Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty Rankings


Recommended Posts

WR16 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 24

Like a lot of your rankings, but this one really stood out to me as overvalued. I wouldn't even put Maclin in the top 36. Really, really dislike him. I could see him not even starting in the NFL in a year or two.
What can I say, I like him. Best WR on his team, finished the year strong (yes against poor d's) and still only 24.Two players I realised I missed. Cecil Shorts and Dwayne BoweWould have Shorts around the top end of the Decker tier and Bowe at the bottom end
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RB

Missed Forte. I'd slot him at 12ish1 Trent Richardson - CLE (10) - Age 212 Ray Rice - BAL (8) - Age 253 LeSean McCoy - PHI (7) - Age 244 Doug Martin - TB (5) - Age 245 Jamaal Charles - KC (7) - Age 266 C.J. Spiller - BUF (8) - Age 257 Adrian L. Peterson - MIN (11) - Age 278 Arian Foster - HOU (8) - Age 269 Alfred Morris - WAS (10) - Age 2410 Marshawn Lynch - SEA (11) - Age 2611 Ryan Mathews - SD (7) - Age 2512 Darren McFadden - OAK (5) - Age 2513 DeMarco Murray - DAL (5) - Age 2414 David Wilson - NYG (11) - Age 2115 Stevan Ridley - NE (9) - Age 2316 Jonathan Stewart - CAR (6) - Age 2517 Maurice Jones-Drew - JAX (6) - Age 2718 Chris Johnson - TEN (11) - Age 2719 Darren Sproles - NO (6) - Age 2920 Mark Ingram - NO (6) - Age 2321 Reggie Bush - MIA (7) - Age 2722 Rashard Mendenhall - PIT (4) - Age 2523 Bernard Pierce - BAL (8) - Age 2124 Ben Tate - HOU (8) - Age 2425 Ronnie Hillman - DEN (7) - Age 2126 Ryan Williams - ARI (10) - Age 2227 Daryl Richardson - STL (9) - Age 2228 Mikel Leshoure - DET (5) - Age 2229 Ahmad Bradshaw - NYG (11) - Age 2630 Bilal Powell - NYJ (9) - Age 2431 Robert Turbin - SEA (11) - Age 2332 Frank Gore - SF (9) - Age 2933 Steven Jackson - STL (9) - Age 2934 Shane Vereen - NE (9) - Age 2335 Jacquizz Rodgers - ATL (7) - Age 2236 Fred Jackson - BUF (8) - Age 3137 Knowshon Moreno - DEN (7) - Age 2538 Chris Wells - ARI (10) - Age 2439 BenJarvus Green-Ellis - CIN (8) - Age 2740 Toby Gerhart - MIN (11) - Age 2541 Chris Ivory - NO (6) - Age 2442 Willis McGahee - DEN (7) - Age 31

Lamar Miller, Lamichael James, Deangelo. Just my opinion on a few I'd have on there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR16 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 24

Like a lot of your rankings, but this one really stood out to me as overvalued. I wouldn't even put Maclin in the top 36. Really, really dislike him. I could see him not even starting in the NFL in a year or two.
Also, no Colston or Bowe? I know they are older, but still should both have a few good seasons left at least. I suppose it depends on where Bowe ends up as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did these in 40 minutes on mt lunch earlier. There'll be some guys I've missed. Will post my blog link once I've got a more final set completed.Also, anyone having trouble with TE rankings. I get past 3, pick a few guys (Rudolph, Witten, Allen) and then just give up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR16 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 24

Like a lot of your rankings, but this one really stood out to me as overvalued. I wouldn't even put Maclin in the top 36. Really, really dislike him. I could see him not even starting in the NFL in a year or two.
Also, no Colston or Bowe? I know they are older, but still should both have a few good seasons left at least. I suppose it depends on where Bowe ends up as well.
Doesn't matter where he ends up, I'm taking Bowe over Britt.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR

1 A.J. Green - CIN (8) - Age 242 Calvin Johnson - DET (5) - Age 273 Dez Bryant - DAL (5) - Age 244 Percy Harvin - MIN (11) - Age 245 Demaryius Thomas - DEN (7) - Age 256 Julio Jones - ATL (7) - Age 237 Hakeem Nicks - NYG (11) - Age 258 Randall Cobb - GB (10) - Age 229 Brandon Marshall - CHI (6) - Age 2810 Victor Cruz - NYG (11) - Age 2611 Michael Crabtree - SF (9) - Age 2512 Larry Fitzgerald - ARI (10) - Age 2913 Mike Wallace - PIT (4) - Age 2614 Pierre Garcon - WAS (10) - Age 2615 Jordy Nelson - GB (10) - Age 2716 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 2417 Josh Gordon - CLE (10) - Age 2118 Justin Blackmon - JAX (6) - Age 2319 Andre Johnson - HOU (8) - Age 3120 Wes Welker - NE (9) - Age 3121 Roddy White - ATL (7) - Age 3122 Kenny Britt - TEN (11) - Age 2423 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3024 Eric Decker - DEN (7) - Age 2525 Torrey Smith - BAL (8) - Age 2326 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3027 Antonio Brown - PIT (4) - Age 2428 Greg Jennings - GB (10) - Age 2929 Miles Austin - DAL (5) - Age 2830 Kendall Wright - TEN (11) - Age 2331 Denarius Moore - OAK (5) - Age 2432 Steve Johnson - BUF (8) - Age 2633 Danario Alexander - SD (7) - Age 2434 Michael Floyd - ARI (10) - Age 2335 Sidney Rice - SEA (11) - Age 2636 Rueben Randle - NYG (11) - Age 21

Excellent list - particularly where the 3rd tier ends and the 4th begins - for me that is a cliff fall from the players I really like to those that I have questions about.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR

1 A.J. Green - CIN (8) - Age 242 Calvin Johnson - DET (5) - Age 273 Dez Bryant - DAL (5) - Age 244 Percy Harvin - MIN (11) - Age 245 Demaryius Thomas - DEN (7) - Age 256 Julio Jones - ATL (7) - Age 237 Hakeem Nicks - NYG (11) - Age 258 Randall Cobb - GB (10) - Age 229 Brandon Marshall - CHI (6) - Age 2810 Victor Cruz - NYG (11) - Age 2611 Michael Crabtree - SF (9) - Age 2512 Larry Fitzgerald - ARI (10) - Age 2913 Mike Wallace - PIT (4) - Age 2614 Pierre Garcon - WAS (10) - Age 2615 Jordy Nelson - GB (10) - Age 2716 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 2417 Josh Gordon - CLE (10) - Age 2118 Justin Blackmon - JAX (6) - Age 2319 Andre Johnson - HOU (8) - Age 3120 Wes Welker - NE (9) - Age 3121 Roddy White - ATL (7) - Age 3122 Kenny Britt - TEN (11) - Age 2423 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3024 Eric Decker - DEN (7) - Age 2525 Torrey Smith - BAL (8) - Age 2326 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3027 Antonio Brown - PIT (4) - Age 2428 Greg Jennings - GB (10) - Age 2929 Miles Austin - DAL (5) - Age 2830 Kendall Wright - TEN (11) - Age 2331 Denarius Moore - OAK (5) - Age 2432 Steve Johnson - BUF (8) - Age 2633 Danario Alexander - SD (7) - Age 2434 Michael Floyd - ARI (10) - Age 2335 Sidney Rice - SEA (11) - Age 2636 Rueben Randle - NYG (11) - Age 21

Excellent list - particularly where the 3rd tier ends and the 4th begins - for me that is a cliff fall from the players I really like to those that I have questions about.I'd have to say that list is quite weak, unless you are a dynasty team rebuilding to win in 5 years. It totally discounts any WRs with age and gives way too much credit for young WRs. Josh Gordon ranked ahead of WRs like Welker and Andre Johnson?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR

1 A.J. Green - CIN (8) - Age 242 Calvin Johnson - DET (5) - Age 273 Dez Bryant - DAL (5) - Age 244 Percy Harvin - MIN (11) - Age 245 Demaryius Thomas - DEN (7) - Age 256 Julio Jones - ATL (7) - Age 237 Hakeem Nicks - NYG (11) - Age 258 Randall Cobb - GB (10) - Age 229 Brandon Marshall - CHI (6) - Age 2810 Victor Cruz - NYG (11) - Age 2611 Michael Crabtree - SF (9) - Age 2512 Larry Fitzgerald - ARI (10) - Age 2913 Mike Wallace - PIT (4) - Age 2614 Pierre Garcon - WAS (10) - Age 2615 Jordy Nelson - GB (10) - Age 2716 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 2417 Josh Gordon - CLE (10) - Age 2118 Justin Blackmon - JAX (6) - Age 2319 Andre Johnson - HOU (8) - Age 3120 Wes Welker - NE (9) - Age 3121 Roddy White - ATL (7) - Age 3122 Kenny Britt - TEN (11) - Age 2423 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3024 Eric Decker - DEN (7) - Age 2525 Torrey Smith - BAL (8) - Age 2326 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3027 Antonio Brown - PIT (4) - Age 2428 Greg Jennings - GB (10) - Age 2929 Miles Austin - DAL (5) - Age 2830 Kendall Wright - TEN (11) - Age 2331 Denarius Moore - OAK (5) - Age 2432 Steve Johnson - BUF (8) - Age 2633 Danario Alexander - SD (7) - Age 2434 Michael Floyd - ARI (10) - Age 2335 Sidney Rice - SEA (11) - Age 2636 Rueben Randle - NYG (11) - Age 21

Excellent list - particularly where the 3rd tier ends and the 4th begins - for me that is a cliff fall from the players I really like to those that I have questions about.
I'd have to say that list is quite weak, unless you are a dynasty team rebuilding to win in 5 years. It totally discounts any WRs with age and gives way too much credit for young WRs. Josh Gordon ranked ahead of WRs like Welker and Andre Johnson?Unfortunately that's the problem with any dynasty rankings, they're never going to suit both situations.When I do mine I look over the course of a players career. That's not to say that if a guy is 21 I'll put him over a guy that's 28 just because he's younger. I need to believe he has the potential to put up top numbers as well (and quickly).Re the specific player you mentioned. Josh Gordon is 21, hadn't played football for over a year and was playing on a team with a rookie QB. Despite that he finished with 50 catches and over 800 yards.He's a great athletic prospect and the big question was whether he could develop as an NFL receiver, personally I believe he will. I think he'll be putting up WR1 numbers sooner than people think and that coupled with his age (he's 10 years younger than Johnson and Welker) mean I have no problem ranking him where I do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WR

1 A.J. Green - CIN (8) - Age 242 Calvin Johnson - DET (5) - Age 273 Dez Bryant - DAL (5) - Age 244 Percy Harvin - MIN (11) - Age 245 Demaryius Thomas - DEN (7) - Age 256 Julio Jones - ATL (7) - Age 237 Hakeem Nicks - NYG (11) - Age 258 Randall Cobb - GB (10) - Age 229 Brandon Marshall - CHI (6) - Age 2810 Victor Cruz - NYG (11) - Age 2611 Michael Crabtree - SF (9) - Age 2512 Larry Fitzgerald - ARI (10) - Age 2913 Mike Wallace - PIT (4) - Age 2614 Pierre Garcon - WAS (10) - Age 2615 Jordy Nelson - GB (10) - Age 2716 Jeremy Maclin - PHI (7) - Age 2417 Josh Gordon - CLE (10) - Age 2118 Justin Blackmon - JAX (6) - Age 2319 Andre Johnson - HOU (8) - Age 3120 Wes Welker - NE (9) - Age 3121 Roddy White - ATL (7) - Age 3122 Kenny Britt - TEN (11) - Age 2423 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3024 Eric Decker - DEN (7) - Age 2525 Torrey Smith - BAL (8) - Age 2326 Vincent Jackson - TB (5) - Age 3027 Antonio Brown - PIT (4) - Age 2428 Greg Jennings - GB (10) - Age 2929 Miles Austin - DAL (5) - Age 2830 Kendall Wright - TEN (11) - Age 2331 Denarius Moore - OAK (5) - Age 2432 Steve Johnson - BUF (8) - Age 2633 Danario Alexander - SD (7) - Age 2434 Michael Floyd - ARI (10) - Age 2335 Sidney Rice - SEA (11) - Age 2636 Rueben Randle - NYG (11) - Age 21

Excellent list - particularly where the 3rd tier ends and the 4th begins - for me that is a cliff fall from the players I really like to those that I have questions about.
I'd have to say that list is quite weak, unless you are a dynasty team rebuilding to win in 5 years. It totally discounts any WRs with age and gives way too much credit for young WRs. Josh Gordon ranked ahead of WRs like Welker and Andre Johnson?I think it's a good list. I think Garcon, Maclin, and Gordon are too high. Crabtree is higher than I would feel comfortable valuing him, but he has looked the part for a couple months now. I agree that Welker and Andre are too low - I also think that taking Cobb over Cruz would be a mistake. But, in general, I like the rankings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before Eli Manning went into his slump, Cruz was top 5 in receptions, yardage, and TDs. Last year, he was the 2nd most productive WR in the NLF, per start, behind only Calvin. He just turned 26. He hasn't missed a game due to injury despite a couple nasty hits this year. I don't understand the arguments for Cobb, Harvin, and Nicks being taken ahead of him.Not directed at these rankings, just a general statement; lots of people seem to have moved Cruz down quite a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on the 49ers' backfield looking ahead to next year? James has looked OK, but he doesn't strike me as someone who's a serious threat to play a major role there. Hunter looked pretty good in limited opportunities the past two seasons. He looked more like someone who could be a feature back IMO, but of course now he'll be coming off a major injury.Then there's Gore, who will turn 30 in the spring. He seems to be slowing down, but then again, he did put up 1,200 yards this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say Wilson had a better rookie year than Ryan. They both benefited by not being asked to throw the ball a lot (just like Roethlisberger and RG3), but Wilson really stepped it up a notch in the second half of the season. He has been lights out for about the last 10-12 weeks. I think he had a better year than Luck, but their usage was so vastly different that I don't know how useful it is to compare them. I feel good enough about Wilson to rate him as a top 5-6 dynasty QB. His rookie year was so exceptional that a Ryan/Roethlisberger type of career almost looks like the worst case scenario.

Good post. Not sure about top 6, but I do think he will likely be underrated in most rankings. I want to say that Seattle opened up the offense starting in week 8; can any Seahawks homers confirm that timing?Anyway, consider his splits through week 7 and after week 7:Through week 7 (7 games): 104/175 (59.4%), 1230 passing yards (175.7 ypg, 7.03 ypa), 8 passing TDs, 7 interceptions, 79.5 passer rating, 35/119/0 rushing (17 ypg, 3.4 ypc)After week 7 (10 games): 187/280 (66.8%), 2460 passing yards (246 ypg, 8.79 ypa), 21 passing TDs, 4 interceptions (including that season ending Hail Mary), 113.4 passer rating, 74/497/5 rushing (49.7 ypg, 6.7 ypc)Those are ridiculous splits. He made a huge improvement in every single category. His passing attempts were 25 per game in the first 7 games, 28 per game thereafter, only a slight uptick... but they blew out 4 of 10 opponents during the last 10 games, which likely depressed his attempts a bit.I think some of the change was Carroll opening up the offense, both adding in some read option and also putting more trust in Wilson through less conservative playcalling. And some of it was likely just due to Wilson getting better and he and his OL and receivers gaining chemistry with more reps.By all appearances, he is a guy who will work his ### off throughout the offseason to get better. Even moreso than the typical hardworking NFL players. I think it is very possible he will finish in the top 10 in fantasy next year.Now imagine that they improve his targets...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on the 49ers' backfield looking ahead to next year? James has looked OK, but he doesn't strike me as someone who's a serious threat to play a major role there. Hunter looked pretty good in limited opportunities the past two seasons. He looked more like someone who could be a feature back IMO, but of course now he'll be coming off a major injury.Then there's Gore, who will turn 30 in the spring. He seems to be slowing down, but then again, he did put up 1,200 yards this year.

I liked Hunter alot before the achilles injury, but now as you imply the situation is a but more muddied now. Gore actually still looks like a strong runner to me - and I was ready to bury him two offseasons ago - so I do think even at 30 he'll be the main ball carrier next season. James and Hunter could be worked in a little more than this season though.It's possible the Niners address RB in the draft again and maybe this time with a higher pick. I've taken a flyer on Jewel Hampton in one league with deep rosters as he seems like he has the skillset to step into the Gore role - but that's far from a given of course.This probably wasn't all that helpful of a post - but I think that speaks to the uncertainty of the situation and not sure anyone will really have a true grasp on it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on the 49ers' backfield looking ahead to next year? James has looked OK, but he doesn't strike me as someone who's a serious threat to play a major role there. Hunter looked pretty good in limited opportunities the past two seasons. He looked more like someone who could be a feature back IMO, but of course now he'll be coming off a major injury.Then there's Gore, who will turn 30 in the spring. He seems to be slowing down, but then again, he did put up 1,200 yards this year.

I am an owner of all three of these guys in various leagues, though not more than one of them in either.Gore- holding onto him and using him as long as I can. Nobody is willing to give anything remotely valuable for him, but I expect him to put together another season.Hunter- his injury is one that makes me very suspect of him going forward. Will trade him if I can get anything for him at all, even a late round pick. He was good this year, but I don't think he is as talented as James.James- I have been trying to pick him up in leagues where I can, though owners normally value him highly. I don't anticipate he would be a guy that is going to get 16-20 carries a game, but I think he can get 10-12 carries a game and 2-4 catches out of the backfield, and be a valuable PPR flex guy with huge homerun potential. More-so, I think James is a back that is very well suited to match up with Kaepernick in unique formations.Edit: Additionally, I think that having James on their roster will really dampen the dynasty prospects of other RBs on the roster that may get added in post-Gore. I don't think James will be the bell-cow, but he's too good to not be used for 20 or so snaps per game. Edited by jonboltz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like your rankings Don. Thanks for sharing. I've seen Decker rated pretty similarly elsewhere (+/- 25), but I personally think he should be about 10 spots higher. Here's why:This was year one with Peyton Manning. 85/1064/13. He finished WR8 in all my leagues with those numbers. Obviously the concern is the TD numbers were so high that they will be difficult to repeat. He does seem to be a quality red zone option though, so I doubt you'd see him fall to less than 8 TDs or so. If you'd plug in 85/1064/8, that would have still put him at WR15. As long as Peyton is still slinging it there, I think Decker is a very safe bet to finish between WR5-15. There's some guys on your list ahead of him that may have top 5 upside, but I think if you'd look back on it three years from now most of them will be looking up at Deckers numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like your rankings Don. Thanks for sharing. I've seen Decker rated pretty similarly elsewhere (+/- 25), but I personally think he should be about 10 spots higher. Here's why:This was year one with Peyton Manning. 85/1064/13. He finished WR8 in all my leagues with those numbers. Obviously the concern is the TD numbers were so high that they will be difficult to repeat. He does seem to be a quality red zone option though, so I doubt you'd see him fall to less than 8 TDs or so. If you'd plug in 85/1064/8, that would have still put him at WR15. As long as Peyton is still slinging it there, I think Decker is a very safe bet to finish between WR5-15. There's some guys on your list ahead of him that may have top 5 upside, but I think if you'd look back on it three years from now most of them will be looking up at Deckers numbers.

Deckers a guy I own in one of my main leagues and I know how helpful he was the past year. I guess I subconciously feel he's more dependent on situation than some of the other players ahead of him, and unlike players like Cobb, his QB doesn't have as long left.Someone like DT or Julio or even Wallace (speed) have such great athletic traits that they'll put up numbers regardless. I just don't see Decker having same physical gifts and that's why I'd be cautious having him in the top 15.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like your rankings Don. Thanks for sharing. I've seen Decker rated pretty similarly elsewhere (+/- 25), but I personally think he should be about 10 spots higher. Here's why:This was year one with Peyton Manning. 85/1064/13. He finished WR8 in all my leagues with those numbers. Obviously the concern is the TD numbers were so high that they will be difficult to repeat. He does seem to be a quality red zone option though, so I doubt you'd see him fall to less than 8 TDs or so. If you'd plug in 85/1064/8, that would have still put him at WR15. As long as Peyton is still slinging it there, I think Decker is a very safe bet to finish between WR5-15. There's some guys on your list ahead of him that may have top 5 upside, but I think if you'd look back on it three years from now most of them will be looking up at Deckers numbers.

Deckers a guy I own in one of my main leagues and I know how helpful he was the past year. I guess I subconciously feel he's more dependent on situation than some of the other players ahead of him, and unlike players like Cobb, his QB doesn't have as long left.Someone like DT or Julio or even Wallace (speed) have such great athletic traits that they'll put up numbers regardless. I just don't see Decker having same physical gifts and that's why I'd be cautious having him in the top 15.
I think people are underestimating Decker's ability. Sure, it helps a lot to have Manning. But he's not simply a product of Manning. He's a very good player.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like your rankings Don. Thanks for sharing.

I've seen Decker rated pretty similarly elsewhere (+/- 25), but I personally think he should be about 10 spots higher.

Here's why:

This was year one with Peyton Manning. 85/1064/13. He finished WR8 in all my leagues with those numbers. Obviously the concern is the TD numbers were so high that they will be difficult to repeat. He does seem to be a quality red zone option though, so I doubt you'd see him fall to less than 8 TDs or so. If you'd plug in 85/1064/8, that would have still put him at WR15.

As long as Peyton is still slinging it there, I think Decker is a very safe bet to finish between WR5-15. There's some guys on your list ahead of him that may have top 5 upside, but I think if you'd look back on it three years from now most of them will be looking up at Deckers numbers.

Deckers a guy I own in one of my main leagues and I know how helpful he was the past year. I guess I subconciously feel he's more dependent on situation than some of the other players ahead of him, and unlike players like Cobb, his QB doesn't have as long left.

Someone like DT or Julio or even Wallace (speed) have such great athletic traits that they'll put up numbers regardless. I just don't see Decker having same physical gifts and that's why I'd be cautious having him in the top 15.

I think people are underestimating Decker's ability. Sure, it helps a lot to have Manning. But he's not simply a product of Manning. He's a very good player.
a>

Pretty confident Decker would have broken out a year earlier if they had a QB that could actually hit him when he was running wide open downfield. I believe even without Manning, Decker is a FF WR2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like your rankings Don. Thanks for sharing.

I've seen Decker rated pretty similarly elsewhere (+/- 25), but I personally think he should be about 10 spots higher.

Here's why:

This was year one with Peyton Manning. 85/1064/13. He finished WR8 in all my leagues with those numbers. Obviously the concern is the TD numbers were so high that they will be difficult to repeat. He does seem to be a quality red zone option though, so I doubt you'd see him fall to less than 8 TDs or so. If you'd plug in 85/1064/8, that would have still put him at WR15.

As long as Peyton is still slinging it there, I think Decker is a very safe bet to finish between WR5-15. There's some guys on your list ahead of him that may have top 5 upside, but I think if you'd look back on it three years from now most of them will be looking up at Deckers numbers.

Deckers a guy I own in one of my main leagues and I know how helpful he was the past year. I guess I subconciously feel he's more dependent on situation than some of the other players ahead of him, and unlike players like Cobb, his QB doesn't have as long left.

Someone like DT or Julio or even Wallace (speed) have such great athletic traits that they'll put up numbers regardless. I just don't see Decker having same physical gifts and that's why I'd be cautious having him in the top 15.

I think people are underestimating Decker's ability. Sure, it helps a lot to have Manning. But he's not simply a product of Manning. He's a very good player.
a>

Pretty confident Decker would have broken out a year earlier if they had a QB that could actually hit him when he was running wide open downfield. I believe even without Manning, Decker is a FF WR2.

I would probably agree. I've just got him at the lower end of WR2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm by no means saying that either back is better suited to step into the other's role and as I said, I don't expect Ridley to lose his role. I thought Vereen was the better back coming into the league and I surely wouldn't be shocked if he does surpass Ridley given Belichick's hot hand approach though. People that pretend to know what Belichick is thinking or what he'll do from week to week, no less from season to season are fooling themselves.

Thought this post from FF Ninja in another thread was relevant here, so I'm copying it over to perpetuate the argument here on Vereen.

To get back in the spirit of things, I noticed this stat while using the data dominator for another thread:Stevan Ridley had 20 rushes inside the 5 for a whopping 2 yards, but he did punch it in 8 times. Either way, he went backwards a lot. Woodhead had 6 carries for 8 yards and 2 TDs. Vereen had 5 carries for 12 yards and 3 TDs. Based on that, I'd be pretty concerned about Vereen possibly slipping into that role next year. Sure, the same size is very small and on the year Ridley did have a higher ypc than Vereen (4.4 vs. 4.0) on a much heavier workload (290 vs. 62), but Ridley's performance in the goal line package would give me pause if I was a Ridley owner. I'm certainly not going to actively seek him in trades. I'd buy Vereen right now, though. With Woodhead being a FA, Vereen should have some value as a pass catcher next year at the very least. I think 100 carries and 40 receptions is a realistic floor unless Woodhead is brought back. This post has been edited by FF Ninja: 08 January 2013 - 08:20 AM

Vereen is quite a quandry to me. I would assume most could acquire him fairly cheaply, though less so after his game this past weekend. Still, most owners are viewing this as a selling opportunity to get rid of Vereen for anything of value, so it's possible the window isn't completely closed. Here's the thing - considering the data FF Ninja puts forth above, it would appear Vereen was quite possibly the best goalline back on the team this season. Additionaly, we all saw what he could do as a receiver last game. Is it possible the team lets DW walk, allows Vereen to assume that Faulk-esque role in the offense, and he ALSO contributes at the GL? Evan Silva over at Rotoworld also had this to say via Twitter:

Danny Woodhead is UFA this offseason. Sunday's game hints at Shane Vereen #fantasyfootball upside should he inherit that passing-back role.

Consistency is obvious issue but Woodhead quietly finished as #fantasyfootball RB25 in 2012. Pats can support 2 fantasy assets in backfield.

Concerns with Vereen are obvious. There's multiple capable RBs in the backfield, including Ridley, Bolden, and the possibility they bring back DW and/or add talent in the draft. There's the chance that Vereen's big game was no more of a blip than Bolden's game against the Bills. And there's certainly the game-to-game consistency issues that BB suddenly shifts the gameplan completely away from Vereen any given week, even IF he's given a much bigger role.But I think the upside is obvious -- potential for Woodhead's receiving role plus 1/3 of the rushing production and scores. Plus after the formations used this past weekend, you have to think he could almost become another chess piece for BB in the slot, out wide, etc.It's a connundrum, but I'd kick the tires to see what the price is. May surprise you how cheaply you can acquire his potential upside. Edited by JFS171
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on the 49ers' backfield looking ahead to next year? James has looked OK, but he doesn't strike me as someone who's a serious threat to play a major role there. Hunter looked pretty good in limited opportunities the past two seasons. He looked more like someone who could be a feature back IMO, but of course now he'll be coming off a major injury.Then there's Gore, who will turn 30 in the spring. He seems to be slowing down, but then again, he did put up 1,200 yards this year.

I am an owner of all three of these guys in various leagues, though not more than one of them in either.Gore- holding onto him and using him as long as I can. Nobody is willing to give anything remotely valuable for him, but I expect him to put together another season.Hunter- his injury is one that makes me very suspect of him going forward. Will trade him if I can get anything for him at all, even a late round pick. He was good this year, but I don't think he is as talented as James.James- I have been trying to pick him up in leagues where I can, though owners normally value him highly. I don't anticipate he would be a guy that is going to get 16-20 carries a game, but I think he can get 10-12 carries a game and 2-4 catches out of the backfield, and be a valuable PPR flex guy with huge homerun potential. More-so, I think James is a back that is very well suited to match up with Kaepernick in unique formations.Edit: Additionally, I think that having James on their roster will really dampen the dynasty prospects of other RBs on the roster that may get added in post-Gore. I don't think James will be the bell-cow, but he's too good to not be used for 20 or so snaps per game.
Let me first of all say that I don't fancy myself a scout, and rely on a lot of scouting reports from others about players - then see if they match up with what my eye tells me.I largely agree with what was said above on James, and have been quitely trying to acquire him as well in my dynasty format. When I watched the SF/GB game, I noticed the 49ers using James on some drives completely on his own, almost working him in for entire series to give Gore a break. And I didn't notice a substantial drop-off in their offensive production during those series.Gore's probably not going away next year, but I could easily see James carve out 10-12 carries and a handful of catches per game, with the upside for much more. While the achilles tear isn't a death sentence for Hunter -- not like it used to be, I still wouldn't be shocked to see James move ahead of him in the pecking order.I must admit I'm intrigued... but I would certainly welcome other opinions on James.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wesseling threw some quick rankings up on Twitter. RodgersLuckCamBreesGriffinStaffordRyanBradyKaepWilsonPetersonRichardsonRiceMcCoyMartinSpillerFosterLynchCharlesMorrisCalvinGreenDezJulioDemaryiusHarvinFitzCruzMarshallCrabtreeNicksCobbGronkGrahamHernandezCrapshootHe also said the backs from Rice to Foster were "pretty much interchangeable", that Griffin would be #1 or 2 if not for the knee injury, and that Charles was lower before Reid arrived in KC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morris isn't the 10th best rb in the league either

Most broken tackles in the league (22), third most missed tackles (57), third in yards after contact (795), second in the league in rushing yards (1613), second in touchdowns (13).You're right, 10th might be too low.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterson

Richardson

Rice

McCoy

Martin

Spiller

Foster

Lynch

Charles

Morris

:unsure:
Perhaps he is one of those Dynasty owners that you call "short sighted" who looks at a 2-3 year timeline and is more concerned with winning in the next couple years rather than having the prettiest team in his league.

I can't remember specifically Chris Wesseling's Dynasty philosopy, but the above would be an indication that it is more shorter term (2-3 years) than longer term (3-5+ years).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morris isn't the 10th best rb in the league either

Those are fantasy football rankings. He finished the season sixth in my league and it's a ppr league. I actually traded Morris away this offseason (for Fitzgerald and a second rounder), but people need to stop dismissing him without really assessing his game and his situation. I still think people are spooked by his draft status and false perceptions about Shanahan, and they really shouldn't be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morris isn't the 10th best rb in the league either

Most broken tackles in the league (22), third most missed tackles (57), third in yards after contact (795), second in the league in rushing yards (1613), second in touchdowns (13).You're right, 10th might be too low.
That's a nice year, doesn't mean he does it again and again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morris isn't the 10th best rb in the league either

Most broken tackles in the league (22), third most missed tackles (57), third in yards after contact (795), second in the league in rushing yards (1613), second in touchdowns (13).You're right, 10th might be too low.
That's a nice year, doesn't mean he does it again and again.
What, that's ludicrous. You could say that every year about any player. He did it this year, and there's no reason to think he won't next year, what so hard to understand? Hey, trent Richardson had a good year, but he won't do it again next year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterson

Richardson

Rice

McCoy

Martin

Spiller

Foster

Lynch

Charles

Morris

:unsure:
Perhaps he is one of those Dynasty owners that you call "short sighted" who looks at a 2-3 year timeline and is more concerned with winning in the next couple years rather than having the prettiest team in his league.

I can't remember specifically Chris Wesseling's Dynasty philosopy, but the above would be an indication that it is more shorter term (2-3 years) than longer term (3-5+ years).

Couldn't agree with this post more. I play mostly dynasty leagues, but rarely post in this thread because I already know I'm miles apart from where most of you guys are in terms of philosophy. Plenty of these rankings confuse me with people constantly valuing potential over production. In fact, I would even argue that many dynasty players would be closer to being correct if they just pretended it was a redraft league than they are now with their extreme overvaluing of young players. Most of the people will disagree with this and point to long-term success using their current ranking philosophies. Personally, I believe anybody who is pouring over this site, posting on here, making their own rankings, and more is going to be successful in spite of whether they are right or wrong about how to value players. Ultimately, the #1 driver of success in fantasy is commitment to the hobby.

Just my 2cents on the topic. I do appreciate those who take the time and effort to post rankings and thoughts here as it does help. I don't want to come across as "I'm right and everyone else is wrong". I just generally think their is a huge slant towards the future throughout this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 28 year old RB should never be the first back picked in a dynasty draft. Peterson is hugely overvalued if people think he is worth the same as guys like Richardson and Martin. I can buy the idea that he's the best RB in the league on talent, but he's six years into his career with too few remaining peak seasons to justify the top spot. I know from experience how this kind of thing works. I bought high on Moss after his monster year in New England using the same logic that people use to defend Peterson (i.e. once per decade talent, difference-maker production, win now, etc). The next year his performance dropped a bit, he was a year older, and all of a sudden I couldn't trade him for a top 15 dynasty WR. This is the exact same thing. Household name. Career year. Getting old. The whole "maybe some people like winning" argument used to defend this kind of ranking is hollow. Winning is about getting the most value. A player who is 65-70% through his prime probably doesn't offer the most value at his position. Peterson might help you win a title for 1-2 years, but a guy like Richardson could do the same and you could probably trade him two years from now for any RB you wanted. By then ADP will be nearly untradeable even if he manages to sustain high end RB1 numbers until that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterson

:unsure:
Perhaps he is one of those Dynasty owners that you call "short sighted" who looks at a 2-3 year timeline and is more concerned with winning in the next couple years rather than having the prettiest team in his league.

I can't remember specifically Chris Wesseling's Dynasty philosopy, but the above would be an indication that it is more shorter term (2-3 years) than longer term (3-5+ years).

I think you can swing for the fences with youth, and you can swing for the fences with veterans. Wesseling also has had very high rankings on Luck, RG3, and Cobb since last offseason, so I think to say he doesn't favor youth is wrong. He favors extreme upside (IMO?). He took ADP at 2.11 in a mock startup last offseason :nostalker: and has always been high on him returning to greatness.

I don't know if he is necessarily low on Richardson, but he did promote drafting both Luck and RG3 over TR last year, and with the fact that TR's first year had some warts, I'm not too surprised to see him favor AP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 28 year old RB should never be the first back picked in a dynasty draft. Peterson is hugely overvalued if people think he is worth the same as guys like Richardson and Martin. I can buy the idea that he's the best RB in the league on talent, but he's six years into his career with too few remaining peak seasons to justify the top spot.

I agree that he probably shouldn't be the first back picked in a dynasty league but I think your stance here is a little too rigid. He actually could be worth more than Martin or Richardson to people that approach team building a little different.I'm sure that you'd agree Peterson is likely (not guaranteed of course) to outscore Martin and Richardson over the next two seasons and personally I doubt he becomes worthless at age 30 and 31 and maybe even 32 - he's proven to be a physical freak above everyone else.There is plenty of "value" and "worth" in having a safer bet for production over a two year span. Taking Peterson in Round 1, doesn't stop that owner from taking a younger back in Round 2 or Round 3, etc. that can carry their team once Peterson ultimately slows down. Once you take Peterson it doesn't mean that you're taking Gore and Steven Jackson to round out your RB depth - plus there are trade avenues and rookie drafts over the next several seasons to acquire a young RB as well.I'm with you, in that I'd rather not do it - but I surely don't think it's the kiss of death if some one does. I take Richardson, Rice, McCoy and maybe Foster (and a few WRs or QBs as well) over Peterson at least. I probably take him over Martin who I don't really see as special (not saying he'll bust long term, but I think this may be a high watermark season for him). I understand the sentiment though and your way works just as well. Edited by Dr. Octopus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is plenty of "value" and "worth" in having a safer bet for production over a two year span. Taking Peterson in Round 1, doesn't stop that owner from taking a younger back in Round 2 or Round 3, etc. that can carry their team once Peterson ultimately slows down. Once you take Peterson it doesn't mean that you're taking Gore and Steven Jackson to round out your RB depth - plus there are trade avenues and rookie drafts over the next several seasons to acquire a young RB as well.

Your post kind of illustrates the downside of relying on old players though. The fact that Peterson can only be relied on for 2-3 more years means you will have to find some way to replace him between now and the time when he expires. Yes, you can use rookie picks and trades to fill that hole and you might be successful. However, the fact that you have to spend those resources to fill that need means you aren't able to spend them on other areas of your team. This is why a guy like Julio Jones is more valuable than a guy like Brandon Marshall. Over the next three years, they might score the same amount of points. But three years from now you won't be able to trade Marshall for a sack of potatoes. Meanwhile you'll probably be able to trade Julio for almost anyone. And thus you're able to use all of your picks and resources to add value to your team instead of being forced to spend them merely treading water. Old players need to be replaced. Young players replace themselves. That is the critical difference. This is not to say that Peterson doesn't have value. He's still a great option, but there are younger players with similar redraft potential who offer a lot more value on the back end. A guy like Richardson is a riskier pick than ADP in some respects because he's not as proven, but in this case the potential value that you'll get back deeper in his career offsets the higher risk of him busting outright.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you can use rookie picks and trades to fill that hole and you might be successful. However, the fact that you have to spend those resources to fill that need means you aren't able to spend them on other areas of your team.

As far as spending resources (picks) to fill needs, isn't that what they are there for? Either way they are getting used to (hopefully) strengthen a part of your team.

This is why a guy like Julio Jones is more valuable than a guy like Brandon Marshall. Over the next three years, they might score the same amount of points. But three years from now you won't be able to trade Marshall for a sack of potatoes. Meanwhile you'll probably be able to trade Julio for almost anyone. And thus you're able to use all of your picks and resources to add value to your team instead of being forced to spend them merely treading water.

This isn't really the same issue - there isn't anyone that would argue that if we have two players that will score the same amount of points over a three year span, they'd prefer the older one. People taking Peterson over Richardson or Martin are surely thinking Peterson will score MORE than the younger backs over a three year span - or at the very least he's the much safer bet to do so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this conversation is far too black and white, right now. The absolutes that are being painted don't exist. EBF is confident that Martin and Richardson are going to be top 5-7 RBs, and if he's right, and they stay healthy, he'll be right to value them over Peterson today.Our projections of these players careers determine our value of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you can use rookie picks and trades to fill that hole and you might be successful. However, the fact that you have to spend those resources to fill that need means you aren't able to spend them on other areas of your team.

As far as spending resources (picks) to fill needs, isn't that what they are there for? Either way they are getting used to (hopefully) strengthen a part of your team.

This is why a guy like Julio Jones is more valuable than a guy like Brandon Marshall. Over the next three years, they might score the same amount of points. But three years from now you won't be able to trade Marshall for a sack of potatoes. Meanwhile you'll probably be able to trade Julio for almost anyone. And thus you're able to use all of your picks and resources to add value to your team instead of being forced to spend them merely treading water.

This isn't really the same issue - there isn't anyone that would argue that if we have two players that will score the same amount of points over a three year span, they'd prefer the older one. People taking Peterson over Richardson or Martin are surely thinking Peterson will score MORE than the younger backs over a three year span - or at the very least he's the much safer bet to do so.
Yes, a typical strawman argument that I have learned to expect from this poster. Edited by squistion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't really the same issue - there isn't anyone that would argue that if we have two players that will score the same amount of points over a three year span, they'd prefer the older one. People taking Peterson over Richardson or Martin are surely thinking Peterson will score MORE than the younger backs over a three year span - or at the very least he's the much safer bet to do so.

Yea, I understand the reasoning. It's a case by case thing. Sometimes the math favors the old guy. Sometimes the math favors the young guy. I wouldn't advocate trading Adrian Peterson for Shane Vereen just because Vereen is younger. However, in the case where you have a super elite prospect like Richardson who has a realistic shot to outscore Peterson next year and in every subsequent year, I think the math favors the young guy. You're talking about a guy who is six years younger. That's like getting two careers instead of one. I'll take those odds on a guy like Trent who checks every box and was touted as one of the best RBs ever. That's exactly the type of player you hope to get in exchange for an aging star like Peterson. Just like how when Tomlinson was getting long in the tooth, you would've been happy to move him for ADP.

As far as spending resources (picks) to fill needs, isn't that what they are there for? Either way they are getting used to (hopefully) strengthen a part of your team.

When you have to spend your draft picks to replace lost assets, you are not improving your team. You are just sustaining its current level of performance. When you are able to use your picks to ADD to your team, you are increasing its total value and actually getting better (rather than just maintaining). There's a huge difference there.

A team that is just treading water will eventually fall behind a team that is steadily accumulating value every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Richardson plays above baseline until he's 28, and Peterson plays above baseline until he's 31, Peterson would have to out-do Richardson by about 80% per year for him to provide more value from this point on. And that is assuming Peterson plays 3 years longer than Richardson.

Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, in the case where you have a super elite prospect like Richardson who has a realistic shot to outscore Peterson next year and in every subsequent year

Here's your error. Peterson is a proven beast capable of single-handedly delivering his owners a title in any given year. Richardson is a very good RB, but the fact is he just finished RB9 purely on usage, and it appears very likely that the Browns will continue bumbling along (Chudzinski, really?) and holding Trent's stats down. And even one or two years of ridiculous #1 overall scoring is absolutely worth WAY more than many years of decent fantasy starter scoring in terms of putting trophies on the mantle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, in the case where you have a super elite prospect like Richardson who has a realistic shot to outscore Peterson next year and in every subsequent year

Here's your error. Peterson is a proven beast capable of single-handedly delivering his owners a title in any given year. Richardson is a very good RB, but the fact is he just finished RB9 purely on usage, and it appears very likely that the Browns will continue bumbling along (Chudzinski, really?) and holding Trent's stats down. And even one or two years of ridiculous #1 overall scoring is absolutely worth WAY more than many years of decent fantasy starter scoring in terms of putting trophies on the mantle.
It's not an error; it's his projections. If he's right; Richardson will double Peterson's value from this point on. Double. If he's wrong, he will have missed out on 2-3 years of elite production.But none of us know exactly what is going to happen and have to give it our best projection; just because yours is different than EBF, doesn't mean he is wrong. He is more sure that Richardson will produce than you are and that's fine. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, in the case where you have a super elite prospect like Richardson who has a realistic shot to outscore Peterson next year and in every subsequent year

Here's your error. Peterson is a proven beast capable of single-handedly delivering his owners a title in any given year. Richardson is a very good RB, but the fact is he just finished RB9 purely on usage, and it appears very likely that the Browns will continue bumbling along (Chudzinski, really?) and holding Trent's stats down. And even one or two years of ridiculous #1 overall scoring is absolutely worth WAY more than many years of decent fantasy starter scoring in terms of putting trophies on the mantle.
The first thing that popped into mind when I read this post:http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/randymoss.jpgHistory repeats itself. I've heard all of these arguments before. No one is denying that Peterson is an awesome player. However, step back and get some perspective. He just had the best season of his career by a long shot. The "Moss in New England" season that causes people to overlook the obvious warning signs and chase a legend's career year. Peterson is not going to rush for 2000 yards every year. Even if he's able to maintain his career averages for three more years (unlikely), I'm not convinced that the value justifies passing on younger players like Martin and Richardson who have a realistic shot to outscore him now and indefinitely (and also have a much more durable trade value because of their youth). People can do whatever they want, but my advice is to avoid Peterson as a top 5 dynasty startup pick. It's the perfect example of overvaluing the past and not putting enough emphasis on the future. Redraft thinking in a dynasty league.As for Richardson, the guy just put up a top 10 season on broken ribs with a horrible supporting cast. Unless his knee proves to be a long term impediment, what we saw this year was probably pretty close to a worst case scenario. And that shows you why he's such a golden asset.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 28 year old RB should never be the first back picked in a dynasty draft. Peterson is hugely overvalued if people think he is worth the same as guys like Richardson and Martin. I can buy the idea that he's the best RB in the league on talent, but he's six years into his career with too few remaining peak seasons to justify the top spot. I know from experience how this kind of thing works. I bought high on Moss after his monster year in New England using the same logic that people use to defend Peterson (i.e. once per decade talent, difference-maker production, win now, etc). The next year his performance dropped a bit, he was a year older, and all of a sudden I couldn't trade him for a top 15 dynasty WR. This is the exact same thing. Household name. Career year. Getting old. The whole "maybe some people like winning" argument used to defend this kind of ranking is hollow. Winning is about getting the most value. A player who is 65-70% through his prime probably doesn't offer the most value at his position. Peterson might help you win a title for 1-2 years, but a guy like Richardson could do the same and you could probably trade him two years from now for any RB you wanted. By then ADP will be nearly untradeable even if he manages to sustain high end RB1 numbers until that point.

You are making 2 separate cases against ADP here IMO. One, you're arguing that Richardson might be just as good in the short term anyway. The value of the 2 players next yr or the next 2 yrs is just a matter of opinion. I happen to think ADP is a much better bet, but everybody projects things differently.The 2nd case is probably more relevant and that is that the case that even if Peterson is the better bet short-term, he still isn't the right pick in a dynasty league. I would argue that points projected to happen 5 years from now are less likely to actually happen than value projected for 2013 or 2014. I would also argue that even if those points happen, I would rather have the points now unless my team composition was in an extreme situation. There are many reasons for this. Not the least of which is the fact that dynasty leagues sometimes don't last for years 6-8 which Richardson might still be producing and ADP won't be. Besides that, there is a reason that in the NFL a 2013 2nd rounder costs a 2014 1st rounder in most cases. Production now is simply worth more than a likelihood of production later.Another tangent I think would be interesting is the angle that many of these dynasty leagues have contract and salary cap components. If they carry the same price tag, I would rather get my value packed into the next few years rather than pay that contract and hold that roster spot for several more years in order to get a similar ROI. My original post wasn't specific to Peterson/Richardson, but I think the case for ADP is similar to the case for a proven stud in general. Besides that, all of my post explains why I might be OK with ADP over Richardson even in the event that Richardson doesn't bust... which he still might. The risk component is legit here and for every Randy Moss falling off a cliff example, there is equally an example of a rookie RB who had a great season and then faded off.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterson's 2012 isn't nearly as big an outlier as you're making it out to be. He had 291 fantasy points in 2009, and averages 264 over his career (if you prorate 2011 to account for his injury. Guys in his class as a player (like Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, and Walter Payton) don't suddenly hit the wall at 28/29 as do normal good NFL RBs. There is no reason to expect him to fall off within the next three years.As for Richardson, how is his rookie year any different (besides being way worse) than say, Matt Forte's, who you've blasted for years. High volume, terrible efficiency, crappy supporting cast, etc. Richardson's hype as a prospect doesn't matter at this point. He's a good RB, sure. But not anywhere near Peterson's level. He's in the huge class of guys (vast majority of NFL RBs actually) whose value depends on situation -- and that situation is really bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterson's 2012 isn't nearly as big an outlier as you're making it out to be. He had 291 fantasy points in 2009, and averages 264 over his career (if you prorate 2011 to account for his injury. Guys in his class as a player (like Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, and Walter Payton) don't suddenly hit the wall at 28/29 as do normal good NFL RBs. There is no reason to expect him to fall off within the next three years.

I'm not as comfortable assuming that he can stay great indefinitely. A lot of athletes start to lose a little something around 29-30. And the NFL is not very forgiving for players who have lost a step, especially at the RB position. I've said elsewhere that I expect 1.5-2 more peak seasons from Peterson and then maybe 1-2 years of journeyman performance. To me that's just not worth a top 5 dynasty pick. And that's without even factoring in trade value considerations.

As for Richardson, how is his rookie year any different (besides being way worse) than say, Matt Forte's, who you've blasted for years. High volume, terrible efficiency, crappy supporting cast, etc. Richardson's hype as a prospect doesn't matter at this point. He's a good RB, sure. But not anywhere near Peterson's level. He's in the huge class of guys (vast majority of NFL RBs actually) whose value depends on situation -- and that situation is really bad.

Broken. Ribs.Trent's rookie year was a disappointment overall. And yet he still had a top 10 RB season. His hype as a prospect does matter. He has special qualities. That's why he was touted as the best player in the draft by some scouts and garnered a top 3 pick in a draft that wasn't short on impact players. We haven't seen his best football yet and I think he'll render this "debate" silly so long as he can stay healthy (my only real concern with him at the moment).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also I'm not advocating Peterson at 1.01 in a startup -- I'm usually a trade down type of guy -- and if not I'd take Calvin or Rodgers, same 1st ballot HOF talent at longer shelf life positions.But he's the most valuable RB in FF, unless you're taking on a hopeless mess of a team, which is IMO the only time "rebuilding" is a good strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 2nd case is probably more relevant and that is that the case that even if Peterson is the better bet short-term, he still isn't the right pick in a dynasty league. I would argue that points projected to happen 5 years from now are less likely to actually happen than value projected for 2013 or 2014. I would also argue that even if those points happen, I would rather have the points now unless my team composition was in an extreme situation. There are many reasons for this. Not the least of which is the fact that dynasty leagues sometimes don't last for years 6-8 which Richardson might still be producing and ADP won't be. Besides that, there is a reason that in the NFL a 2013 2nd rounder costs a 2014 1st rounder in most cases. Production now is simply worth more than a likelihood of production later.

I don't think anyone would deny that all of these factors should be considered. However, I think people would disagree about the extent to which they should be considered and weighted. I agree that there's more uncertainty in the future. However, I've played in something like 10 dynasty leagues and I've only had one fold prematurely (and that was run by a total crook). I tend to assume that my leagues will be around for a while and that I'll keep participating indefinitely, which is probably part of the reason why I don't discount future seasons as much as others might.

When you look down the road, you are talking about probabilities, not certainties. Julio Jones could get in a motorcycle accident tomorrow and never play a down of football again in his life. That doesn't change the fact that he's more likely to still be in the NFL and still be contributing to your FF squad in five years than someone like Brandon Marshall who is nearing his 30th birthday.

However, looking ahead always involves a lot of guesswork. It's an estimate. The conclusions you draw are going to vary wildly depending on what you believe. For example, if you think Richardson is a risky prospect and not a surefire elite talent, you're obviously a lot less likely to consider him a slam dunk top 3 dynasty pick. If you think Peterson is likely to sustain his elite production for another 3-4 years, you're obviously a lot more likely to view him as a great dynasty asset. If you believe the opposite, your projections and your valuations are going to look completely different. I've got Trent in two leagues and if someone offered me Peterson for him right now I'd click reject so fast that it would cause a rift in the space-time continuum.

On some level it's just a reflection of personality traits. Some people are more conservative and risk-averse by nature. These are the "bird in the hand" types who will covet guys like Peterson and Foster. I've always been more of a gambler. I'll make very risky decisions because I focus on the upside and not the worst case scenario. For me, Richardson over Peterson is any easy call. I understand why people would take the other side. I just don't think they're right in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a Peterson owner, and have ridden his coat tails to a few dynasty titles. I want nothing more than for the Peterson side of this argument to be correct. I just have a hard time not comparing him to Tomlinson, who to me is the best comparison of a recent generational talent. In 2006, when he was roughly AP's age today he put up 2300 combined yards, and 31 TDs. From a fantasy perspective, better than APs 2012 by a decent margin. LT gave us 2 more dominant (but declining) years after that, and then hit the wall in 09. Still scored 12 TDs, but with less than 1000 total yards. Then, he was a Jet and his fantasy relevance ended. LT never had his knee rebuilt.Putting that aside, lets just assume that AP is THAT much better of a physical specimen. I think the nest you can hope for is 3 more years of startability - and those may or may not be dominant. And I think this is a best case personally. AP runs angry. Angrier than LT. If you have a great team that can win for the next 2-3 years, then he is a keeper. The flags will always wave. If not, I would be looking to use him to get younger right now - before he becomes the equivalent of LT in an ugly green uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But he's the most valuable RB in FF, unless you're taking on a hopeless mess of a team, which is IMO the only time "rebuilding" is a good strategy.

I think taking Peterson over Richardson today is roughly akin to taking Moss over Calvin or Tomlinson over Peterson when those guys were first arriving on the scene. Big mistake from my standpoint. I think it's a good example of overvaluing security and past production. Like the opposite of the youth-crazed owner who trades Julio Jones for Marqise Lee.

Overvaluing youth comes at the expense of risk.

Overvaluing security comes at the expense of upside.

There is a risk that Richardson won't live up to the hype, but from the standpoint of someone who passes on him for Peterson there's also the risk that he will. Because if he's as good as some people think he is, you've just passed on 7-8 years of elite level RB play for 2-3 years of the same. The downside of your approach is that you miss out on that extra value because you're only investing in players who have proven themselves over a few years. So sure, going the safe route is going to result in you avoiding some turkeys, but there is a hidden cost to that strategy as well.

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...