Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

****OFFICIAL 2021 OFF- SEASON DYNASTY TRADES****


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, menobrown said:

The Alabama RB thing was an example. Another example would be something like not drafting a player who wears #13. In other words I think it's basically like allowing superstition to dictate your fantasy football decisions.

I used to be guilty of this (a long time ago) without regard for coaching staffs, etc. So stupid. Each player is independent of the player that came before him unless they played together, or had similar systems, then, well...you get what I'm saying. Each player is different regardless of program unless said program is known to be a system-type deal that doesn't churn out great professionals under the same coaches and philosophy as came before, how's that? Or that the current player played with and had lesser numbers and/or sat the bench behind regulars that have struggled in the NFL (I'm looking at you, DeVonta Smith). On the other hand, I'm swooning over you, Ja'Marr Chase, for your 2019 success while playing with Jefferson and the like.

My point is I used to say things about backs and receivers and stuff coming out of college without regard for individual differences in the backs or receivers. If they're different, then that should be reflected in evaluation and assessment.

Edited by rockaction
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 33.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • menobrown

    1849

  • One More Rep

    1306

  • barackdhouse

    1157

  • FreeBaGeL

    1039

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No, they won't accept

Barkley on this one, it isn't that close

You mean it went down in a league you used to be in??  I’d go ful Vontae Davis on that league asap 

4 minutes ago, menobrown said:

The Alabama RB thing was an example. Another example would be something like not drafting a player who wears #13. In other words I think it's basically like allowing superstition to dictate your fantasy football decisions.

I'll agree that we shouldn't discount a guy just because he came from a place where previous failures also played.

But in this case we're talking about where a guy is going TO and the Lions are a void of a franchise. Yes there are seasons here and there,  but careers? Never.

You really have to squint to think they finally got it right with this staff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, menobrown said:

The Alabama RB thing was an example. Another example would be something like not drafting a player who wears #13. In other words I think it's basically like allowing superstition to dictate your fantasy football decisions.

I guess but pattern proves something to me.  I'll let someone else try to break that pattern.  Only 1 1k yard rusher since 2004 is not superstition.  That is just a terrible organization not able using the position properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I used to be guilty of this (a long time ago) without regard for coaching staffs, etc. So stupid. Each player is independent of the player that came before him unless they played together, or had similar systems, then, well...you get what I'm saying. Each player is different regardless of program unless said program is known to be a system-type deal that doesn't churn out great professionals under the same coaches and philosophy as came before, how's that? Or that the current player played with and had lesser numbers and/or sat the bench behind regulars that have struggled in the NFL (I'm looking at you, DeVonta Smith). On the other hand, I'm swooning over you, Ja'Marr Chase, for your 2019 success while playing with Jefferson and the like.

My point is I used to say things about backs and receivers and stuff coming out of college without regard for individual differences in the backs or receivers. If they're different, then that should be reflected in evaluation and assessment.

You can call it stupid or being guilty if you want but Kevin Jones in 2004 and Reggie Bush in 2013 are the only ones that have broken 1K yards and those weren't even monster years.  You can go for the outlier but that is like saying that Detroit has a chance to win the SB because they aren't the same team that they have been over the last 70 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

You really have to squint to think they finally got it right with this staff.

As it pertains to Swift I consider the staff a major plus with respect to how the teams the  OC and HC utilized Rb's in their previous spots. That's real tangible stuff to me I can discuss, not what someone from the past in no way relative other then he wore the same jersey.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jonesin For Some Football said:

You can call it stupid or being guilty if you want but Kevin Jones in 2004 and Reggie Bush in 2013 are the only ones that have broken 1K yards and those weren't even monster years.  You can go for the outlier but that is like saying that Detroit has a chance to win the SB because they aren't the same team that they have been over the last 70 years.

Oh, I'm not calling you stupid. I'm looking back at when I would say "I don't want a 'Bama back because they're system backs" without really trying to evaluate each guy. You'll notice there's a lot of hedging in my post about what happens if there are similar staffs and philosophies in place for guys not making it.

As far as Detroit guys go, that's part of the reason people were staying away from D'Andre Swift. But I think that reason is fallacious, because it's the staff, philosophy, and personnel strengths/weaknesses that will dictate touches. I was more worried that all of the three main components of what determines who gets touches would change and they would emphasize different guys in different roles because Swift wasn't necessarily that regime's "guy," so to speak. And then they went out and brought in Williams, so the fears weren't totally unfounded in that respect.

I was just saying that to make blanket statements like the ones I was making were short-sighted, at best. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, menobrown said:

As it pertains to Swift I consider the staff a major plus with respect to how the teams the  OC and HC utilized Rb's in their previous spots. That's real tangible stuff to me I can discuss, not what someone from the past in no way relative other then he wore the same jersey.

 

Well, I guess I can soften my stance a little as Anthony Lynn IS a much better OC than HC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Oh, I'm not calling you stupid. I'm looking back at when I would say "I don't want a 'Bama back because they're system backs" without really trying to evaluate each guy. You'll notice there's a lot of hedging in my post about what happens if there are similar staffs and philosophies in place for guys not making it.

As far as Detroit guys go, that's part of the reason people were staying away from D'Andre Swift. But I think that reason is fallacious, because it's the staff, philosophy, and personnel strengths/weaknesses that will dictate touches. I was more worried that all of the three main components of what determines who gets touches would change and they would emphasize different guys in different roles because Swift wasn't necessarily that regime's "guy," so to speak. And then they went out and brought in Williams, so the fears weren't totally unfounded in that respect.

I was just saying that to make blanket statements like the ones I was making were short-sighted, at best. 

I didn't take offense really and I agree with most statements that way.  I have just been playing fantasy for a really long time and have done pretty well avoiding Lions RBs.  Not saying it can't work out.  Just saying I would lean the other way until proven otherwise.  Its not 100% accurate.  I just don't like some positions for certain teams.  Like TEs for the Jags.  Lions RBs is another one.  It has just proved me right too many times.  I'm sure it will prove me wrong eventually but I prefer to error on the side of caution.

That being said....in a redraft league, I would take Swift if it makes sense.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jonesin For Some Football said:

I didn't take offense really and I agree with most statements that way.  I have just been playing fantasy for a really long time and have done pretty well avoiding Lions RBs.  Not saying it can't work out.  Just saying I would lean the other way until proven otherwise.  Its not 100% accurate.  I just don't like some positions for certain teams.  Like TEs for the Jags.  Lions RBs is another one.  It has just proved me right too many times.  I'm sure it will prove me wrong eventually but I prefer to error on the side of caution.

That being said....in a redraft league, I would take Swift if it makes sense.

Take rbs based on Oline, not on rb talent. That’s my $.02. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jonesin For Some Football said:

That is brutal.  Some terrible luck for the football teams.  I have been a Niner fan since I was 4 in 85 so have had some really good times.  Some rough ones but not like that.  Hopefully you have a team or 2 you route for outside of those 2 that have been good at times like GB or Pitts or something.

Well, I've been a Brady fan since he came in because he went to Michigan, so I kind of root for him. That's worked out OK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Blackbear said:

I’d be on the Hunt, Raegor, Gesiecki side

Not me.  I’d rather have one of Harris, Williams, Chase, Waddle, Smith, or Pitts.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JohnnyU said:

Not me.  I’d rather have one of Harris, Williams, Chase, Waddle, Smith, or Pitts.  

Might as well say Williams, Waddle or Smith because the other 3 are never going to be there at 6 right

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IHEARTFF said:

Might as well say Williams, Waddle or Smith because the other 3 are never going to be there at 6 right

I'd say Pitts has a better shot at being there than Williams.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Jonesin For Some Football said:

I get that too but it has been multiple staffs.  Not just one.  Time will tell, I just think this is being way optimistic on Swift even though I do like him as a player.

Past Lions coaching staffs have zero correlation to what Swift does going forward. I don’t even get how that’s a thing?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, IHEARTFF said:

Might as well say Williams, Waddle or Smith because the other 3 are never going to be there at 6 right

I know Harris and Chase aren't going to be there at 6, but the point is there will be a stud there at 6.  Also, Pitts definitely has a chance to be there at 6.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, smbkrypt24 said:

12 team super flex.

gave: 1.07, diontae Johnson

received: 1.05

 

i think 2-3 qbs go in top 5.

this would leave me with one of chase, ET, Harris

Wow.  Free diontae basically.

The players in the 5 to 7 range seem like they will be valued closely and I wouldn't want to pay to pick your favorite.

 

Edited by kittenmittens
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, smbkrypt24 said:

12 team super flex.

gave: 1.07, diontae Johnson

received: 1.05

 

i think 2-3 qbs go in top 5.

this would leave me with one of chase, ET, Harris

With the talent in this draft I would definitely move down two spots and also be able to add Johnson...IMO 1.7 is still in the "stud zone" and you also add a 24 year old quality WR who I don't think many would be surprised if he took his game to another level this year.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Past Lions coaching staffs have zero correlation to what Swift does going forward. I don’t even get how that’s a thing?

They do have some correlation.  They were all hired by the same incompetents at the top. 

 

I'm not betting the Ford family has found gold with this new coaching staff.  They almost certainly didn't with this clown show. 

Edited by kittenmittens
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, smbkrypt24 said:

12 team super flex.

gave: 1.07, diontae Johnson

received: 1.05

 

i think 2-3 qbs go in top 5.

this would leave me with one of chase, ET, Harris

I prefer the side getting what you gave up.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, smbkrypt24 said:

12 team super flex.

gave: 1.07, diontae Johnson

received: 1.05

 

i think 2-3 qbs go in top 5.

this would leave me with one of chase, ET, Harris

I like the idea of getting the guy you like. And not to pile on, but...

If you would have added Williams to your list (which I think you probably should have) you would have ended up with a top guy and still had Johnson. 

Edited by Andy Dufresne
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

They have some correlation.  They were all hired by the same incompetents at the top. 

I don't want to get back into this today but that's just weak premise on multiple levels with respect to analyzing how a RB will do in fantasy.

Last thing I'll say on this is despite past poor Lions coaching staff which RB's fantasy value did they actually ruin? They just had a lot of mediocre RB's and the one electric guy they had got his career cut short.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

They do have some correlation.  They were all hired by the same incompetents at the top. 

 

I'm not betting the Ford family has found gold with this new coaching staff.  They almost certainly didn't with this clown show. 

I'm not speaking to this new staff - I think Campbell is a meat head - but past Lion RBs have no bearing on how good Swift can be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, menobrown said:

I don't want to get back into this today but that's just weak premise on multiple levels with respect to analyzing how a RB will do in fantasy.

Last thing I'll say on this is despite past poor Lions coaching staff which RB's fantasy value did they actually ruin? They just had a lot of mediocre RB's and the one electric guy they had got his career cut short.

Do you agree that team success correlates to RB fantasy points?  

It's more about being on a bad team with bad owners who are unlikely to have a good offense in Swifts entire tenure.  They are entering another rebuild right now. 

If Swift is a good fantasy play it will be because of garbage time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I'm not speaking to this new staff - I think Campbell is a meat head - but past Lion RBs have no bearing on how good Swift can be.

Past RBs don't. Their record and offensive situation do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, smbkrypt24 said:

12 team super flex.

gave: 1.07, diontae Johnson

received: 1.05

 

i think 2-3 qbs go in top 5.

this would leave me with one of chase, ET, Harris

Diontae is worth more than a 2 spot bump in the mid 1st IMO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Past Lions coaching staffs have zero correlation to what Swift does going forward. I don’t even get how that’s a thing?

Of course a the new staff is different but shows that no matter who the coach is (they have had many since 2004), it doesn't matter.  They just don't produce good RBs.  Plus, they added Jamaal Williams showing they aren't willing to fully commit as it is.  I like Swift as a player and think he will be fine but I think people believing he is going to be consistent RB1 (let along a top 5 RB) are going to be in for a surprise.

  • Like 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

Diontae is worth more than a 2 spot bump in the mid 1st IMO. 

I agree, but it would have made more sense to go from 1.9 to 1.7 than 1.7 to 1.5.

  • Like 2
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

Where did Swift finish? 

He was a rookie and they they tried to ease him in and before their early bye in week 5 he was only playing about 20 snaps a game. You can hold that against him if you wish but he was getting just over 6 touches a game during that time, still managed to put up 10 fantasy points a game which is pretty impressive.

After the bye he went up to 35 snaps a game, his total touches went up to almost 17 a game and he was RB9 in total points and RB10 in PPG from week 6-16 after his bye.

Totality of season put him in RB17/18 range in both PPG and total but it's pretty easy to see that the guy after the bye week is more indicative of the player going forward then the guy getting 6 touches a game his first 4 weeks.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 tm, 2QB league. right after the darnold trade i put him on the block and got a bite last night. deal ended up being pretty simple

Gave: Darnold

Got: 2.01

seems about right. I actually offered the deal and was surprised the other guy accepted it without countering

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, menobrown said:

He was a rookie and they they tried to ease him in and before their early bye in week 5 he was only playing about 20 snaps a game. You can hold that against him if you wish but he was getting just over 6 touches a game during that time, still managed to put up 10 fantasy points a game which is pretty impressive.

After the bye he went up to 35 snaps a game, his total touches went up to almost 17 a game and he was RB9 in total points and RB10 in PPG from week 6-16 after his bye.

Totality of season put him in RB17/18 range in both PPG and total but it's pretty easy to see that the guy after the bye week is more indicative of the player going forward then the guy getting 6 touches a game his first 4 weeks.

His price right now is top 5 RB in dynasty. 

I certainly don't think he is bad.  He's a great player but the situation is only great if they are going to feed the RBs passing game touches.  If they do that he could blow up.  I'm not sure this is a great bet, especially if they dont care about winning. 

Being on a really bad team also means they may be fine with sitting you late in the year if you have any dings.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Andy Dufresne said:

I don't think this is necessary guys. Nobody's convincing anyone of anything. 

I do think i could be convinced of changing my view with solid arguments. 

I hope I could at least. 

No more in this thread though which is probably the better half of your point.  Apologies for the derail. 

Edited by kittenmittens
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iamkoza said:

10 tm, 2QB league. right after the darnold trade i put him on the block and got a bite last night. deal ended up being pretty simple

Gave: Darnold

Got: 2.01

seems about right. I actually offered the deal and was surprised the other guy accepted it without countering

2QB league that seems pretty fair, though only 10 teams so I would take the pick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FFPC Single QB - one of a couple orphans I am tearing down

I gave CMC
I got Akers, G Davis, 2022 1st (his team just got better but I don't like his receivers and he has no TE but it's only March April)

My receivers are worse than his. Big fan of Akers this year with Stafford and a really good defense. I need a lot more help than I'm likely going to get within CMC's FF window. We'll see. I bought a handful of orphans with CMC but this is the only share I've ever sold. Don't really plan to be doing much of it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, barackdhouse said:

FFPC Single QB - one of a couple orphans I am tearing down

I gave CMC
I got Akers, G Davis, 2022 1st (his team just got better but I don't like his receivers and he has no TE but it's only March April)

My receivers are worse than his. Big fan of Akers this year with Stafford and a really good defense. I need a lot more help than I'm likely going to get within CMC's FF window. We'll see. I bought a handful of orphans with CMC but this is the only share I've ever sold. Don't really plan to be doing much of it.

 

I am as big an Akers fan as they come, but I think this is a little light for CMC. Seems like maybe one more first is missing from the other side.

  • Like 6
Link to post
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...