|
Keep chasing that Rudolph dragon, guys.
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
Tannehill and Roethlisberger are going to be around in rounds 9-11 and it's going to own bones
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 07:29
|
|
|
You say this but then almost every league I've been in in the last two years has seen him be on the waiver wire at some point. He's just one of those guys that don't seem flashy and no one cares about, Ryan, Newton, Brees, maybe even Cutler for some ugodly reason will still go over him and it won't make any sense. Do not apply logic to Ben's ADP.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
I straight up dropped Brady for Roethlisberger in dynasty last year about Week 5 and never looked back.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
don't buy kelce you clods have fun chasing that brent celek usage dragon gently caress TEs all day bwoi
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
timp posted:Specifically check out the bottom of page 4 and page 5, we started to talk about changes we want to make for next year. The way we ended up actually playing we had, imo, way too many starting spots, especially since we had 12 teams, and not nearly enough bench space. It's all in the thread so check it out! I liked the bigger roster because it made me feel like you were actually putting together a full defensive unit instead of just starting a few guys without positions really mattering. It made it so that people needed to have DTs and CBs, which are normally not very productive IDP positions. That said, I'm up for discussing whatever changes should be made to make it better. Last year was pretty much a beta test anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah. I wound up wanting a bigger bench, but otherwise I was pretty happy with the mix. I think I liked JoeRules' proposal: quote:While I'm in favor of cutting starting spots a bit, I don't think we should cut as many as some of you are talking about. It seems that there's plenty of LBs out there, and it seems they dominate the flex spot even with rosters stretched thin. I also don't think there's a significant distinction between DTs and DEs, and CBs and Ss, so here's my proposal: Except I'd probably do 1 DE, 1 DT, 1 DL and 1 CB, 1 S, 1 DB instead of three DL/DB slots. I'd also keep one of the flex positions. But otherwise I think that's a pretty solid compromise. D LB LB LB LB DE DT DL CB S DB would then be the roster with 5 bench spots and I think that's pretty solid. A 16-man roster with 11 starting seems fair, might even add a bench spot but I'm not sure. I also don't want the benches to be too deep because then it just becomes "draft your roster and see what happens." I like player movement, it makes leagues more fun. Having to decide between cutting a guy you think is good because he's hurt or starting a sub-par player is half the battle. I'm also going to get rid of FAAB. I vastly prefer FAAB to regular waivers, but they can be a little much in a league with this format. I think I would do reverse standings waivers instead of priority since that prevents people from sitting on higher priorities. e: or we could just nix waivers altogether and make it a mad-dash free for all  Normally, I would hate that, but I think that big IDP performances tend to go under the radar and anyone watching games on Sunday would probably have just as much of a chance to be the first in on the "next big thing" as anyone else. Might be a more fun wrinkle that way? Who knowse2: if most people think that 11 is still a bit too big, i would potentially be in favor of going down to 3 LB spots instead of 4 to make a 10-man roster. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Jun 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:The trouble with the shallow bench is more than just being forced to move guys for bye weeks. IDP players get injured a lot; with just 5 slots, any injured guy in a non-LB slot you basically *have* to drop in order to keep a full team on the field. And that really sucks when you're dropping a guy who is only going to miss two weeks. I don't think Yahoo allows for non-IR injury spots, I wish they did. I'd definitely be open to adding a 6th bench spot, though. I had a few injuries and got hit with byes a few times, but I didn't really have a problem rostering a team ever. I originally went with 5 bench because there were 5 positions (LB, DT, DE, CB, S) and between that and the two D flex, I was able to mostly keep a pretty balanced bench. It's looking more and more to me like the solution is to just add another bench spot. I don't want to be too lenient on stashing hurt guys, but I also don't want to make it too tough on people to fill out their roster. I don't think it would be much of a problem to add another bench spot.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
all that graph proves to me is that i now have visual evidence for my gently caress TEs crusade
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
I'd rather deal with the one day a month that Yahoo is down than have to deal with clicking a thousand links to do anything on ESPN
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
I have CJ Anderson as a 17th round keeper to go with Jeremy Hill in the 10th and Charles in the 13th so 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Yeah, make it mushrooms and Requiem for a Dream and then we'll see how tough everyone really is
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:Well that's the idea behind most of the strategies I've programmed and simulated, anyways! The main issue is how to define "best" (mean rank? ADP? upside? VORP?) and how to define "need" (e.g. all other things equal, how much do you need a 3rd RB? A Fourth? The 1st TE? The second QB?). Nobody needs a TE
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
I love how Kelce is a "safe" pick. Alex Smith can't throw a seam route to save his life and Charles will get 85% of the dump-off looks. Kelce is going to have a nice mediocre 60-600-5 season and I'm going to loving laugh and laugh and laugh. He's so talented but I have seen nothing to think that they're going to utilize him in a way that actually promotes that talent. He's going to spend 2015 running roughshod over linebackers while Jamaal Charles gobbles all the touches and Alex Smith panics and ponders over his tiny hands. TEs are dumb guys for real
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
I still doubt he sees over 100 targets, honestly. And of those, I doubt that more than 75 are legitimately catchable. I'm willing to bet he doesn't clear 70 catches. e: If he gets over 170 pts in a PPR, 10yd/pt league, I will pen a 2,000 word essay to the majesty that is Andy Reid's mustache. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Aug 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
jabro posted:In his rookie year he caught 66-of-71 catchable passes last season. So, maintaining that ratio, in order to have 70 catches, he needs to be thrown 75 catchable balls.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
All I'm saying is y'all can chase that Brent Celek usage dragon all you want. I've seen enough of Andy Reid's bullshit and Alex Smith's inefficiency to stay as far the gently caress away from that poo poo as possible. If I had Kelce as a keeper in the mid-to-low teens, then yeah why not, but otherwise I'm pressing sell and hard. e: I also think that Randle is a much better keeper because there are no FA backs out there that are really that good enough to relegate Randle to a purely reserve role. He's going to get his, behind a very good line. Getting a guy like that in the 10th or whatever, really allows you to pursue a legit 0RB if you really want to because you can plug him into your RB2 slot pretty much all season. Tight Ends are stupid, don't keep them. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Aug 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Fight Club Sandwich posted:he's likely to be a top 5 TE on the season If you're not Gronk, top-5 TE means "slightly above replacement level" quote:that being said, agree TEs suck and OP is a huge pussy if he keeps Kelce over Randle yase
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Metapod posted:I don't care how good that line is Randle is not a nfl starting hb and will be exposed Niether is Matt Asiata and he-- an RB2 for half the season behind a worse line, with less talent, in a piss-poor offense-- couldn't hold Randle's jock with stickum. He's going to get touches and they are going to lead to production. Even if he only gets 150 on the season, that's going to be enough for him to be a weekly flex play in 12+ team leagues.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Metapod posted:Asiata was extremely reliant on touchdowns and was near unplayable most weeks and Randle isn't going to be a bell cow or get goalline carries. Just like asiata Randle will be a daily tournament winning play He still got 10 carries a game and Randle could manage a 3.5 YPC just by falling forward, so as long as there is usage, there will be points.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Remember when Monte Ball was a rookie getting coached by John Fox and not that good of a back anyway and when Toby Gerhart was a plodder going to an offensive blackhole and also when all circumstances are unilateral and there are no such things as variables
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Ty1990 posted:The Joseph Randle poo poo is so funny to me. Here's a guy who is so talented that he barely touched the ball last year. I don't personally think he's that talented and I'm not really into him at his current ADP, but the argument for him here is as a 8-10th round keeper and there's no reason to think he can't provide flex numbers. He's got a history of production (albeit in limited carries), he knows the system, there's not a lot of competition, there aren't many RBs walking the steet that could come in and immediately be good enough to be a bell cow, the team around him is more than competent, and the line in front of him are road graders. This is not Toby Gerhart rolling over Peterson's wake on his way to a starting gig on a dogshit team, this isn't a total unknown Montee Ball getting (rightfully) snubbed by a noted rookie hater. Randle after like the 7th is at the very least a solid RB3 for all intents and purposes and at that point in the draft, you're not likely to find that at all, especially not someone with, should the cards fall right, have low-end RB1 potential. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the guy who wants to keep him is also getting Hill in the 10th? Basically that means if you keep Randle in the 8th, you pretty much only need to take whatever the best RB is available in the first 5 rounds and use all of your other picks on WRs and your team will probably be stacked. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Aug 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Papes posted:No, because he wasn't a rookie last year. If you drafted Montee Ball last year you made your own bed, tbh. He couldn't block and anyone who knows anything about Peyton Manning knew that he wouldn't be staying on the field if he couldn't figure that poo poo out ASAP. I'm really referring to his rookie season when he was a consensus top-40 pick for the same reason why idiots ranked him so high last year, while proving even less going into 2013 than he had into 2014. I know it's easy to say hindsight and whatnot, but I had exactly 0 shares of Gerhart and Ball last year for these exact reasons and I'm much happier for it. e: actually I might have gotten auto-drafted or stuck with a falling Gerhart in one league and hated it the entire time and dropped him by like week 4
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Ty1990 posted:If I'm a Cowboys fan I'm thrilled if Randle can give them 1,100 yards with DMC's corpse chipping in a couple hundred as well. Randle isn't near talented enough to win anybody a league behind any o-line. Not at his current ADP, no, but as an 8th round keeper coupled with Hill as a 10th? That could be a league winner if you don't ruin the top of your draft.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
In a league where yards are 10/pt and full PPR, that would be about 200 points, give or take 20 points, when you add in the receiving yards; 230-260 if he scored 10.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Suave Fedora posted:He was 3 catches short of 70 last year. I'd ask if you're sure about making that bet but you're already I did the math assuming 1 PPR. 70 catches for 700 yards and 5 TDs would be 175 points and I lowballed a bit because I HATE TIGHT ENDS  e: if you want to call it 180, I'll make it a 2,500 word essay and I will donate money to the WWF and adopt a walrus. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Aug 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 19:23
|
|
and your toxx falls under 1ppr by the way as you didnt specify.
|
Suave Fedora posted:Splendid. Which one do you want to do? Because I like the 180 points one, because if I'm going to lose this bet I better get a loving stuffed walrus out of the deal. I will however take the original out of honor and not try to eke out an extra 10 points. vvv e: deal  I'll have my sister knit him a little chiefs polo maybe 
Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Aug 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
I hope Navorro Bowman isn't borked because he's the only guy who can tackle on a defense that's going to be on the field for 40 minutes a game and I have him as a 22nd round keeper.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
RCarr posted:I drafted Montee Ball in the 2nd, and Gerhart in the 4th last year. My keepers were loving Percy Harvin and Michael Crabtree. Sup CJA in the 18th buddy  Hill in the 10th, Charles in the 12th, Anderson in the 18th; .4PPR, 2 RB and FLEX 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
I don't mind starting a keeper league based off of last year's results if you're only doing a league with like one keeper and/or there are limits on how many year's guys can be kept, because if you're drafting a team with absolutely no youth your team probably sucks anyway, but those are very specific types of leagues and as a general rule, yeah, it's much better to start keeper leagues from a blank slate.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
trade one of your billion RBs for a WR2
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
not any that i'd want to rely on for a whole season in a 10 team league e: Tate, yeah, but even then if you start 3 I'd want another. e2: He still has 6 RBs, Brandon Marshall gets hurt a lot and has The Geno Factor. Tate is fine and Bryant is getting passed. You need another WR. Well, need is a strong word, but I'd want one and I'm sure you could get one. e3: I probably would've taken another WR over Yeldon, I'm wondering who was there. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Aug 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Guys, it's back: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3735414
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Ayudo posted:The no. 1 rule of fantasy is actually 'don't overpay for last year's performance.' OBJ is an immense talent with a small sample size and an injury history. See also: Doug Martin, CJ Spiller, Keenan Allen. This is true but OBJ seems generational. I'm not taking the chance at his ADP but I don't blame anyone who does.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Spoeank posted:The argument is that he is considering ODB at 1.01 which is kinda crazy. In certain keeper formats I would do it in a heartbeat, bot not so much in a re-draft. Maybe in a 10-team or less, since then you can go WR/RB at the turn, but even then, not in a keeper, I'd probably go Brown.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Sataere posted:3) Outside of Graham and Gronk, TE's are interchangeable This should be the title of the loving thread.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
I think Doltos has done a very good job explaining his points even if I think he's wrong like 75 % of the time  There's a reason why you're not called Daltos any more never 4get 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh7B7s3-pGs
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
Olsen and Kelce are going to score like a point a week more than the #5 TE, it happens every year. If you spend a top-50 pick on one of them you're going to have a bad time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 14:39 |
|
|
The TEs I'm targeting this year, in order, based upon when I'm probably going to have to draft them: 1) Eifert 2) ASJ 3) Paul 4) Walker 5) Ebron 6) Daniels 7) RUDOLPH THIS IS THE YEAR GUYS If everyone forgets Rudolph exists and I have my choice betweem him and those other 6, I might take him god help me E: two of those guys will end up being a TE1 in a 12-team league, and since there's like a 20 point difference between 5-12 and like another 25 point difference maybe between 3-5, I'm going to take my chances and hopefully I'll be right. Otherwise, I'll just have to pick up Heath Miller off of waivers for the 6th year in a row. Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 04:02 on Aug 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2015 03:59
|
|