| 0 |
Subject: Survivor Random Discussions part 4
Posted by: RBP
- [246551918] Mon, Jul 25, 2005, 19:19
Ed said.........Scotty, start a new thread!!!!
Ok, I'll give you a topic.
Break down the AFC East. We'll take two days to discuss then on to teh NFC West.
Who wins it, surprises, duds, studs, etc. Thanks |
| 1 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Mon, Jul 25, 2005, 20:27
|
That was posted before I finished mine. It took 20 minutes to write those few sentences. This work thing has got to stop!!
|
| 2 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 05:36
|
NE, NYJ,Buff and Miami. Bank it
|
| 3 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 11:43
|
From a fantasy perspective:
Overrated: McGahee
Underrated: C. Martin
Most interesting story line: R. Brown & R. Williams
Guy I'd want on my fantasy team the least: Whoever wins the QB job in Miami
|
| 4 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 12:27
|
NE, Buff, NYJ, Miami
Overrated: S. Moss
Underrated: M. Booker, just needs a QB to get him the ball
Most interesting: I agree with Brown & Williams, also can Losman lead the Bills as a rookie QB?
Guy I want least: Pennington
Guy I want most: Dillon
Difference Maker this year: McMichael
|
| 5 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 12:32
|
I agree with Cobb on Magahee, sure he's got talent, but I just don't see why he's going so high in a lot of drafts?
|
| 6 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 12:34
|
I forgot Moss went to Wash? Sorry..I guess I'll change it too Chambers.
|
| 7 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 13:49
|
Just can't roll with McGahee.
1) Losman is his QB and I haven't seen a rookie QB yet (outside of Marino) who could handle the job. And don't even start talking Roethlisberger...he was a fluke early in the season and most figured him out toward the end....should've put him on the overrated list. Anyhow, I see 8-9 in the box against McGahee. Unless your name is Barry Sanders that spells trouble.
2) I still can't get the picture of his knee basically exploding in the Ohio St. game out of my mind.
|
| 8 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 13:53
|
Keep Moss ready for the overrated list when we hit the NFC East...he definitely belongs on that list.
|
| 9 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 14:21
|
Magahee:
I've never seen a injury that bad, not flare up at some point down the road? I tore a ACL in High School and I thought my knee dislocated and it was never the same. True it was back before Penicillen was available, One good hit and the Bills will wish they had Henry back?
|
| 10 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 14:23
|
We put anyone off Magahee yet? Not my purpose, but I think everyone saw the knee cave in on impact....ouch!!
|
| 11 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 14:56
|
Don't think we put anyone off on McGahee. Too many folks blindly follow draft lists. :0)
His knee caving in was almost as bad as the Theisman hit and right on par with the Napoleon McCallum (Raiders) hit...just ugly.
The comment about Henry really does raise an interesting question. Wouldn't they have been just as far ahead if they had been satisfied with Henry as the lead back and taken someone else with the #1 pick they used on McGahee? Don't know who they could've gotten with that pick, but I don't see a huge difference between Henry and McGahee. It breaks down like this...
McGahee & 3rd round pick
Henry & 1st round pick
Which would you rather have??? I'd go with Henry and the #1.
|
| 12 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 15:00
|
And, continuing on the Buffalo bashing program...I'm doing this from memory, so feel free to jump in if my info is bad...
The Bills essentially traded away Julius Jones and Marcus Spears for the right to draft J.P Losman. The jury is out on this for a couple years...Losman could be another Brett Favre...but I'm sure the Cowboys are happy with the early returns on this one.
|
| 13 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 15:35
|
I'm sure we will see if Buffalo made the right choice very soon. They say Losman has all the tools to succeed right now? I never saw him at Tulane to make a judgement, but I still think taking Magahee with a #1 pick will be seen as a very bad pick sooner rather then later.
I'd rather have Henry plus #1 pick also. I remember all the other teams were surprized at Buffalo selecting him. I'm just a Henry fan I guess?
|
| 14 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 15:41
|
I like Losman and would be very happy to select him last as my backup QB. I think he'll be under rated in fantasy drafts but he has tremendous upside.
|
| 15 | Superclydes
ID: 63402814
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 15:56
|
I am thinking that the newer technologies in surgery may have saved McGahee. If you look back, at torn ACL or MCL usually meant at least two years coming back. Now you can see players who tear it early in the season, as long as it isn't like McGahee's or Winslow's, they might actually make it back towards the end of the season.
Two players I can think of who have done this is Jamal and the Edge. Both are back, both have proved they can compete near the top. They didn't come back that same year, but they are back from torn ACL/MCL injuries and playing well. What is to say McGahee can't? I didn't see too many Buffalo games last year, but the ones I did see and heck just his numbers, he must have been pretty effective.
|
| 16 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 19:06
|
Possible, I just looked back to last years weekly injury reports and more then four times he was questionable with some kind of knee problem? Hyperextensions, Bruise's , Twists? I was happy for the guy that he didn't get hurt worse and another year of making it stronger helps. Jamal Anderson ring a bell? Lewis has blown out his ACL three times. I'm sure the techniques have improved and he may never get hurt again..I doubt it. You break a bone it mends itself and becomes stronger, You tear up a knee as bad as he did, well he may be a freak of nature? I'm really surprized he played last year!!
|
| 17 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Tue, Jul 26, 2005, 21:37
|
Alexander Signs!
|
| 18 | Joe
ID: 4652283
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 02:52
|
Anyone out there (after pick 12) want to trade their first and second pick for my first (second overall) and last pick.........Just throwing it out there.
|
| 19 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 09:12
|
What's wrong Joe, now Alexander signs and you want to move down from #2? I will say this if Mcgahee is still around at #10 I wouldn't take him.
|
| 20 | Joe
ID: 1653278
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 10:28
|
I dont think I will take a RB at number two. I will do the unthinkable and take a certain QB....Ever since last year when I picked moss over a RB, which was my downfalllast year I said I would def. take a RB in the first round. By trading down I will ensure that I will take a RB. However at two I have to pick that certain QB or I will kick myself for not getting a guy that is going to throw so many TD's Unless ofcourse you pass on LT Ednecks. If you can promise me that then I will keep number two. But you wont do that cause it would be stupid to pass on him. So my prior offer still stands.
Hey guys.....just think of that top running back you can get with your number two pick
Joe
|
| 21 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 11:00
|
Joe I already traded down to #10. I'm at 10, 36,37,46,73. Shakdaddy has 1,26,64,72. I moved up twenty-six spots from 72 down to 46. I think giving up LT may just be worth the jump If I select the right guy at #10.
I can see the taste for a little LT action, but I think people dropping down to get Alexander or Holmes could be few and far between. Hey it's not a bad deal, your offer.
|
| 22 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 11:06
|
I read your offer wrong, are you certain you mean your first and laat for someones first and second? Nobody in their right minds would take that...why bother?
|
| 23 | Joe
ID: 4652283
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 12:53
|
If someone wants one of the top couple guys bad enough they will. Depending on where they are ranked anyway. Depending when this draft ends based on possible injuries or hold outs signing towards the end of our draft....and there will be, it would not be to bad to have an extra last round pick in case the tides turn.
|
| 24 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 15:11
|
If someone wants to move up that bad, I will give up the #1 pick and my 6th rounder for anyone that will give me their 1st and 2nd rounder. I don't even care what position you're at.
Joe, maybe you could pull this swap with me and parlay it into an even bigger deal.
|
| 25 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 16:23
|
Joe,
Would that have been your down fall if Moss stayed healthy?
|
| 26 | RBP
ID: 246551918
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 17:34
|
Officially what is the offer? I'm interested.
|
| 28 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 17:50
|
Joe's: 1st round (2nd pick) and 10th round (179th) picks for your 1st and 2nd round picks (have to be picking 13th or lower in 1st round).
Shak's: 1st round (1st pick) and 6th round (102nd) picks for your 1st and 2nd round picks (offer good for anyone).
|
| 29 | RBP
ID: 246551918
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 18:13
|
1st and 2nd for 1 and 10?
No thanks, I stopped using crack years ago.
|
| 30 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 18:13
|
Actually, my 6th rounder is the 99th pick.
|
| 31 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 18:49
|
Why would anyone in the first round give up say picks #7 and #29 as an example
for
Shaks picks #1 and #99?
These offers are not even close? The offer I made was at least fair?
I guess we'll looking for that knucklehead that's in every draft?
|
| 32 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 18:54
|
I don't mind trades that are one-sided, but I think Scotty will have to rule on ridiculous trades?
Shak's offer is borderline nuts!! Joe's is ridiculous and doesn't even deserve any further comments!!
|
| 33 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 19:03
|
Borderline nuts? Hmmm. Maybe it is a little one-sided when it's the #7 and #29, but what if it's #18 and #19? I think it then becomes a fair trade.
Scotty ruling on fair trades is like putting Drew Rosenhaus in charge of controlling hold outs. :-0
|
| 34 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 19:11
|
Ouch!!
|
| 35 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 19:16
|
You forget to add that you would have 18,19, and 26? We both know the running backs are deep this year and it's still not even close!! Here's what was drafted last year with those picks: #1 Holmes ,#99 Brandon Lloyd, #18 Dillon #19 D. Davis.
Fair trade? Your smoking crack now bud?
|
| 36 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 19:40
|
Another example of a experts league draft with those same picks. and I'll show the first three pick's of the person at #18 if they make the trade.
#1. LT
#54 D. MAson
#55 M. Bennett
#18 A. Green
#19 M. Harrison
#26 T.Holt
Closer then I thought, but we know a QB is being selected in the first three rounds by most everyone, and waiting till 54 would hurt.
Which one would you rather have? Definetely one-sided, maybe not nuts, but Fair...give me a break..
|
| 37 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 19:53
|
Come on Clyde, your dieing to give the Edneck a bashing..no sense being quiet, I miss ya!!!
|
| 38 | Shak
ID: 165532722
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:06
|
Ed, you're really hurting my feelings now. Should I clear my trade offers through you now?
Let me show the other side of this trade. You've been around long enough to have seen many 2 for 1 trades, I'm sure. I know that's a fave of Scotty. Tell me you've never seen the #14 and #15 RB traded for the #1 RB. When Priest was clearly the #1 RB, he was being traded in many leagues for 2 borderline #1 RBs like Westbrook and A Green. LT is clearly the #1 RB. I don't know why you think that is definitely one-sided.
The other thing I'm sure you are aware of is anyone drafting out of the 18th spot is at a distinct disadvantage. I was extremely lucky last year to get as far as I did. I finished 2nd from the bottom many weeks and although I finished 2nd, I was barely in the top half for total points. I know you didn't think for a second about taking the #18 spot with your first choice. I'm so confident that it is a handicap that I will bet either player in the #18 spot next year's entry fee that both my teams will beat their #18 team. That's not saying that I'm that good -- it's saying that they are at a disadvantage. A big part of the disadvantage is they don't get to pick until 17 players are off the board.
Ed, just out of curiousity, if I were to trade the #1 pick for the #18, what would be a fair return? Let me know, please.
|
| 39 | Shak
ID: 165532722
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:15
|
Ed, is this payback for my comment suggesting that you put a little thought into your trade offers? If it is, I apologize. That was unfair of me.
|
| 40 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:31
|
I think your comments were earlier to keep trades private. I think if you didn't want my opinion you would have kept it behind closed doors, I took your advise? This draft is not a regular draft, the more picks you get in the early rounds the better. So yeah 18,19, and 26 is a lot better then 1, 54, and 55. Just my opinion, If somebody makes the trade, more power too ya!!
I'll try and show anyone that it's not fair, soley because I know your turn it into an edge. You honestly believe LT is that much better then Tiki, D.Davis, Dillon? No!! Keep it private otherwise I'll say something everytime If I think it's wrong, As far as running your trades through me, you already made that mistake right now by posting it here....Keep it private or I'll throw in my 2 cents...I'm sure you can handle it by yourself?
|
| 41 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:32
|
Thanks for the invite Scott. These guys are for more entertaining than the HEMI site I was hanging out on.
|
| 42 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:42
|
If you think I'm not happy with our trade your wrong? If I get pick #10 right and I think my odds are 70/30 I do, then our trade is in my favor. waiting 39 picks from 26-65 has got to hurt a little. a lot of good players available between those picks. The talent level drops quite a bit from seventy on.
|
| 43 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:52
|
"So yeah 18,19, and 26 is a lot better then 1, 54, and 55. Just my opinion, If somebody makes the trade, more power too ya!!"
You are not alone ED. You are absolutely right. Give that to me and see what I can do with it in any type of league but probably more so in this one.
|
| 44 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 20:55
|
I hope I don't get hate mail again, this is just letting Shak/Joe know Big Brother is watching!!!
|
| 45 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 21:02
|
All of these numbers are making my head hurt. This is a critical part of the game as we don't have trades.
I still think that the later rounds are where you have to be the craftiest/luckiest with finding those players who come from nowhere to put up either huge or unexpected numbers. Sure plotting to get the most picks in the lower rounds is ideal, but I proved last year that even good picks for that year turned out to be garbage and my number 7 was probably a top 5 WR for the year. It did help that I had Alexander and Dunn, but aside from those two, Muhammed was my only other solid player for the year.
Ed, no hard feelings about the earlier posts. I since been to the Ricky Williams dimebag pharmaceutical school and am now mellow. I am sure I will get fired up again soon though:o)
|
| 46 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 21:16
|
I'm not trying to be a know it all, but I've got a gameplan and I'm sure Shak has one as well. Picks 18,19 are much better then last year, soley because it's a deeper draft RB wise. The talent level for teams this year has got to be better, because we had quite a few rookies playing from Kosovo last year (quite a few strange picks).
You give Shak a #1 and two #2 picks and he'll make it hard on the beaver and and Well Scotty might as well take his ball and go home!!!
|
| 47 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Wed, Jul 27, 2005, 22:37
|
FNAS, your welcome.
|
| 48 | Shak
ID: 165532722
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 01:52
|
Why would I want to keep my trade offers private? What's the fun in that? I never said or even hinted to you to keep your trade offers private. I think it's great that everything is out in the open. I just took offense to your making an offer and then pulling it off the table after I accepted. I thought that was rather lame -- even for you. :)
BTW, if the 18th pick isn't so bad, why didn't you just pick it in the first place? I still think it stinks and my offer stands for the two guys with the 18th pick.
If LT isn't that much better than the other RBs, why is Joe trying to trade down if he doesn't get LT?
In all honesty, I only threw the trade offer out there because of Joe's offer. I would have offered my 1st and 5th for someone's 1st and 2nd, except I really was afraid someone would accept. According to two different draft pick analyzers, I lose out in that trade. Of course, those analyzers aren't geared for an 18-team survivor league, but I'm not really looking to trade LT away, either. Believe it or not, I really don't think I could trade my 1st and 5th for the 18th and 19th pick. I'm content with where I am, so someone would have to knock my socks off for to consider trading.
Ed, you really need me on this board. Who else is going to help you stir the pot and create controversy? Problem is, Ed, you really wear me out with these discussions. It takes me days to recover mentally.
|
| 49 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 04:52
|
I'm not going to go into great detail but the more I think about and the more I crunch numbers teh more I'm convinced that the only player (IMO) worth trading up for is Peyton Manning.
|
| 50 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 09:08
|
Shak it's all gravy!! I'm voicing my views on your offer, It's speculation and nothing personal against you, I'd say the same thing to anyone else. I didn't attack you or call you names or bring your credibility into it.
Trading players is a lot easier then trading draft picks. It leave's too many question marks that just can't be answered by the likes of me and especially you (Dig). If you look at the numbers Scotty is right the only player's that scored way above everyone else was Manning, Culpepper.
Some ride the Fence, some draw swords and some bite there tongues for the betterment of the group...I'm from that last group!!
|
| 51 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 09:33
|
I'll see you boys on draft day, going to lay-low for a while or until I get bored.
"Imagine all the people, living life in peace..Youhooooooooooo!!! I bet there is more arugments in the Fantasy World then the Daily meeting of the United Nation's?
|
| 52 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 13:00
|
Hmmm, Manning. Is he worth the number one pick in the draft? If LT is the clear cut #1 RB, Manning is an even more clear cut #1 QB and almost certain high point scorer. Might have to reconsider.
|
| 53 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 15:47
|
Give me MANNING #1 and 9 more players (that I drafted) to compliment him and I like my chances to win. Not blowing smoke. It's easy for me to talk about the top few picks since I have no shot at LT, Manning and the like.
|
| 54 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 15:55
|
I never thought I'd see the day when the Running Back Pimp would utter such words. Not a single mention of grabbing a stud running back or two or three. The end must be near!
|
| 55 | JHHH
ID: 2204499
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 16:22
|
Changing the subject for a moment...ROGER CLEMENS! Is this guy awesome or what? Headed for his EIGHTH Cy Young with and ERA of 1.40. By the way he is also batting .234 which is better than these everyday players:
Tino Martinez
Jose Cruz Jr.
Raul Mondesi
Sammy Sosa
Mark Belhorn
Aaron Boone
Doug Mientkiewicz
Jim Thome
Marquis Grissom
Bret Boone
Richard Hidalgo
The Rocket's batting average would probably be lower if he had to bat against himself though....
|
| 56 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 16:56
|
Just got from PT and I think the honrable thing for me to do is to try and trade up to the top "few" picks and take Manning. "Put your money where your mouth is" kind of thing.
Now I'm not looking to get raped to move up but if it's fair I'll do it. Shak is at #1 who is at #2?
FNAS is also at #1, who is at #2?
|
| 57 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 16:59
|
Where was the "Rocket" born at JHHH?
Rocket Hails from great state of..........
|
| 58 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 17:08
|
I'm sure that Clemens considers himself a Texan since he was raised there (I consider him a Texan also so don't gang up on me) but I remember hearing a long time ago that he was born in Dayton, Ohio.
|
| 59 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 17:26
|
"Roger Clemens was born on Saturday, August 4, 1962, in Dayton, Ohio. Clemens was 22 years old when he broke into the big leagues on May 15, 1984, with the Boston Red Sox, and his Major League Baseball stats for every season he played, along with his career totals are on this page."
That's alright. I'm a Texan and I'll claim him. Hell these days most people that live in Texas weren't born there.
|
| 60 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 17:30
|
Scott,
You shouldn't be so sure he's getting past me.
|
| 61 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 17:40
|
Reminds me of when I was stationed in California. Very rarely did I meet anybody over the age of 18 who was actually born and rasied in CLIFORNIA.
|
| 62 | RBP
ID: 246551918
Thu, Jul 28, 2005, 21:19
|
So Jim what do you want for #1?
|
| 63 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 00:42
|
I think you've sold me and FNAS on Manning. I don't know if I can part with #1 now. Let me think about it.
|
| 64 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 02:16
|
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't think you have the "stones" to pass on LT. Taking Manning, at least in many peoples minds, would be a bad pick before LT. But I say screw what everybody else says, who wants to be a robot and just make the pick that everybody else would so you don't get second guessed. This is Survivor, it is an 18 team, 17 week -- Meat Grinder! What better player to hang your week to week survivability odds on then the NFL's BEST PLAYER.
If I was picking 2-3-4 you would not here this talk from me. Why? Because I would hope that LT, Holmes and Alexander would go 1, 2 and 3 and leave me with Manning. But since I'm out of the Manning/LT sweepstakes I can spill my mind freely.
Now last season I was burned with a bad QB and essentially no back up, so maybe that experience has skewed my rationale.
|
| 66 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 05:41
|
I never have been convinced that the #1 pick is a all that good. Make me an offer and we'll see what we can do. I have a MACRO final tonight so it will be about 15 hourse before I'll see the offer. Take your time. Make it fair.
|
| 67 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 06:29
|
The kind of deal I'd like to do is something like to do would be where we swap picks in round 1 and 2 (1 and 36 from you for 17 and 20).
So on the grand scheme of things you pick...
17, 20, 37, 72, 73, 108, 109, 144, 145 and 180.
versus what you already have ......
1, 36, 37, 72, 73, 108, 109, 144, 145 and 180.
I would have..
1, 36, 53, 56, 89, 92, 125, 128, 161 and 164.
versus what I already have...
17, 20, 53, 56, 89, 92, 125, 128, 161 and 164.
So looking objectively as I can, you move down 16 in round 1 and up 16 in round 2. I don't think that the move up in round two 16 spots is equal to moving down 16 spots in round 1 so their must be more compensation. So IMO we'd need to swap a lower round pick to make the trade fair. Maybe swap 7th rounders (you get my 128 and I get your 144) which is another 16 position gain for you.
At the end of the day I'm putting my money where my mouth is and declaring that I intend to take Manning #1. I reserve the right to change my mind but as I said before I feel the need to give it a go.
I feel uneasy about the offer which usually means it's a fair deal. When I feel great about it you can bet the ranch that I feel like I'm getting more than I'm giving.
As an alternate I'll trade you all 10 of my picks for all 10 of yours.
|
| 68 | Leaping Lenny
ID: 115222815
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 11:47
|
What's that smell?
|
| 69 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 18:48
|
You, get lost.
|
| 70 | Leaping Lenny
ID: 115222815
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 19:02
|
Dont mess with Leaping Lenny.
|
| 71 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 20:39
|
Scrap post 67, or at least put it on the shelf.
After careful consideration I'd prefer to swap all 10 picks with you if your willing and swap a mid to late rounder to compensate you. What you say?
And I'm going to ignore "you know who" in hopes that he leaves.
|
| 72 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 21:08
|
If I did the swap, I would most likely end up with the same two teams or at least close enough to where a injury or two could knock me out of both.
|
| 73 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 21:24
|
I'm good with swapping rounds 1 and 2 with no need to swap in later rounds. That's why I love FF. It's the challenge of the draft. I don't want anything handed to me,
|
| 74 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 22:40
|
I agree to swap picks in round 1 and 2.
|
| 75 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Fri, Jul 29, 2005, 22:46
|
I'll wait for you to reconfirm before I post the trade.
|
| 76 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 05:13
|
Wow, something happened there. I sent a post and it didn't show up.
If we are swapping draft slots for rounds 1 and 2 and back to original positions for round 3 and the rest of the draft, I'm cool with it and see no need for a later round swap as part of this deal.
|
| 77 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 07:26
|
great, done deal. thanks
|
| 78 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 07:51
|
Enjoy
|
| 79 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 10:53
|
FNAS, must think it's a rich RB draft also. Taking Manning #1 is probably worth the risk? RBP with a #36 running back as his starter, Pigs may fly out of SuperClydes Bumm-hole soon?
Fair enough trade. Interested in that draft for sure now? Manning gonna go in #1 in both drafts..never happen...Good Luck
|
| 80 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 11:01
|
Ed,
I have no flippin idea what the RBs are going to look like when pre season is done. I watch NFL network a couple hours a day. I'm on the net researching a couple hours a day and I have come to realize that the so called experts and I are exactly the same. No flippin idea. You hear one guy say so and so is going to be an sbsolute stud but then read or hear another "expert" say so and so will be a dud.
|
| 81 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 11:15
|
You can never tell. I thought A. Green would out perform everyone last year? All it takes is a little nagging injury like a deep bruise, Ankle, Concussion to hinder a players production for 3-5 games and he then wasn't worth the early pick. All you can do is pick the player you think will perform and hope it works out!! You don't have to be the best in this format to win the whole thing, just the best on the last week. Weekly stats don't mean anything, That's why taking Manning is a good thing, soley because he never seems to have a bad week until he plays N.E., Safest pick in the whole draft!!
|
| 82 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 11:30
|
Oh don't get me wrong. I agree with Scott and you. Manning is by far the safest number 1 pick. I would just about bet the guys drafting at number 2 are about to pop a chubby with all this talk. I just have a bad feeling about LT. No idea why but just one of those gut things.
|
| 83 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 15:21
|
FNAS, Funny you say that, something told me to drop down also? He'll probably break the single season rushing total now!!
I'll stick with my golden rule "When in doubt take the guy with the better scoring offense.
|
| 84 | Superclydes
ID: 63402814
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 16:12
|
Let him drop to number 5 and I will take a chance on LT:o)
|
| 85 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 16:18
|
Yep, now that I dropped down, he'll average 150 rushing, 70 recieving with 3 tds a game. To make things worse, he'll be traded before SDs bye week to a team that already had theirs.
|
| 86 | QBP
ID: 5859283
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 18:03
|
I have LT in two keeper leagues so the "bad feeling" about LT in 2005 talk can stop right now :-)
|
| 87 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 22:21
|
Hey it could just be I'm brewing up a really good fart nu tI had this same feeling when I passed on Marshal Faulk a couple years ago.
|
| 88 | QBP
ID: 5859283
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 22:30
|
Marshall Faulk now that dude was an absolute STUD for a few years! I never had him on one of my teams when he was elite or T. Davis for that matter. I did however have E. Smith numerous times when he was the consensus #1 player.
|
| 89 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Sat, Jul 30, 2005, 23:18
|
I guess nobody noticed I changed my name to "QBP" for a few posts........
|
| 90 | Superclydes
ID: 63402814
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 02:51
|
Scotty, can you post the corrected draft order now that all of the wheeling and dealing has been done, for the moment?
|
| 91 | RBP
ID: 5859283
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 03:11
|
League 1
League II
|
| 92 | Joe
ID: 2668318
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 09:23
|
my first round pick (2nd overall) and my fourth round pick (71st overall) in return for a 1st and 2nd round pick. Anyone interested?
|
| 93 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 12:35
|
Scotty I noticed the Change to QBPimp, but I'll believe it on draft day.
I do believe that the only reason to move up is too get Manning, I don't think LT is that much better then D. Davis, Barber, Green with a good year or the other top 5-13 RB's. say Manning vs- a Vick then your talking about a pretty big difference....?
|
| 94 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 16:44
|
Joe, u looking to move up or down?
|
| 95 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 17:04
|
I'm crunching some numbers now. I'm going to put out a VBD ranking for round 1 today based upon CBS projections with our scoring system. Take it FWIW. I just want to gen up some more draft related conversations.
|
| 96 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 21:24
|
VBD list 1-18 assuming..
18 starting QB's
24 starting RB's
24 starting WR/TE.
Actually with the last position being a flex position I probably could 9 positions to RB's and WR/TE to get a more accurate number. Off of CBS projections this is how they view the top 18.
(BTW I'm not going to go into great length explaining VBD, if you don't know how it works already then that's your fault but in a nutshell it allows to compare apples and oranges and see who holds more value.) This also assumes an injury free season. FWIW
Holmes 123
Manning 119
Culpepper 109
Tomlinson 94
McNabb 94
Davis 83
Vick 69
Alexander 65.5
Green 47
McGahee 47
James 46
Barber 40
Moss 39
Owens 39
Harrison 37
Westbrook 37
McAllister 37
Bulger 35
Now off of the top of my head I need to assign more value to the RB/WR/TE position to get a better number. I'll run the same numbers adding in 18 more RB/WR/TE's and that will bump some QB's down. Hold 1.
I'd like to add my comments after I get the list looking better.
|
| 97 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 21:26
|
screwed up, disregard these numbers.
|
| 98 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 22:15
|
In weekly starting lineups we have.....
18 QB's
at least 18 RB's
at least 18 WR/TE's
and 3 flex positions x 18 = 54.
So after lunch I'm going to revisit some numbers because I was thinking 12 team league with 24 (2 per team) RB's and 24 WR's.
So reallistically we as a league will start
18 QB's
36 RB's
36 WR/TE's
If I run the numbers that way the QB's will decrease in value (by a large margin) and RB/WR/TE's will gain.
I think my view point was skewed when I made the trade to #1 to get Manning.
A big thing lost on these numbers is health issues. Holmes if healthy will be #1 but will he be healthy? I doubt it.
More to come.
|
| 99 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Sun, Jul 31, 2005, 22:27
|
"So reallistically we as a league will start
18 QB's
36 RB's
36 WR/TE's"
Thats not right either. That still doesn't account for the other 18 flex players. A quick look at numbers and they will more than likely be WR's in that last flex position.....so....
I got it. After gorging myself at lunch I'll post a better top 18 players posted solely for discussion purposes.
|
| 100 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 00:14
|
VBD with projections from FBG for our league parameters:
1) LT
2) Holmes
3) Moss
4) Manning
5) Alexander
6) McCallister
7) James
8) Owens
9) Holt
10) D. Davis
11) C. Johnson
12) Barber
13) Harrison
14) Westbrook
15) Portis
16) Gonzo
17) McGahee
18) Horn
I don't know what is more surprising, a TE in the first round or no Dillon, Martin, Jones x2, R. Johnson, J. Lewis, Culpepper, or McNabb.
I wonder if you are accounting for the points per reception (.5 for RB/WR and 1 for TE) in your rankings above.
|
| 101 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 01:16
|
got new ones, this is accurate.
My new updated top 18 players using VBD and CBS projections. This is as accurate as I can get and I feel good about the numbers.
Holmes 196
LT 165
Davis 154
Alexander 136
Manning 119
Green 118
McGahee 118
James 117
Barber 111
Culpepper 109
McAllister 108
Westbrook 108
Lewis 101
Dillon 99
McNabb 94
Jackson 89
Portis 89
Jordan 86
Now debate the list. Holmes durability concerns knocks him down a few spots. Green #6? I doubt that.
WR’s are eary 2nd rounders by CBS projections and yes TB I have t he scoring system correct.
|
| 102 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 01:24
|
TB no way Moss is #3. What numbers did you use for the number of starters for each position?
I settled on
18 QB
36 RB
54 WR/TE
Remember we must start 1 RB, 1 WR and 3 flex from RB/WR/TE.
Also I do not neccesarily this list is the list I'm using, just that it could spark some conversation.
|
| 103 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 01:37
|
"Remember we must start 1 RB, 1 WR and 3 flex from RB/WR/TE."
That is 54 flex players. I hope Moss goes #3.
|
| 104 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 01:38
|
TB do you have the FBG spreadsheet?
Please send to scott.mccoy@andersen.af.mil and I'll tweak it tonight and send it back to you.
|
| 105 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 09:00
|
I can understand Holmes being #1 if healthy, he scores more then any other player. I understand this is all projected and every year things change from the last as far as who scored the most points in our scoring system.
I've done the numbers myself and Manning is the best scorer bar none in this format along with Culpepper. OK you now have to decide on position depth and who grants a pick where. Lists don't mean much in this format except for maybe round one. I think the QB position is weak after the first 7 and the RB's are at least 15 quality deep. We all know the RB's will fly off the board early? Is LT/Holmes a better pick at #1,2 or Manning/Culpepper?
The rest of the draft will follow normal drafts until bye week and other issues make you choose a different player? Crunch all the numbers you want, it's that simple.
|
| 106 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 09:19
|
This is the real RBP talking. Crunch the numbers and each and every system used will say LT/Holmes as the top scorers. It's your pick do what you want with it, no justification needed for selecting LT over Manning. I dropped down soley because I couldn't take Manning over LT and I don't think LT is 50 points better then McAliister,Portis, Green, Barber? Now I do think Manning is 50 points better then say Vick, Hasselbeck, Plummer who are ranked in the top ten QB's in most lists.
Plus I think your scoring projections are way off?
That system sucks if that is right?
|
| 107 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 12:44
|
I mean Footballguys.com has a good record of using their Value Based Drafting (VBD) system. I just don't agree with the numbers. They have put more time and effort into basing their ranking's on this system then I could ever think of doing.
How many times have I followed Fanball, KFFL and other sites view's/ranking's and got burnt. I know Scotty is just trying to base his reasons for drafting a certain player on the facts and views of a legitimate source. They may will be right, I just happen to think the numbers are flawed due to the formula they are using.
|
| 108 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 13:25
|
VBD is a solid approach to drafting. It helps you compare the apples and oranges and make sense of it all. I've seen it used a number of times in a number different scoring formats and the RBs are almost always in the top 3-4 spots because you're usually starting 2 as opposed to 1 QB.
Anyhow, as Ed points out, it isn't really about who scores the most points, it's about relative value of the position, depth at the position, etc.
One of the main flaws with VBD is it doesn't take into account the "Morgan-Stanley" rule. Take no player before his time. Even though VBD might say a particular palyer is the next highest value, if you are reasonable sure you could get that same player a round later it's somewhat inefficient to stick strictly with VBD. Plenty of sites out there can give you a feel for when a particular player will go.
Bottom line: This is what makes drafting fun. Everyone has their own system and any number of them can work. In this league, it's more about consistency and good fortune than anything else.
|
| 109 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 16:20
|
My new updated top 18 players using VBD and CBS projections. This is as accurate as I can get and I feel good about the numbers.
Holmes 196
LT 165
Davis 154
Alexander 136
Manning 119
Green 118
McGahee 118
James 117
Barber 111
Culpepper 109
McAllister 108
Westbrook 108
Lewis 101
Dillon 99
McNabb 94
Jackson 89
Portis 89
Jordan 86
OK I'm no so called expert so all I'm going to say is that I hope everyone is using the same list that you are. I'll be a rich man!
|
| 110 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 16:28
|
This isn't "my list". I would never publish "my list". This is what CBS projects, nothing more, nothing less.
My sole purpose is to spark a conversation.
|
| 111 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 16:49
|
Scott,,
I know. I've looked at the same list. Like I said, I hope everyone follows the CBS projections.
|
| 112 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 17:04
|
I will however share a thought on another subject. PH has said that he thinks it will good for the team if he and Johnson split carries.
How will that impact his FF value?? Well of course the normal train of thought will be that it will hurt his value. I'm going to go the other way. It is not going to help his numbers but it just may help him play 17 games instead of 12 to 14.
|
| 113 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 17:50
|
I can't wait until 21 Aug to get this going....I'm ready......this is torture!
|
| 114 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 17:51
|
Oooh, good question. I think if PH shares carries from day 1 with LJ it will make PH a significantly safer albeit less valuable fantasy player (is that the correct usage of albeit?). That said, in this format, I wouldn't draft PH with your pick let alone my own. LJ is a great guy to nab as your 3rd RB, tremendous upside if PH goes down plus he'll have decent games even if he shares time.
|
| 115 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 17:52
|
Maybe I will publish my list. Why not?
|
| 116 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 17:56
|
Chuck--check your mail please.
|
| 117 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 18:16
|
Top 5 IMO if we drafted today..........
LT
Alexander
Manning
Davis
Holmes
James
|
| 118 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 18:24
|
It does my Houston Heart good to see Davis ranked so high.
|
| 119 | TB
ID: 5809511
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 18:46
|
Scotty, I don't use the spreadsheet I use the DD. I am in a lot of leagues so it helps me keep each league and draft straight.
Obviously, a key to any drafting system is having good projections. I think the problem with projecting the top 18 players based on the number of starters is not taking the entire draft and bench into consideration. Grabbing my back-up QB is a higher priority than selecting my 3rd Flex starter.
I should have said the above list was the projected top 18 scorers from FBG. Keeping GCobb's Morgan-Stanley rule in mind, it certainly doesn't mean when they should drafted. We will see how accurate it turns out to be at the end of the year. Are these the same scoring rules from last season?
|
| 120 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 19:42
|
Scott,,
I'm looking at your list. I see you have LT ahead of Manning. I hope you understand I didn't think you taking Manning with the number one pick was part of our trade deal. That would be crazy to dictate that kind of stipulation in a trade.
|
| 121 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 20:32
|
DD the 3rd ranked running back?? LOL Must be because he plays for the high-powered Texans. I picked him with my 18th/19th pick last year and he should probably get a small bump this year, but top 5? We'll see.
|
| 122 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 20:33
|
FNAS--Thanks, appreciate that. I'm absolutely torn between gut instead and what my head is telling me. On the 21st we'll see which one wins out. Usually my gut (I have a large gut BTW) over rules the best rationale my head can counter with.
Holmes Point/Counterpoint
|
| 123 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 20:50
|
See what I mean about the so called experts? What makes any one of them more qualified than anyone in this league? OK except for maby Shak. He just made my list. Shak it's not too late to jump on the Houston band wagon.
|
| 124 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:18
|
I know nobody asked for it, but I'll share my opinion since this is a discussion board.
Taking a QB at the overall #1 position would be crazy in almost every fantasy league I can think of...except this one.
There are 18 teams in this league and only 32 starting NFL QBs, so getting your QBs locked down is a huge advantage. RBs still have huge value, but the number of teams in this league coupled with the number of legit NFL QBs does make taking them earlier less of a reach.
|
| 125 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:19
|
I like everything I read about DD. He's young and talented. IMO he's a lot safer pick than some of the other guys on his level.
Actually it was my top 6 (I said top 5) and it was off of teh top of my head. If I am allowed to tweak it for Survivor purposes only I'd change it to........
LT
Alexander
Manning
Holmes
James
DD
Yes we will see. Here is the problem, I see seperation att he top between LT, Manning, Alexander and a healthy Holmes. But beyond that you can put all of these guys names in a hat and be right (or wrong).
McGahee
Green
C-Pep
Lewis
Barber (Yes Tiki)
Westbrook
Portis
McAllister
Dillon
All of those players could go 5th through 7-16 in various different orders. I prefer DD to those guys at this point and I could take the safe way out and replace him with Lewis (who I think is a stud and will return to 2003 type form) but I didn't.
|
| 126 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:20
|
Besides, I really don't know what all the fuss is about. The Fish Naked All Stars will wind up on top. You really shouldn't stress so much about finishing second or higher.
|
| 127 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:23
|
DC,
Just a question, not saying your wrong, Manning wouldn't be a worth a number 1 overall in a 10 team keeper's first year?
|
| 128 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:41
|
I think Scott has it about right. I have DD ranked pretty high also, not top five. The reason is the percentage of plays he's directly invovled in on most series has got to be very high. I know it the past when I've played against him, he just seemed to get the ball one down after another?
The question is if you take Manning @#1, then have too wait til 36 for your next pick are you going to get as good a value if you were selecting QB @36 instead of RB?WR? It will be very interesting to see how that would pan out!!
Fish Naked All Stars (FNAS)...watch out for that hook?
|
| 129 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:51
|
FNAS -- Manning is a near lock for a top 5 spot in any league so taking him #1 overall wouldn't be crazy. With the number of teams in this league and the one loss and you're out format, I think it makes some real sense to get that superstar QB early and get those big, steady points.
But, what do I know, I was out in week 2 last year. Of course my starting QB was Byron Leftwich because I went with D. McCallister & C. Johnson at 5 & 32, and watched 4 QBs go before I get my next pick.
|
| 130 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 21:59
|
Manning at #1 is a good move, but you have to remember bye weeks. He will NOT play in week 8. That leaves 10 teams left in the league at that point. The weakest links will already be eliminated and now the average to slightly above average teams will be sorted out. Your picks at 36 and 37 better be able to pick up the slack or have the rest of your team do it. The late bye week is something to cosider. Although making it past week 8 based upon past performances, you should be able to rest a bit easier.
I am would not rate DD in the top 5. He will get plenty of touches and has pretty decent durability, but Houston just doesn't have the rest of the offense to take the pressure off of him. Carr is coming along nicely (especially because he lived after all of the sacks in the first season). I think Carr is one - two years from turning it into a playoff contender. If he gets some receivers and take the pressure off him, DD will be huge. Not this year though. 1100 yds, 13 TD's. Not bad numbers, just not top 5.
|
| 131 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:13
|
SC
Andre Johnson isn't a WR?? Man all the research I've done is for not.
|
| 132 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:18
|
I am not saying that, just that the rest of the offense isn't enough of a threat to take the pressure off of DD.
|
| 133 | GCobb
ID: 387201918
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:19
|
I think SC is saying A. Johnson needs a consistent #2 before the passing game will open up. Neither Gaffney or Bradford is consistent. Bradford is feast or famine and Gaffney is just another in a long line of overrated Fla WRs.
|
| 134 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:34
|
I think the interesting picks are going to be Holmes, A. Green, where does Culpepper fall too, How high will the Jones boys go, I've seen both go in the top ten in some drafts? Tiki is he really worth a top ten selection. Is anyone brave enough to select a WR in the first round?
|
| 135 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:35
|
I'll partially agree. When Carr decided it was time to sprout his wings and start wearing his big boy pants in public, trying to hit the home run instead of working the ball down the field, it hurt Johnson. 79 receptions for 1142 isn't too shabby. Play action isn't as effective when the D knows you are going to throw to one guy. I have a name that has taken care of that problem but I'll let ya'll look it up. One thing you need to keep in mind is the style of offense Caper runs. If you put Johnson on a west coast O type team and then I think you have a top 5 WR. Capers has said he plans to open it up. We'll see.
|
| 136 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:40
|
FNAS, you talking about Jerome Mathis..Speed Demon!!
|
| 137 | FNAS
ID: 475182816
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:50
|
Ed,
I thought you was on some kind of hiatus or something. From what I've seen of him, if everyone can stay healthy, this team is going to be pretty darn explosive for the 2006 season. The O line is still unproven (to be nice) and a dependable TE would be nice.
|
| 138 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 22:55
|
I was sitting Here watching Million Dollar Baby on DVD @3:00 in the morning and as much as everyone would like me to shutup...I just have to much time on my hands for that to happen!!
|
| 139 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:02
|
I think Houston will be a surprise this year. Maybe not surprise, but will end up with a winning season.
Ed, apparently sleep is an option for you!! The ONLY reason I am up at 0300 is work.
|
| 140 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:07
|
Houston with Carr at the helm will be up and down for years to come? He looks great one game and terrible the next three? He just might be Gun-shy from all the beating's he's taken because the O-line is so bad. I like him a lot don't get me wrong, he just throws funny to me..Remember Kosar? Carr falls on my too busy looking in the mirror (good) to win list...Sorry!!
|
| 141 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:09
|
Where do you guys rank the highest scoring RB from last year? Not in top 5 or 6 RBs???
|
| 142 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:15
|
Sometimes I get the sleeper Sofa bed out when i can't sleep and watch Movies and ballgames on the Computer, MLB.com. I sleep whenever I drift off. No Kids, just a wife and Dog to worry about. Bad heart, big mouth....don't worry about me I get eight hours a day, normally from 03:00 til about eleven.
|
| 143 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:17
|
I have McAllister ranked high on my list, I think he lights it up this year...gut feeling. I know he killed a few teams last year.
|
| 144 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:28
|
Three things make me leery of DD. One is I'm not confident in his ability to stay healthy. He has gotten dinged up and missed time in both seasons. 2nd, the Texans drafted Morency in the 3rd round and he is pretty talented from all reports. And finally, DD averaged less than 4 yards a carry last year and the line hasn't really improved. Select him at your own risk.
Of course, just about every RB has some questions to answer.
|
| 145 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:30
|
I agree with RBP on Tiki and pretty much all of the guys he listed. There isn't a lot of separation from the 6th ranked back to the 7th ranked back to the 8th ranked back and so on. Down to my 20th ranked back. There is a gap from number 6 to number 20 on my charts and it is about as big from LT to number 6.
Is anyone brave enough to select a WR in the first round?
Moss, Owens, Holt, Harrison? Add in QB's Manning, Culpepper, and McNabb and you are looking at probably 11 RB taken in the first round. I would almost guarantee that none of those players makes it more than halfway back through the 2nd round.
Let's say you are drafting somewhere between 9-15. Do you take your #9-14 rated RB in the first round and grab your 5th-7th ranked WR or 4th-6th ranked QB in the 2nd round? Or, do you grab your 1-4th ranked WR or 2-3 ranked QB in the first round and maybe grab your #12-20th ranked RB in the 2nd round? Sure, several of those teams will go RB-RB, but nobody truly believes any of those players are not going to go in the first round or very early in the 2nd. I would have to think very hard about nabbing one of the top WR in the 18th spot, but I wouldn't hesitate if one of the top 3 QB made it that far.
|
| 146 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:33
|
11 RBs in the first round??? I'll take the over and bet the house on that one!
|
| 147 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:38
|
I just looked at last years draft and there were 10 RB taken, 4 WR and 4 QB.
|
| 148 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:42
|
I think we can safely say that some of those picks were big mistakes. Trent Green in first round?
|
| 149 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:42
|
My bad, just recounted, 11 RB taken, 4 QB and 3 WR. I counted Owens but he wasn't drafted until 2.4 last year.
|
| 150 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:43
|
Last year was a learning experience for everyone and a few guys Like T. Green, Holt, Harrison should have waited until round two? I see @ least 14 running back in round one. I can only see Manning, Culpepper, McNabb and maybe Moss go in round one! There is always that Harrison or Owens pick maybe.
|
| 151 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:43
|
True, Green was a bit early, but Moss, Holt, Harrison, McNabb, and Culpepper were all legit first rounders.
|
| 152 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:44
|
That would be a dream if only 11 RBs go in the first round. I'll definitely take Manning if that's the case.
|
| 153 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Aug 01, 2005, 23:55
|
Brees at 9.6 and Clayton at 10.8 were great picks last year.
If we are talking about drafting 1st, I think you are nuts to get Manning but we will see how it turns out. He will be the highest scoring player for the season, but just because only 11-14 RB's go in the first round, that doesn't mean another 6-10 aren't gone in the 2nd before it gets back to the top.
I would rather have my 7th-10th ranked QB and LT than Manning and my 21st-25th ranked RB. LT and Tom Brady versus Manning and Warrick Dunn...Hmmm
|
| 154 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 00:01
|
Who Barber? He should be in the 10-15 range. Will he do what he did in 2004 in 2005? I'd bet against it.
|
| 155 | superclydes
ID: 36371321
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 00:04
|
Thats true, I can't see CuMar or Barber repeating what they did last year. Doesn't mean they aren't first rounders though.
|
| 156 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 00:07
|
At some point CuMar has to drop way off. I'd like to have a guy like CuMar as my #2 back though.
|
| 157 | Shak
ID: 1911172611
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 00:10
|
The luxury I have is that my 2nd round pick is #27, rather than 36. If 11 RBs go in the first 18, I'd bet no more than 5 go in the next 8. That means I would have the top QB and #17 RB. I have to make those two picks count because I don't have a 3rd round pick. Lots of decent RBs still available in that range: CMart, Westbrook, S Jackson, L Jordan, T Bell, and any other RB that might slide down. I don't feel good about having to draft Tom Brady with my 2nd pick and I'd have to get a RB and QB with my first two picks because of not having a 3rd round pick. IMO there's a world of difference between Manning and Brady, but a Tatum Bell, Westbrook, or CMart could have comparable numbers to LT.
|
| 158 | Superclydes
ID: 36371321
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 00:21
|
I am not sure I agree Jim. This is all about consistancy, not high score each week. You really only have to beat the low score each week. Sure it would be nice to have 90+ each week, but until it gets to the nitty-gritty, 60+ should keep you safe.
Also remember that teams are going to bench their playmakers if they have clinched or are out of it to prevent injury. Made a difference in my playoff run last year with Vick and Dunn off. Maybe the backups or first year players might prove to be the sleepers at the end.
|
| 159 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 02:18
|
Shak good point. I'm scared to death with my options at 36 for a RB. Wouldn't be as scared if I also picked 37th but my 3rd rounder is all the way out at 53. If I take Manning then I absolutely must get a quality RB at 36. If I take a RB #1 then I can wait until the 6-7-8th round to get a pair of QB's.
|
| 160 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 05:12
|
Top 5 backs in this scoring system from 2004.
LT 280
Barber 274
Davis 266
Alexander 248
Westbrook 240
I think the DD bashing can end with those numbers.
|
| 161 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 09:29
|
Those aren't the same numbers that Ed posted earlier. What gives?
Just some stats from this scoring formatlast year: Top thirty scorers! Just some geewizz stuff.
Manning, Peyton 460.0
Culpepper, Daunte 456.0
McNabb, Donovan Q 359.0
Barber, Tiki 326.0
Alexander, Shaun 317.5
Favre, Brett 317.0
Green, Trent 316.0
Plummer, Jake 316.0
Tomlinson, L. 314.5
Delhomme, Jake 309.0
Martin, Curtis 303.5
Brees, Drew 296.5
Davis, Domanick 293.5
Brooks, Aaron 293.5
James, Edgerrin 285.5
|
| 162 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 09:30
|
Can you list the top couple of WR and QB from last year and their point totals? Also, is the scoring system the same as it was last year?
|
| 163 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 09:56
|
Mike, I'm not sure I get your point. Are you saying that it's better to have a consistent scorer rather than one that has highs and lows from week to week? Are you saying that Manning falls in the latter category? The QB that epitomizes the highs and lows is Vick, who you chose last year. I think Manning is a very consistent scorer. As far as teams benching their playmakers at the end of the year, there really is no way to predict that, unless you stay away from players from the elite teams all together -- and I don't know anyone that is willing to pass on players from NE, Indy, SL, Minn, Phil, etc. Who could have predicted that last year the Falcons would be resting Vick and Dunn for the playoffs?
Scott, my numbers agree with yours. My question is why all the love for DD and none for Tiki. I have voiced my concerns about DD. I think between the two, Tiki is by far the safer choice. He has proven to be much more durable than DD. He is clearly the better skilled RB. He averaged 4.7 yards per rush and 11 per reception as compared to DD's 3.9 and 8.6. The Giants have more offensive weapons (although it's close). If I have the choice between DD and Tiki, I won't hesitate for a second to take Tiki.
|
| 164 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 10:13
|
The scoring is the same for this year.
QBs
Manning 318
Culpepper 308
McNabb 244
Brees 210
Vick 200
Favre 194
Delhomme 194
Plummer 193
WRs
Muhammad 223
Harrison 216
Owens 210
Gates 207
Bennett 202
Wayne 200
Gonzalez 200
Horn 196
Walker 196
Burleson 188
|
| 165 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 11:30
|
I got my numbers from the Pain Game League where we were getting the stats from last year.
They are accurate, not sure where Scotty is getting his totals?
The top RB's from last year were
1. Tiki 326
2. Alexander 317.5
3. LT 314.5
4. Martin 303.5
5. DD 293.5
6. James 285.5
Does Tiki deserve a top ten pick and before DD, I think so. He was the offense last year, WIll Burress and a healthy Toomer help out more probably and that should help TIki more then hurt him, so I see him him scoring pretty much the same as last year with a few less rushing totals. If you remember he broke a number of long-ones last year too pad the rushing numbers.
|
| 166 | Superclydes
ID: 63402814
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 12:41
|
I am not saying Manning wasn't consistant(well, there were a couple of weeks he only scored 30 or so). There will be a big drop off from the quality of player being chosen in the third round for you than others. Manning in not feast or famine, Vick is, you are correct there. Will Manning's weekly points be able to make up for the lower tier player you will get in that round? Who knows? As I mentioned before, there is that pesky bye week, so hope for the free ride that week!
I guess my point is that having Manning at QB and a lower tier RB and mid tier WR might not average out to the same points as someone picking in middle of the pack. I can honestly say that in this format, I would take a team full of healthy, everyday players over a few studs and a few duds. I can't say that is how my team worked last year, far from it, but I think a teamfull of average scores will outlast a few studs. Just because of the bye weeks and the possibility of counting on those studs too much for most of your points each week. Everyone can still have a bad game.
|
| 167 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 12:47
|
I think RBP said give me Manning and nine other guys I draft and you can bring home the money to Big papa (Edneck adlib). That's a bold statement and If you draft LT then things must have changed?
He did say a "Lady has the right to change her mind"?
|
| 168 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 13:09
|
Scotties, actual statement:
Give me MANNING #1 and 9 more players (that I drafted) to compliment him and I like my chances to win. Not blowing smoke. It's easy for me to talk about the top few picks since I have no shot at LT, Manning and the like.
My statement was what he was really thinking?
|
| 169 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 15:21
|
Mike, I agree with you in principle -- you'd rather be milking many cows rather than just one or two. However, how many steady point producers are there going to be past the 2nd round? I think WRs in particular are feast or famine. Quality WRs like Reggie Wayne, Hines Ward, Chad Johnson, Javon Walker, etc, are constantly up and down, but what can you do? There are only so many consistent scorers and not everyone is going to be able to draft a Mushin Muhammad in the later rounds. That one pick was the reason you won last year.
I'm sure most would agree with you that it's better to have depth than to have one or two studs and a bunch of duds, but if that were the case, wouldn't everyone rather pick in the bottom half of the 1st round? Why did you pick the 5th spot? Do you have more confidence in your B-League team, where you were forced to pick from the bottom half? Just wondering.
BTW, have we decided on names for our leagues yet? I'm tired of referring to them as the A and B League. How about we name one for Ricky and the other for TO? Or we could keep it basic and just call them the NFC and AFC.
|
| 170 | Superclydes
ID: 63402814
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 15:51
|
"B" team?? Who is to say I won't have an ENTIRE team of studs?? LOL! I picked 5th because I still have a shot at a decent RB in the 1st round and still get a better chance than 4 others on the way back. Sure there isn't much difference between 3-8 in RB's, but I would rather have the choice than take what is left.
I agree with you on WR's. They are so hit and miss. I just hope that Rice is available to me. Just what I want, someone who should be a WR COACH, not mentor in a uniform on my team!!
Milking many cows at the same time is my goal. Not that I wouldn't mind having a flash player or two, but slow and steady gets the job done. This is essentially VBD in a nutshell. Taking the best player available. Although, I take that with a grain of salt because if there is a run going on, you need to grab who you can when you can or be stuck with the leftovers. Normally that wouldn't matter, but without trades or FA pickups, you have to be careful. I should start charging for my "expert" opinions as I am the reigning champ!!
Yes, Muhammed did win it for me last year. Without him, I was looking at leaving after about week 10. I had some real duds last year though, who were projected to go big. Who really knows anyway?
|
| 171 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:02
|
Now that's something I can agree wholeheartedly with -- who the hell knows? At this point, nobody, which is why if you say it with conviction, people will actually think you know what you're talking about, even though nobody has a clue at this point.
I often wonder whether I'm giving away too much info for those less-inclined to take the time to do their own research. Here's another tidbit. You mentioned the pesky bye week for Manning -- week 8. As you recall, last year I gangloaded my bye weeks early and got ridiculed for it. I'll do it again this year and see how it goes. Who really remembers whether you finished 15th or 4th? You're either in the money or your not. The bye weeks run from week 3-10. Manning's bye week is in week 8, but guess who's is in week 10? LT! Does that mean you drop him down a bit?
|
| 172 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:17
|
I can understand the strategy on going with the early bye week players? Your odds are a little better of beating that one person. I just think spreading them out and not loading certain players in the same bye week is a better solution. It's pretty obivious you don't want Manning and your top RB off on the same week. If you finish within the money you have accomplished something in this format. We can see plenty of people have their own views and strategies and each think they are correct based on the huge egos we have playing this year..Of course I'm not in that category!!
|
| 173 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:26
|
Me neither.
|
| 174 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:30
|
BTW I've taken everything Shak has said and filed it away for draft day..His genius and my time to do all the research I want, that combination should win me the title this year...LOL
|
| 175 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:38
|
Hey, my strategy in the past was too do exactly the oppisite of Mike and I was certain of making the playoffs. He's gone and messed that all up by winning last year. He He
|
| 176 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:38
|
Uh, not sure why I have different stats from 2004? I went to LMSDL and requested a report for the 2004 totals......
|
| 177 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:44
|
RBP,
All you have to do is look at Tiki's stat's versus LT and the totals show he outscored LT and you show LT as the high RB scorer? I could be wrong?
|
| 178 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:49
|
Yes I thought Tiki was teh high RB scorer but the LMSCL 2004 report says LT? What does it say when you pull it up Ed?
|
| 179 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 16:55
|
Ed are we looking at the same stats with the same scoring system?
|
| 180 | Edneck
ID: 115222815
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 17:00
|
Yes I looked at the rules and the totals and LMSCL shows LT ahead of Tiki by a few points and the Pain Game and LMSCL have the same rules? Not sure why, Tiki out rushed him, had more Rcpt yards by over 100+ and the TD's were 18 (LT) to 15. Plus Tiki has more Bonus points?.
|
| 181 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 17:06
|
Maybe they include the playoffs?
|
| 182 | RBP
ID: 2962315
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 17:11
|
http://lmscl.football.sportsline.com/players/player/gamelog/235249
Ed I have to attend an awards breakfast, add up LT's per game points and see if it matchs what CBS says for me.
|
| 183 | Shak
ID: 481029813
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 19:10
|
I think the reason why the stats came up wrong on the LMSCL site is because I had to do a reset last year when I found an error in the scoring. Luckily, I do have access to the Pain Game site also. Since I was there, I did pull up this stat.
Manning had 4 games where he scored in the 40s, 4 in the 30s, 5 in the 20s, and 2 in the teens. His high score was 48 and low was 15 (if you don't count his last game where he only threw 2 passes).
In comparison, the highest scoring RB, Tiki, had 3 games in the 30s, 5 games in the 20s, 3 games in the teens, and 3 games in single digits. His high game was 30.5 and low was 3 in week 13.
What position do you think gives you the most consistent scoring?
|
| 184 | RBP
ID: 175571322
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 19:13
|
Shak can you send me the RB, WR, TE and QB 2004 stats from the pain game page?
|
| 185 | Superclydes
ID: 36371321
Tue, Aug 02, 2005, 19:41
|
Here we are with the link Survivor discussion V to the new page. Even this is taking long to load with broadband!!
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|