My Week 1 Vibes

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:01 am

If still in Vegas I'd load up on Seattle to crush the Buccs. Dallas should beat the spread as well, but the rivalry could keep it close.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:03 am

Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
Speaking of bets, my stone cold lock pick of the week is Detroit being a 1-point underdog at Oakland. Take the Lions and the point. No way the Raiders stop Martz’s passing attack. Weren't the Raiders Defense #1 against the pass last year AND they added players this season? [/QUOTE]The Lions were 7th in passing offense and they added talent too.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:06 am

Originally posted by DOOMSDAY:
I had this same enthusiasm for Kitna last year when I picked him in my main. I actually expected more than 21 TDs and he hardly scored at all on the weeks that I played him.

Depending on how there season is going, I am not sold that he will finish the year as their starter. He is obviusly not there future and I would expect one of the young guns to see some action late in the year. I believed this as well -- up until the time that Drew Stanton (43rd overall selection) was placed on IR. The future most likely does NOT lie in O'Sullivan and Orlovsky. Thus, barring injury -- a big IF, mind you -- I can see Kitna finishing off the season in an attempt to hit his self-proclaimed target of 50 TD strikes.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:10 am

Originally posted by KOTRAX:
quote:Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
Speaking of bets, my stone cold lock pick of the week is Detroit being a 1-point underdog at Oakland. Take the Lions and the point. No way the Raiders stop Martz’s passing attack. Weren't the Raiders Defense #1 against the pass last year AND they added players this season? [/QUOTE]ALOT OF TIMES WHEN YOU LOOK AT A TEAM THAT IS GOOD AGAINST PASS IS TO LOOK AT THEIR RUN DEFENSE. FANTASY OR NOT A TEAM WANTS TO RUN FIRST THEN PASS. I DON'T CARE IF ITS MANNING, PALMER, KITNA ETC. TAKING NOTHING AWAY FROM THE RAIDERS SECONDARY BUT THEY GAVE UP ALOT OF YARDS ON THE GROUND SO TEAMS RAN THE BALL WITH REALATIVE EASE. IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR A QB TO TURN AND HAND THE BALL OFF VERSUS THROWING A PASS. [/QUOTE]This is true. But, using this same logic - that their pass defense appeared statistically strong due teams simply ran on the Raiders instead of passing - how does this explain the fact that they were tied for 10th best in interceptions among all 32 teams? Shouldn't they be among the worst teams in ints?

Maybe their pass defense wasn't really "best" in the NFL but it was - at the very least - above average.

[ September 05, 2007, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: Nag' ]

KOTRAX · Post by **KOTRAX** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:16 am

Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by KOTRAX:
quote:Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
Speaking of bets, my stone cold lock pick of the week is Detroit being a 1-point underdog at Oakland. Take the Lions and the point. No way the Raiders stop Martz’s passing attack. Weren't the Raiders Defense #1 against the pass last year AND they added players this season? [/QUOTE]ALOT OF TIMES WHEN YOU LOOK AT A TEAM THAT IS GOOD AGAINST PASS IS TO LOOK AT THEIR RUN DEFENSE. FANTASY OR NOT A TEAM WANTS TO RUN FIRST THEN PASS. I DON'T CARE IF ITS MANNING, PALMER, KITNA ETC. TAKING NOTHING AWAY FROM THE RAIDERS SECONDARY BUT THEY GAVE UP ALOT OF YARDS ON THE GROUND SO TEAMS RAN THE BALL WITH REALATIVE EASE. IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR A QB TO TURN AND HAND THE BALL OFF VERSUS THROWING A PASS. [/QUOTE]This is true. But, using this same logic - that their pass defense appeared statistically strong due teams simply ran on the Raiders instead of passing - how does this explain the fact that they were tied for 10th best in interceptions among all 32 teams? Shouldn't they be among the worst teams in ints?

Maybe their pass defense wasn't really "best" in the NFL but it was - at the very least - above average. [/QUOTE]I CAN AGREE WITH YOU THERE NAG. THAT IS A GOOD POINT. I DIDN'T TAKE THE INTERCEPTION RATIO INTO ACCOUNT.

RiFF · Post by **RiFF** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:52 am

Also, at least a contributing factor, in Oakland's apparent good pass defense last year was the fact Oakland's offense was so pathetic that in numerous games teams just "ran the clock out" in the 2nd half; after building up a nice cushion in the 1st half. Without looking at last year's numbers, wassn't a major contibutor to Oakland's good interception total the Pittsburgh game in which they intercepted Ben about 4 or 5 times. I recall watching that game and thinking HOW DID THIS TEAM WIN THE SUPER BOWL!!! Of course probably the same could be said for other teams high in a statisatical category, take away the couple big games and they look pretty average.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:27 am

Originally posted by RiFF:
Also, at least a contributing factor, in Oakland's apparent good pass defense last year was the fact Oakland's offense was so pathetic that in numerous games teams just "ran the clock out" in the 2nd half; after building up a nice cushion in the 1st half. Without looking at last year's numbers, wassn't a major contibutor to Oakland's good interception total the Pittsburgh game in which they intercepted Ben about 4 or 5 times. I recall watching that game and thinking HOW DID THIS TEAM WIN THE SUPER BOWL!!! Of course probably the same could be said for other teams high in a statisatical category, take away the couple big games and they look pretty average. The flipside of this, is that the D must have been awfully good to keep them in games when they had to be on the field pretty much the whole game because the offense did next to nothing all season. I think the OAK D is very underrated - I drafted them in the 18th rd as my second D to play the matchups.

Their corners are rated well, and they have a good pass rush. I'll go out on a limb here and disagree with Tom, I think this one will come down to the wire, and OAK could win it. I will probably look foolish

for questioning Tom's insight, as I'm certain he has much better sources, and I would be paying the fantasy price for it too if I'm wrong since I'll be benching Kitna in a number of leagues for this game. But, that's what its all about, make your best call and live with the results. Can't wait to see the game now!

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:29 am

The line has gone from 1 point to 1.5. Looks like too many NFFC guys are betting before I get out there and spoiling the bet for me. It'll probably be 3 by Friday.

kjduke · Post by **kjduke** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:30 am

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
The line has gone from 1 point to 1.5. Looks like too many NFFC guys are betting before I get out there and spoiling the bet for me. It'll probably be 3 by Friday.

If it's three by Friday, I'll take your bet Tom.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:31 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
The line has gone from 1 point to 1.5. Looks like too many NFFC guys are betting before I get out there and spoiling the bet for me. It'll probably be 3 by Friday.

If it's three by Friday, I'll take your bet Tom.

[/QUOTE]The slam dunk lock was based on the 1-point spread. If it goes to 3, I'm out.