KUBJPO01 Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Are the Huddle's projections too high? They are projecting 89/1100 and 11 TD's and have him ranked 11th. Most other places I've looked have him at about 65/900 yds and 6-8 Td's and he's ranked closer to #20. Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPetro Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Too high. Moss sucks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanCT Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Too low. Moss is awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soco Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 right in the middle... just right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FishFreak Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 He's really tough to project at this stage of his career even in New England. I too think the Huddle's projections are high especially in NE's spread offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 (edited) Those projections are way to high for my taste, especially cause he's done squat in the Preseason. He and Brady have not had alot of time to work on their timing, the Pats have alot of other solid options to go to, the Pats always spread it around and Moss already has a bad hammy. Ragardless of what his stats look like at the end one thing is for sure he definitely loses value in PPR leagues as the receptions just won't be there. My #'s - 64 rec. 948 yards and 8 tds. Edited August 26, 2007 by irish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Those projections are way to high for my taste, especially cause he's done squat in the Preseason. He and Brady have not had alot of time to work on their timing, the Pats have alot of other solid options to go to, the Pats always spread it around and Moss already has a bad hammy. Ragardless of what his stats look like at the end one thing is for sure he definitely loses value in PPR leagues as the receptions just won't be there. My #'s - 64 rec. 948 yards and 8 tds. You said way too high yet predicted only 150 yds less & 3 less TDs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 (edited) You said way too high yet predicted only 150 yds less & 3 less TDs Gotta look at the whole picture there partner. I have him at 64 receptions which is 25 less than DMD's, the 150 yards less you mentioned and the 3 tds. I play in mostly PPR leagues so if you look at all the numbers combined he's losing 25 points per the receptions 15 from yardage and 18 from the TDs. That's almost 60 points on the year (58 to be exact), which is close to a 4 point differential per game (3.625 to be exact) from DMD's proj. to mine. That's a big difference. No? Edited August 26, 2007 by irish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ts Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 IMO, he'll be good for somewhere between: 30/490/2 - or - 80/1020/9 ... which means someone else will be drafting him, just so I don't have the headache. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 I agree that DMD is a little excited about revoltin' Randy's potential.. I may just be bitter because he brought me 2 1/2 years of steady disappointment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Gotta look at the whole picture there partner. I have him at 64 receptions which is 25 less than DMD's, the 150 yards less you mentioned and the 3 tds. I play in mostly PPR leagues so if you look at all the numbers combined he's losing 25 points per the receptions 15 from yardage and 18 from the TDs. That's almost 60 points on the year (58 to be exact), which is close to a 4 point differential per game (3.625 to be exact) from DMD's proj. to mine. That's a big difference. No? Ah Yes..PPR ..Point taken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pitbull739 Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Randy is the best WR in the league on any given play that he decides to be. When he decides to be one of the pack, which is 90% of the time, that is what you get. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me the last three years, shame on me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Randy is the best WR in the league on any given play that he decides to be. When he decides to be one of the pack, which is 90% of the time, that is what you get. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me the last three years, shame on me. I don't know if I'd go that far? But I do agree with you to an extent. I certainly expect a bounce back year and his TD totals could be what gives him more substantial value. He is a tough WR/player to project for this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vichawkfan Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 as long as he's healthy - he's 1000 10td's. he's going to look ridiculous good to start the year, then fade out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KUBJPO01 Posted August 26, 2007 Author Share Posted August 26, 2007 DMD?, care to refute any of this and defend your projections? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 IMO, he carries substantially more value where you regularly start 4+ WRs each week ... because you're really not sure how he's going to do, but it could be HUGH. IMO, his potential production each week will make him a mandatory start because we start 4 WRs each week. However in leagues that start only 2 WRs, different story. As with most FF questions, it comes down to your lineup requirements, your league size and your scoring rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFatchix Posted August 27, 2007 Share Posted August 27, 2007 (edited) My #'s - 64 rec. 948 yards and 8 tds. How do you come across the number 948? Kinda random Edited August 27, 2007 by NoFatchix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.