Week 1 FAAB
-
larry schechter
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 6:00 pm
- Location: New York
Week 1 FAAB
Raiders -- right now I'd rather have Clayton than Amendola, but Amendola's worth having. No way he should have been undrafted in the first place.
-
Old School
- Posts: 1084
- Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:00 pm
Week 1 FAAB
Originally posted by Raiders:
quote:Originally posted by Coltsfan:
John,
I didn't have Grant anywhere near my top 10 so there is no way Jackson finshes there.
Wayne $900 bid or more = Top 10 at least, no?
John
That's a ridiculous bet Raider IMO. I never expected any Packer RB to end up top ten. He doesn't have to be a top ten RB to justify the free agent $ spent, just put up RB2 numbers for a fantasy team that was lacking a RB
PS. Any takers? [/QUOTE]
quote:Originally posted by Coltsfan:
John,
I didn't have Grant anywhere near my top 10 so there is no way Jackson finshes there.
Wayne $900 bid or more = Top 10 at least, no?
John
That's a ridiculous bet Raider IMO. I never expected any Packer RB to end up top ten. He doesn't have to be a top ten RB to justify the free agent $ spent, just put up RB2 numbers for a fantasy team that was lacking a RB
PS. Any takers? [/QUOTE]
Week 1 FAAB
Originally posted by Raiders:
quote:Originally posted by Coltsfan:
John,
I didn't have Grant anywhere near my top 10 so there is no way Jackson finshes there.
Wayne $900 bid or more = Top 10 at least, no?
John
PS. Any takers? [/QUOTE]not sure i agree with that logic. you might big 900+ on him thinking with no higher expectations than him being a 15-20 rb... because good luck finding another top 20 rb in free agency.
$900 sounds like a lot but it's all relative to what's available, and there won't be more than a couple chances each season to get a guy going into a situation where he's getting the primary workload in an elite offense.
quote:Originally posted by Coltsfan:
John,
I didn't have Grant anywhere near my top 10 so there is no way Jackson finshes there.
Wayne $900 bid or more = Top 10 at least, no?
John
PS. Any takers? [/QUOTE]not sure i agree with that logic. you might big 900+ on him thinking with no higher expectations than him being a 15-20 rb... because good luck finding another top 20 rb in free agency.
$900 sounds like a lot but it's all relative to what's available, and there won't be more than a couple chances each season to get a guy going into a situation where he's getting the primary workload in an elite offense.
Week 1 FAAB
Originally posted by GK:
also, and again, there is NO WAY that MSW should stay in the FA pool - not even a semblance of an argument here imho...Look, just because you have affection for the guy because he helped you out in the first half of last year and you predicted he'd be good again doesn't make him undroppable. :rolleyes:
2009 Stats
Year: 63/869/7
NFFC Weekly Points: 0,23,12,28,21,3,27,14,21,9,2,2,18,4,5
Yes, he had a nice little stretch of 8 games where he averaged 19 PPG. But he also limped down the stretch and finished the last 7 games averaging only 7 PPG and he appears to have picked up right where he left off.
I'd like to see the roster of the owner who released him. If, for instance, he drafted two stud WRs earlier than MSW, and also has a WR or two that he drafted mid-to-late who look really good already (i.e. Collie, Breaston, Naanee)... well, if he went after Lloyd because he thinks he'd rather have HIM as his WR5 than MSW, who the heck are WE (or YOU) to tell him he can't? :rolleyes:
I'm pretty sure if the NFFC did have an "undroppable" list, MSW wouldn't be on it, though he WAS on our "unDRAFTable" list. Your man-crush aside, I think it's time to move on here.
[ September 18, 2010, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]
also, and again, there is NO WAY that MSW should stay in the FA pool - not even a semblance of an argument here imho...Look, just because you have affection for the guy because he helped you out in the first half of last year and you predicted he'd be good again doesn't make him undroppable. :rolleyes:
2009 Stats
Year: 63/869/7
NFFC Weekly Points: 0,23,12,28,21,3,27,14,21,9,2,2,18,4,5
Yes, he had a nice little stretch of 8 games where he averaged 19 PPG. But he also limped down the stretch and finished the last 7 games averaging only 7 PPG and he appears to have picked up right where he left off.
I'd like to see the roster of the owner who released him. If, for instance, he drafted two stud WRs earlier than MSW, and also has a WR or two that he drafted mid-to-late who look really good already (i.e. Collie, Breaston, Naanee)... well, if he went after Lloyd because he thinks he'd rather have HIM as his WR5 than MSW, who the heck are WE (or YOU) to tell him he can't? :rolleyes:
I'm pretty sure if the NFFC did have an "undroppable" list, MSW wouldn't be on it, though he WAS on our "unDRAFTable" list. Your man-crush aside, I think it's time to move on here.
[ September 18, 2010, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]
Week 1 FAAB
Originally posted by Coltsfan:
quote:Originally posted by Raiders:
Respectfully disagree on Jackson. I think he keeps starting. The kid has gradually improved each season and he doesn't need to be a special or game-breaking back to be successful for the Packers this year. One of two things will happen.
1. Will get hurt and miss more than 5 games.
2. Will not be the starting RB by week 5.
I just don't think much of him.
Good Luck,
John [/QUOTE]John,
It never really occured to me that an NFL RB might get hurt by week 5 - I knew I should have saved my money for the Shayne Graham signing week 12. I also forgot about the talented Joe Kuhn just waiting to take over week 5.
Why is it when someone wants to validate their point in fantasy football they always pull out the "injury card?" I always hear well so and so is good but they will get injured. It's one thing to predict an injury to someone who is already injured and trying to play but why is it every year we hear all of these players WILL be injured. It's normally used in the context of "yes I"m right about my forecast of this player." Every year I'll pick up great players much later than they should have gone only because they were injured the year before. It's just crazy how people react to injuries.
The really crazy thing is that if an injury does happen (which they obviously do) then everyone who predicted that the 350 lb defensive lineman would fall on the RB's knee will pump their chests and say I told you so. I would love to see a preseason list of all of the RB's who are exempt from this happening!
I'll get off my soap box now. Good luck this week everyone.
Wayne [/QB][/quote]
Why is it when someone wants to validate their point in fantasy football they always pull out the "injury card?"
Most use it like this: Ryan Grant will be a Top 10 back if he doesn't get injuried. I'm saying B.Jackson will get injuried.
Different no? 
Not wishing him bad luck, just know his history.
I hope I'm wrong and Jackson finishes in the top 20 at RB.
John
quote:Originally posted by Raiders:
Respectfully disagree on Jackson. I think he keeps starting. The kid has gradually improved each season and he doesn't need to be a special or game-breaking back to be successful for the Packers this year. One of two things will happen.
1. Will get hurt and miss more than 5 games.
2. Will not be the starting RB by week 5.
I just don't think much of him.
Good Luck,
John [/QUOTE]John,
It never really occured to me that an NFL RB might get hurt by week 5 - I knew I should have saved my money for the Shayne Graham signing week 12. I also forgot about the talented Joe Kuhn just waiting to take over week 5.
Why is it when someone wants to validate their point in fantasy football they always pull out the "injury card?" I always hear well so and so is good but they will get injured. It's one thing to predict an injury to someone who is already injured and trying to play but why is it every year we hear all of these players WILL be injured. It's normally used in the context of "yes I"m right about my forecast of this player." Every year I'll pick up great players much later than they should have gone only because they were injured the year before. It's just crazy how people react to injuries.
The really crazy thing is that if an injury does happen (which they obviously do) then everyone who predicted that the 350 lb defensive lineman would fall on the RB's knee will pump their chests and say I told you so. I would love to see a preseason list of all of the RB's who are exempt from this happening!
I'll get off my soap box now. Good luck this week everyone.
Wayne [/QB][/quote]
Why is it when someone wants to validate their point in fantasy football they always pull out the "injury card?"
Most use it like this: Ryan Grant will be a Top 10 back if he doesn't get injuried. I'm saying B.Jackson will get injuried.
Different no? Not wishing him bad luck, just know his history. I hope I'm wrong and Jackson finishes in the top 20 at RB.
John
Week 1 FAAB
John,
There is a big difference between saying someone will hit certain numbers if he doesn't get injured verses saying someone is a bad pickup because he will get injured. We can agree to disagree here but if I passed on every player that somebody here has called an injury risk I wouldn't be able to field a legal lineup.
Wayne
There is a big difference between saying someone will hit certain numbers if he doesn't get injured verses saying someone is a bad pickup because he will get injured. We can agree to disagree here but if I passed on every player that somebody here has called an injury risk I wouldn't be able to field a legal lineup.
Wayne
Week 1 FAAB
Originally posted by Coltsfan:
John,
There is a big difference between saying someone will hit certain numbers if he doesn't get injured verses saying someone is a bad pickup because he will get injured. We can agree to disagree here but if I passed on every player that somebody here has called an injury risk I wouldn't be able to field a legal lineup.
Wayne Gotcha.
John,
There is a big difference between saying someone will hit certain numbers if he doesn't get injured verses saying someone is a bad pickup because he will get injured. We can agree to disagree here but if I passed on every player that somebody here has called an injury risk I wouldn't be able to field a legal lineup.
Wayne Gotcha.
Week 1 FAAB
Ok, here's the team that dropped MSW for LLoyd:
Pos Name Team Bye YTD
QB Jay Cutler CHI 8 --
QB Matt Ryan ATL 8 --
QB Vince Young TEN 9 --
QB Jason Campbell OAK 10 --
RB DeAngelo Williams CAR 6 --
RB Jonathan Stewart CAR 6 --
RB Montario Hardesty CLE 8 --
RB Willis McGahee BAL 8 --
WR Randy Moss NE 5 --
WR Reggie Wayne IND 7 --
WR Percy Harvin MIN 4 --
WR Chris Chambers KC 4 --
WR Josh Morgan SF 9 --
WR Brandon Lloyd DEN 9 --
TE John Carlson SEA 5 --
TE Ben Watson CLE 8 --
TE Shawn Nelson BUF 6 --
K Stephen Gostkowski NE 5 --
K David Akers PHI 8 --
TDSP Arizona Cardinals ARZ 6 --
Something DOES smell fishy w/ this: 4 QBs? 3 TEs? 2 Ks? And the worst? Monterio Hardesty??? Unless the person who cited this league as the one w/ the MSW drop was mistaken, there certainly WERE far better options to drop than MSW - heck, we could certainly argue for Chambers or Morgan too, though I think we'd have to let them slide, as we don't know yet if MSW will be any better. But Hardesty and probably an extraneous QB, TE or K coulda/shoulda been dropped instead.
The online leagues DO seem to be the most open to collusion, seeing we get to PICK exactly which leagues we join based on our draft date/time preferences. Perhaps Greg and Tom can at least keep a watchful eye on this league for a few weeks. Either this is the worst case of dead money ever or perhaps something's not quite right.
[ September 18, 2010, 07:44 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]
Pos Name Team Bye YTD
QB Jay Cutler CHI 8 --
QB Matt Ryan ATL 8 --
QB Vince Young TEN 9 --
QB Jason Campbell OAK 10 --
RB DeAngelo Williams CAR 6 --
RB Jonathan Stewart CAR 6 --
RB Montario Hardesty CLE 8 --
RB Willis McGahee BAL 8 --
WR Randy Moss NE 5 --
WR Reggie Wayne IND 7 --
WR Percy Harvin MIN 4 --
WR Chris Chambers KC 4 --
WR Josh Morgan SF 9 --
WR Brandon Lloyd DEN 9 --
TE John Carlson SEA 5 --
TE Ben Watson CLE 8 --
TE Shawn Nelson BUF 6 --
K Stephen Gostkowski NE 5 --
K David Akers PHI 8 --
TDSP Arizona Cardinals ARZ 6 --
Something DOES smell fishy w/ this: 4 QBs? 3 TEs? 2 Ks? And the worst? Monterio Hardesty??? Unless the person who cited this league as the one w/ the MSW drop was mistaken, there certainly WERE far better options to drop than MSW - heck, we could certainly argue for Chambers or Morgan too, though I think we'd have to let them slide, as we don't know yet if MSW will be any better. But Hardesty and probably an extraneous QB, TE or K coulda/shoulda been dropped instead.
The online leagues DO seem to be the most open to collusion, seeing we get to PICK exactly which leagues we join based on our draft date/time preferences. Perhaps Greg and Tom can at least keep a watchful eye on this league for a few weeks. Either this is the worst case of dead money ever or perhaps something's not quite right.
[ September 18, 2010, 07:44 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]
Week 1 FAAB
Originally posted by GK:
quote:Originally posted by THE_BLACKHAND:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
A little off topic, but I'm hoping that Eric Lundgren (sp?) Made a bunch of pickups this week. to answer you question. i guess you decide. i dont want to show my disgust.
Chansi Stuckey $18
steve johnson $13
thats it. lloyd went for $333 in our league and clayton was drafted. i even pm him with very nice words but he is to much of a bigshot to answer a guy like me back. [/QUOTE]...nice, real nice...I hope that at the least you guys are having fun in that Boston Classic league which have consisted of only 13 owners from the outset...I guess Eric's little chat with Greg and his subsequent "promise" to be aggressive on the WW to make his team as "competitive as possible" seems to have fallen on rather deaf ears here, eh?
...GK [/QUOTE]
Considering the options at wide reciver i think Stevie Johnson after Clayton was the best aviable wide out.I PICKED HIM up myself in other leagues and didnt bid on LLoyd.
quote:Originally posted by THE_BLACKHAND:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
A little off topic, but I'm hoping that Eric Lundgren (sp?) Made a bunch of pickups this week. to answer you question. i guess you decide. i dont want to show my disgust.
Chansi Stuckey $18
steve johnson $13
thats it. lloyd went for $333 in our league and clayton was drafted. i even pm him with very nice words but he is to much of a bigshot to answer a guy like me back. [/QUOTE]...nice, real nice...I hope that at the least you guys are having fun in that Boston Classic league which have consisted of only 13 owners from the outset...I guess Eric's little chat with Greg and his subsequent "promise" to be aggressive on the WW to make his team as "competitive as possible" seems to have fallen on rather deaf ears here, eh?
...GK [/QUOTE] Considering the options at wide reciver i think Stevie Johnson after Clayton was the best aviable wide out.I PICKED HIM up myself in other leagues and didnt bid on LLoyd.
NFBC (NY) auction league champion!
Bad(ass)Angels
He who steps to me in 2005, you better realize you dont have enough jive..... TURKEY!
Bad(ass)Angels
He who steps to me in 2005, you better realize you dont have enough jive..... TURKEY!