|
I took Kenny Stills. I had Rishard Matthews rated higher and would have taken him if 89 hadn't. I also was looking in the last two rounds at will fuller, ted ginn, and a handful of other guys who are still on the board; but I had Stills just below Matthews and am happy to get him. He's still slated as the WR2 in Miami, a pass-heavy offense, who just signed him to 4 years/32 million dollars. That's proof as far as I'm concerned that they have no intention of cutting his usage; there's been a lot of hype about how Devante Parker is going to step up, but I prefer proven usage over coachspeak and handwaving. Last year was 42 catches for 726 yards and 9 touchdowns. That's a sweet bargain for a 13th round pick in my opinion. Getting WRs of this caliber this late in the draft kind of makes me feel quite validated for not going deep on WRs early. There's still plenty of value that is going to wind up undrafted entirely; guys like Cole Beasley, Tyler Lockett, and Marquise Lee being available as well tells me that Stills isn't just the one guy everyone forgot. I had planned to take one more RB, but I guess even though MFL doesn't force it, I should take a D/ST, because most leagues I'd be required to take one and that's the function of the mock. I don't see a single one of you guys taking a second D/ST though, and I'm typically just fine with and D/ST in the top 12 and then streaming as needed, so IDGAF who I get at this point my draft decisions are basically over. Soo, I don't mind saying that I'd have taken DeAndre Washington if he was still on the board, as the guy Oakland will use for first and second downs plus some goal line work if Beast Mode is hurt or turns out to be washed up now. Failing him, I guess maybe jeremy hill or one of the tampa bay boys as week 1-4 dudes to be dumped for whoever I need to grab off waivers by then.
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2017 07:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
I guess I got the rams, whooptie doo
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:Looking over the teams this morning, the big question I had was for Leper. Why go so short on RB? Was that a choice or just the way the cards fell? It's a reasonable question. Basically, my intention had been to take a fourth RB late; but then I remembered I had to take a D/ST. More generally, I think a lot of people (goons, anyway, I have no real exposure to fantasy football outside of SA) are going early and hard on RBs and I decided a contrarian approach might net a stronger team overall. I also chose to take a second QB at a point where I thought most of the other teams would as well - but this isn't best ball, now, is it? Along with the need to back up Gronk, I wound up having to decide whether to emphasize WR or RB and I went WR hard. In this league you start 3-4 WRs which to me means six is the absolute minimum to roster. And there was a lot of good WR value to be had. There are still RBs on the waiver wire in this league that I'd maybe pick up after dumping/trading Ebron or Cousins. Tampa bay's backups will get some work the first four games; I'm not sure Marshawn Lynch is for real and if he isn't, the two guys in Oakland are worth owning; that kind of thing. But I don't love my team and would probably draft differently if I did it again. Which I'm totally up for!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 18:01
|
|