Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

tspencer

Members
  • Posts

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Fan of the
    Packers

tspencer's Achievements

Huddler

Huddler (2/4)

0

Reputation

  1. Hey all, I am looking at the rankings and am baffled that any so-called 'expert' would rank Doug Martin and CJ Anderson ahead of players like Latavius Murray, Jeremy Langford or even Matt Forte, who are players who should be in 2nd round mock drafts as they will be receiving work-horse touches. Doug Martin and CJ Anderson have had PLENTY of opportunity to show they could be forces at the workhorse RB spot, but have been completely disappointing for previous owners. I know, because I owned both of these players in the past and they aren't consistent enough to count on as even a quality #2 option, let alone be ranked ahead of potential #1 work horse RBs who have been PROVEN in recent years. For instance, Lativus Murray is ranked lower than CJ Anderson. How is this even reasonable? Latavius Murray's numbers last year were much better. CJ Anderson is practically a bust. What reasoning are these experts using? And what about inconsistent and often injured players like Doug Martin and LeSean McCoy? Anyone playing fantasy football for the last 4 years KNOWS that these two guys cannot be seriously relied upon as quality #2 guys. In my most recent draft, I selected Langford and Forte ahead of CJ, LeSean and Dougie. I did so because I have no question about Forte's durability. I have high confidence that Langford is an explosive player and is going to have a very good opportunity to be the main man for the Bears. Sure, Langford hasn't proven his durability, but Lesean McCoy and Doug Martin have proven to not be durable players and are very inconsistent. IMO, on my draft board, I have Lativius Murray, Jonathan Stewart and Demarco Murray ahead of CJ, LeSean and Doug. I think certain running backs are "fools gold" in the early rounds and the experts are underrating several great options who should be considered in earlier ADP. Each league's draft is different depending on if there is a 'run' on a position during a stretch of the draft, but I've seen too many people out there are drinking the koolaid on fools-gold RBs who should be avoided and risk taken on them only in mid rounds (4-7). I'm not sure what others think. IMO, Doug Martin is debatable, as he at least played in all his games last year, but clearly wasn't as consistent as I would like. Very comparable to Latavius Murray, but IMO, after Doug Martin played with my mind a couple years in a row 2-3 years ago, I just can't put trust in him in rounds 2 or 3. IMO, I feel justified putting a very late 2nd-thru-3rd round flyer out on Matt Forte, Latavius Murray or even Jeremy Langford. Perhaps others may feel those are 'reaches' but I don't and think the experts got several rankings/evals wrong this year on running backs.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information