reading of his market value to be way off and hold him. But, if the market is willing to give me what his price dictated after the draft, when he was thought to be a 10-12 carry guy with a good chance to take the job by EOS - again, sign me up. I'm not as sold and there are other pieces with a better risk/reward ratio in my opinion. In summary, if others are willing consider safer than I do, due to his special teams play and a run against the worst defense in the league, be my guest.
You are right and the thought cross my mind while typing this, but I specifically avoid PPR leagues because I think it is an arbitrary and generally useless stat that doesn't really serve a purpose beyond confusing scoring and making it possible to reward players for mediocre performance (much like the rushing yardage for quarterbacks).I realize I am slowly fading into the minority with this opinion, however, as PPR leagues are more and more becoming the norm.
How quickly you forget that half-season of terrible play. And the mediocre numbers over the second half of last season.Cam has the upside, but he's not the top dynasty QB. He's probably not a top-3 dynasty QB. You're biased because he's on your team.
With that logic, you should award RBs and WRs with the same yardage as QBs. Yards are yards, right?In that case, QB is going to be pretty much the only position that really matters for your fantasy team and determines your W/L record. Doesn't sound like much fun to me.
And why do you think his play was terrible? I have a pretty good understanding of the changes made that led to his current increase in production. I project that to continue.He is 23 and is on his way to his 2nd top 5 season in as many years. He has a top 10 QB season ever, in terms of VBD. Ryan is laughable. RG3, I love, but fear injury concerns. Luck I love, but value Newton's rushing production. Rodgers is Rodgers; I can't blame anyone for siding with the safer, more proven, less risky option.
No way I'd give up David Wilson for Mark Ingram.
As for Wilson, I don't disagree with your valuation him; just question the market value that you suggest. There is a lot of buzz about him in this forum. It will depend on our individual leagues, so there is likely no right or wrong - all it takes is one trade partner, as they say. I will certainly be testing his value, at the very least.As for Ingram, he has looked a lot better than mediocre this season, in my opinion. I really like what I see from him and think his talent would be even better displayed in another situation.
That's neither here nor there. The relevant question is: what would you add to Ingram to get Wilson?
Uhhhh... not so much. Despite the "terrible play" and "mediocre numbers," Cam has bested the career year numbers that Ryan is putting up right now in each of his first two years in the league. Ryan's upside is worse than Cam's floor, and Cam's significantly younger as well; they're not even remotely comparable in fantasy value.And I own Cam nowhere, and have never really been a particularly big fan of him fantasy-wise.
I actually agree entirely with the bolded. I think Ingram has looked fairly solid and showed well over the last 6'ish games. I think he looked entirely mediocre to terrible over the first 6-7 games, but based on his recent performance, am willing to entirely chalk that up to injury issues, as his coach alluded to as well.In my opinion, Ingram represents one of the single best, sneaky buy low players in all of football for dynasty leagues. People seem to very, very quickly forget that he won a heisman, was good enough to keep Trent Richardson relegated to a backup/change of pace role at a major university, and was drafted in the first round. People also are blinded by the fact that they mistakenly thought the Saints were a perfect spot for him and have been disappointed by his lack of performance, when in reality there literally may not have been a single worse landing spot in the entire NFL. There are very, very, very few running backs that can thrive in an NFL setting while being shuffled in and out of the lineup constantly on a play by play basis, rarely seeing more than low teens in touches. These players are generally of the Spiller/Charles/Chris Johnson mold- electric, quick, blazingly fast, and capable of taking any single touch 80 yards for a touchdown. Mark Ingram is not of that mold and is not even close to that player. However, before we begin writing his obituary, consider for a second what someone like Shaun Alexander, who in my opinion is built much more like the player Mark Ingram is, would have accomplished on 10-15 touches a week (and before anyone blasts me, I'm mostly picking a random player who experienced fantasy superstardom due to his consistent success carry to carry and ability to take a large workload, not his electric athletic ability or speed). Given 10 touches a week, people would have been grumbling about Alexander's ~50 yards a week and seemingly mediocre play due to not being able to get into the game flow and wear defenses down just as people currently do for Ingram.
I really like Cam (and rank him over Ryan), but you and many others are drastically underrating Ryan imo (likely due to the recent slump he's had). He is an elite fantasy QB in his own right.
I'll just add, before the Eagles game (after which Ingram has been the starter; previously, it was Thomas)Ingram was really only used as a short yardage back. I think it's hard to look good in that role, given the Saints offensive line. His YPC was very directly reflective of this.Since starting (including the Eagles game) he has averaged 4.46 YPC.
