MTSuper7

Members
  • Content count

    5,289
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

MTSuper7 last won the day on June 24

MTSuper7 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

301 Excellent

1 Follower

About MTSuper7

  • Rank
    Huddler

Profile Information

  • Location
    Michigan

Recent Profile Visitors

6,939 profile views
  1. Should Antonio Brown be numero uno?

    The "he is the least likely WR in the league to get injured" argument just sounds like you are digging for reasons to support your position. The guy got hurt early in week 15 last year, missing the rest of the regular season (and essentially torpedoing the playoff hopes of fantasy teams who had him). Nobody knows when injuries will strike. It's that simple. I don't even think you have to bring up injury/health to defend yourself here. As you said, he is a lock for 100 catches. And if he meets his averages over the last five years, he'll eclipse 1400 yards and 10 TDs. He's the safest pick out there, and in a PPR league, he very rarely has a down week to hurt you. Again, this question is more about personal preference. The biggest argument against drafting Brown with the #1 overall pick is the opportunity cost. If you take Antonio Brown with the #1 overall pick, you have to be comfortable with the impact that has on your RB situation. If you like a lot of the mid round RB options, then draft WR early and take who falls in those mid rounds at RB. Actually, based on mock trends, this strategy might be pretty smart. It seems like people are in love with the RB once again, meaning there will be a lot of WR value likely to be there at the 2-3 turn. Starting your draft with 3 Top 10 WRs, then taking some lottery tickets at RB in the back half of your draft could work out well. Especially in PPR formats.
  2. Should Antonio Brown be numero uno?

    First, I don't subscribe to any "lowest chance of injury" arguments. This is a violent game, and any player could find himself on the shelf at any time. And though I don't think there is a safer WR either, it's not like Brown's situation remains completely unchanged. It'll be interesting to see how the departure of Todd Haley affects the play calling. There's a very small change that a new play caller will affect Brown much, but to ignore it completely is a mistake. Regarding taking Brown over the stud RBs, I don't think there is a right answer to this question. Instead, ask yourself how your decision shapes the rest of your draft. If you take Antonio Brown #1 overall, then, using these ADP stats, your RB1 would then be among the likes of: Joe Mixon Christian McCaffrey Derrick Henry Or maybe one of these guys is there (because ADP data at this point isn't going to be indicative of how things look in mid-to-late August): LeSean McCoy Jordan Howard Jerick McKinnon Flip that against drafting Le'Veon or Gurley with that first pick. You then end up with a WR1 among the likes of: Mike Evans Doug Baldwin Josh Gordon Tyreek Hill I don't see A.J. Green or Keenan Allen falling the the 2-3 turn, but maybe that could happen in some leagues. You can't count on it though. Let's talk best case for your Antonio Brown scenario... Would you rather have Antonio Brown and LeSean McCoy or Bell or Gurley and one of Mike Evans or Doug Baldwin? I am more in the Bell/Gurley and Evans/Baldwin camp, as RB feels like it falls off a cliff after the first 10 or 11 guys (around the Dalvin Cook / Devonta Freeman line somewhere). In general, I usually subscribe to the idea that, if I am taking RB with my first pick, I tend to go WR-WR with my next two unless some excellent RB value is there. So it becomes more like this: Would you rather Antonio Brown, Jordan Howard, Doug Baldwin -or- Le'Veon Bell, Mike Evans, Doug Baldwin. I am way more comfortable calling Evans/Baldwin my co-WR1s with a stud RB than having Jordan Howard as a RB1 (or any of the other RBs with possible exception of McCoy even though I'm not loving it). But if you like Antonio Brown enough and can accept how that impacts your RB situation, then go for it.
  3. FTSA Experts Draft

    Mariota has real upside this year. He didn't seem fully healthy last year (early on for sure), and he gets a new coach and scheme (Mularkey's offense was too vanilla) along with another year of maturity for the young duo of Davis and Taylor at WR. And Dion Lewis. I wouldn't be surprised if he finished as a lower end QB1, though I think his ceiling is maybe 8th overall. His running/scrambling is going to make a difference. He is currently falling around the #17 QB taken in PPR 12-team mocks.
  4. FTSA Experts Draft

    I don't think people know what TEN plans to do exactly with the Dion Lewis and Derrick Henry split. It is interesting that Lewis seems to be going a couple of rounds later than Henry pretty consistently. For that reason, I love Lewis' value a lot more. As for the rest of the Huddle team, it's pretty solid. I really like pairing ASJ and Clay at TE. I think they probably would have been better off passing on Jordy Nelson and drafting their QB of choice instead (Brady, Wentz, etc.). Love Cameron Meredith in the 10th. He could have standalone value but is kind of a Michael Thomas handcuff. The Mike Williams pick seems optimistic to me, but maybe he does emerge. Overall, nice job!
  5. Seferian-Jenkins signs with the Jaguars

    I really like ASJ as a TE2 this year with top 8 potential. For the current price, I am buying all day.
  6. Yeah, he isn't likely to be an early season contributor. But the Broncos did decline his fifth-year option, so he should be plenty motivated to improve his stock headed into free agency next year.
  7. It depends on whether or not the defense can carry the team and whether or not a healthy Jared Veldheer can thrive in Denver's scheme. Hopefully he stays healthy. It'd really be nice to see something out of Shane Ray this year, but I'm not holding my breath.
  8. Deeper Sleepers

    Hard to ignore Sefarian-Jenkins as a sleeper TE based on his current ADP. I am guessing some hype will bump him up above 150, but if he stays a 14th round pick, I'm all over it.
  9. Think he will regress 20-30%? I think regressing is likely, particularly completion percentage. Hard to quantify it, so maybe 20-30% is the wrong way to look at it. Hard to know for sure. Last year was certainly a statistical anomaly compared to the rest of Keenum's career. Statistical regression to the mean is almost certain, though there are a lot of factors at play (scheme, talent, coaching, etc.) that contribute.
  10. Feeling overall decent vibes from the Broncos right now. Keenum is an upgrade at QB, even if he regresses 20-30% from his Minnesota numbers. It isn't hard to improve upon last year's debacle at QB. If Bradley Chubb steps right in as an impact player opposite Von Miller, I like the defense to bounce back into Top 5 territory again. Also wanted to share some general vibes that I have about other teams based on things I have read or heard: Raiders - Not so good. I think the first year under Gruden is going to be rough. The Martavis Bryant trade has the potential to blow up in their faces already. Something just doesn't feel right with this team. Maybe it's the ridiculous contract Gruden got, which begs the question "would he take this job even if he didn't truly want it just because it's a TON of dough?" Cowboys - Not so good. Outside of Zeke, where are the playmakers on offense? Cardinals - Decent. The Cardinals have a ton of unknowns. New coach, new OC, new QB, new WRs behind Larry... But there are playmakers here, and the QB situation is going to likely be better (when Bradford stays healthy, he is pretty good). Lions - Decent. Still major questions on defensive line though (maybe Hyder and Zettel step up - they need help behind Ansah). But the offense remains consistent. They did lose Ebron (good riddance IMO), and didn't really replace him with an impact player. But Golladay could emerge in year 2 as more than a red-zone and/or situational guy. But the decent vibes come from their work to really reinforce the offensive line (which looks mighty fine on paper) and to get a potential workhorse RB in Kerryon Johnson. If they can establish a legit run game, watch out. Titans - Good. This team really needed a coaching overhaul, and the guys they brought in are young with something to prove. There is risk though in LaFleur as OC, but the previous regime seemed to channel the ghost of Jeff Fisher to do as little as possible with a decent amount of talent. I think Dion Lewis will prove to be a steal this year, and Mariota will bring great ROI to fantasy footballers who invest. Walker is still there as the sure thing, and Corey Davis still has room to make a leap. I expect them to be fun to watch. Giants - Meh. Another coaching overhaul, but this one is more head scratching. Pat Shurmur is an uninspired hire, and David Shula never impressed me with his offenses in Carolina at all. He inherits Eli Manning in his golden years, but there are nice weapons around Manning. I just don't believe in this coaching staff or in Eli at his age, so I'm unlikely to invest much in this offense.
  11. GBP backfield

    Well, when you consider that Green Bay was forced to use Ty Montgomery out of desperation two seasons ago when everyone in front of him got hurt, then they drafted two RBs immediately following the 2016 season, it doesn't exactly tell me that the Packers felt settled at the position. Granted, it's not impossible to think that Ty Montgomery could become the alpha in that backfield, but I have a hard time imagining that his value isn't going to hinge almost completely on his passing game chops or one of the other two RBs getting hurt to give him more opportunity for carries. This will be a very interesting situation to monitor this preseason. I am guessing, though, that Montgomery's role will be solid as more of a pass catcher / occasional runner and that it'll be more about Jones vs. Williams for lead early down back duties.
  12. Browns fans: Read this long rumor!

    I don't think you can assume that both New York teams will draft a QB. The Jets look quite likely to do so, but the Giants maybe not quite as sure. Also, regarding Chubb #1 then QB at #4, aren't all of these QBs a crapshoot? Nobody knows who will pan out and who won't. So how much does it really matter which guy they get of those three?
  13. Browns fans: Read this long rumor!

    Really? There is a difference between what should happen and what will. Mayfield is a proven winner and the most pro-ready guy in the draft. There are enough QB needy teams that someone will look beyond his height.
  14. Browns fans: Read this long rumor!

    I actually think taking Chubb #1 overall, then grabbing a QB with #4 isn't a bad idea. Let the other teams figure out what they want. I also am glad to see Lamar Jackson's name brought up here. I have wondered why he has gotten zero love while Josh Allen gets slobbered over. Josh Allen has the most bust potential of the group IMO. Anyway, the Browns should be happy to get whoever is left of Mayfield, Rosen or Darnold after taking Chubb #1 overall. Drafting two QBs in the top 4 would be silly when they have other needs that could be filled by an elite talent /prospect with one of those picks.
  15. player safety and kickoffs

    For the TL;DR crowd: Go back to the way kickoffs were and fix how players tackle, block, etc. instead (via targeting, fines, etc.). The game is supposed to have 3 phases. Current rules changes threaten to take it from 2.75 phases to 2.5 phases. For everyone else... Not a bad solution, but a few comments: If I understand this solution correctly, the 4th and 15 snap is essentially an offensive snap. Some teams are good enough on offense that giving them an offensive snap seems pretty advantageous. Certainly more advantageous than whatever advantage the team with the best onside kicking kicker/special teams unit would give. I don't like the idea that a team with a stronger offense is at an advantage for what should be a special teams play (or, conversely, that a team with a poor offense should be at a disadvantage). What happens if the team receiving the punt commits a penalty? Is it possible that they could give the kicking team an automatic first down? I don't like the idea of any "automatic first down" penalties being awarded to the kicking team. Is there a reason that a team can't just declare an onside kick and run the onside as it always has been run? Then if a team wants to maintain the element of surprise, they could still elect to fake punt on 4th and 15th. But they shouldn't be allowed to have their starting offense on the field for that 4th and 15 play. Are there statistics to back up the assertion that kickoff returns are notably more dangerous than punt returns (or any other play for that matter)? I'm just wondering how much are these changes legitimate changes in favor of player safety vs. change for appearance's sake. Certainly, not having a kickoff means no risk of injury, but the comparison should be to the "average" play during a game. Color me skeptical, but if you remove kickoffs entirely, at what point do you remove obvious long passing downs (3rd and 20+) because they represent more risk than the average play due to receivers getting hung out to dry by their quarterbacks? What would keep the NFL from just forcing teams who end up in 3rd and 20+ from automatically placing them at 4th and 8 (or whatever the "average" historical gain on 3rd and 20+ amounts to)? I'd rather see them restore kickoffs to the good old days where there were actual returns - simply admit that football is a contact sport and that all players are at risk when they play. But then continue to apply pressure financially on guys who play dirty. For instance, use the new targeting rules to deter guys from making blind side blocks on kick returns. It seems like a lot of the risk on kicks and punts comes from guys who get rocked by a blindside hit by a blocker for the return team. A block can certainly occur without the level of violence that seems inherent in a blindside block. Sorry if this post comes across as ignorant, but I really never understood how kickoffs are so much more dangerous that they had to virtually eliminate kickoffs from game strategy (the touchback percentage is ridiculous). Dudes can get rocked on any play. Fix how guys block, tackle, etc. but don't change the fundamentals of the game. It's supposed to be three phases, but special teams is just not as important anymore with kickoffs so muted (and maybe even going away entirely).