Big Country

Members
  • Content count

    17,407
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by Big Country

  1. I'd say the 50+ responses from the other site you posted this same question to a few days ago, just like your other threads, should suffice, don't you think? Many of the people here are on that site as well, so you're essentially asking the same people. Maybe you'll get different answers I suppose. But, much like that other thread, rule was poorly written, should be revised.
  2. Rankings PLEASE HELP

    I've done it before - takes some work in Excel, but I've used it in the past when I spent way more time than I should have on this to come up with some consistency metrics. Depending on position, I would calculate number of week with a top X finish to indicate elite week, top Y finish based on number of starters at that position and a few other things. Was an interesting metric to play with. I used it mainly to compare players that had similar year end totals in points to indicate which were the consistent players and which were the boom/bust players.
  3. Have we had any rookie drafts yet?

    Tweak the filter a little to "Exclude Mock Drafts" and I also chose "Starting After May 1" and it seems to be much more normal - Barkley is top rookie with ADP of 1.13 and Guice is #2 with ADP of 3.15. Next 4 guys ADP are all between 5.7 and 7.3 which shows just how much of a jumble it is right now with no clear cut 3rd guy, etc. With the default setting, even though it says rookie only drafts, the max picks are out of whack - Barkley has a max pick of 721 and most of the others have max picks in the mid 300s. Not necessarily anything wrong in their data, as not everyone uses the draft the same way or takes the time to properly setup their draft/league so that it can be filtered, etc. for these things.
  4. Yes, it was a wrong thing to change - your long thread on the other FF site where the vote clearly went with the "it was wrong" side should be enough.
  5. What’s wrong with picking 1.02-1.04 this year?

    I think what we are seeing is that other than Barkley at 1, there is a grouping of 6-7 RBs (Guice, Penny, Michel, Jones, Chubb, Freeman and Johnson) that all can have valid arguments for being anywhere from the #2-8 pick. Maybe 1 or 2 of the WRs squeak in ahead of 1 or 2 of the RBs, but generally a pretty weak WR class compared to past seasons, and no QB that is a definite top 10 rookie pick. With all of that uncertainty about where to rank the RBs, I think a lot of owners are content with getting the RB that falls to them out of the group rather than feeling the need to move up to get a particular one. So now you have guys in the 2-4 range wanting to move down, but not out of the top 8, but the other owners with the picks in the 5-8 range content to pick there with no real desire to move up. You could possibly move out of the top 8, but you're not going to get the same type of package as you may have received in years past when there were a more clear top 2-4 picks and a much less severe drop off in the 2nd/3rd tier rookies because there were more WRs and such in better situations. In one dynasty draft that I am in, I will say the most activity and talk was centered on folks outside the top 8 trying to get the 7-9 picks to get the last of the rookie RBs that look to be in decent spots, but those offers didn't happen until the first 5 picks or so had been made.
  6. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    At this point, let's all just agree that based on the opinions of all of the very experienced dynasty players that have responded to you so far, and all of the examples any of us have found of trades for the #1 overall pick, you severely undervalue what it is generally taking to acquire the #1 pick this year, and should probably focus on who it is you are likely to get at the #6 pick. Based on the drafts i have been in and have seen, you are correct in your assumption that you likely will not get Barkley, Guice, Chubb, Penny or Jones, but will likely get your preferred option of Michel, Freeman or Johnson, though, I have seen Michel go as high as #2, so it is possible that one of Chubb, Penny or Jones falls to you at 6. I have not seen Barkley or Guice drop that far, and have not seen many drafts where any of the QBs or WRs go in the top 5.
  7. Sony Michel in NEP

    This is one I am having probably the most trouble ranking. Good talent especially in the running game. Some question on how much he is ready to be used as a receiver. And, as the note above notes, had 12 fumbles in college, which is that happens in the NFL is the fastest way to the bench. Situationally he may be the better running option of the NE backs, but how much does the 1st round pick mean he gets opportunity. I think if NE were a team not in the running for a title, he'd get more leeway, but NE is going to play the guys that will get them back to the SuperBowl regardless of draft pedigree. I've seen arguments for him being as high as the #2 rookie RB, most settling in on him in the 3-5 range, then others pushing him down into the RB7-8 range. No clear consensus. Heck, I think my opinion has flopped twice just while composing this. To me, definitely a guy where I want to see how he does in camp and ideally get some look at him in preseason. For dynasties drafting now, with no additional information, I think I am settling in on him being my RB4-5 out of the rookies.
  8. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    I don;t see many dynasty leagues where the 6 and 10 would net you the 1. If your league really has a rule that every team has to have 5 picks, then you are going to be extremely limited in what you can do. I think at this point have to come to the conclusion that you are severely undervaluing the #1 pick and a move for it is not likely to happen.
  9. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    You do seem to always find a buyer for your garbage in AFL, so it may well work in this guys league as well.
  10. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    As I said, make whatever offer you want. Only you know your league mates and how they play the game. As everyone else in this thread has said, what you have been proposing so far would not even be close to the ballpark of getting any of us to think you were even serious about the #1 pick and likely would not even generate a reply. @millworkguy posted several actual trades that have been made in dynasty leagues for the #1 pick. If you look at them, you will see that the common theme is that they mostly include a top 15-20 player AND a fairly high pick. You're talking about including guys like Lee and Funchess who are basically JAGs in terms of fantasy dynasty value and 3rd and 4th round rookie picks, while those other trades involved guys like Kamara (arguably a top 5 overall pick this year), Mike Evans (a top 5 dynasty WR) and top 5 or top 10 picks.
  11. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    Look from his point of view - what good does temporarily plugging a couple holes with marginal players do for him long term? Take him from last place to just outside of the playoffs over the next few years. What does a player like Barkley, plus any other picks he gets, plus say another early pick next season get him in that same time frame? Probably a heck of a lot closer to playoffs or beyond if one of those other guys hits. Barkley plus any replacement guy he can find is greater than the sum of the parts of your offer. Maybe the owner is not a good dynasty owner or views some of the pieces you are offering differently, but as others have said, and based on the other trades that are being made in other leagues with a similar structure, unless you are offering multiple early picks over a couple years or multiple quality starters that are not well north of 30 years in age, it is likely a bad deal for him to take. That doesn't mean he won't take it or that you shouldn't offer it, we don't know this owner or what his experience or skill level is, but coming from the very experienced players that have replied so far (millwork and Def. have been around for a long time and demonstrated great knowledge and Darin is a staff member/"Dynasty IDP Expert" at certain other FF sites), just know that your offer, if being presented to an experienced dynasty player, is very light at best and laughable/insulting at worst.
  12. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    No one said Edelman does not have value, however he is a 32 year old, oft injured WR on the downside of his career. He might give you two more years of top-25 WR value. That is not a very enticing asset in a dynasty league unless you have a team that is at the cusp of winning a title and having him as your WR2/3 is the missing piece to put you over. The #1 pick has the potential to give you a game changing type player for 8-10 years. If you are not likely in immediate title contention, which asset would you prefer to have?
  13. Dynasty, want 1st pick

    From what I have seen the #1 going for in dynasties, I don't think you are even in the ball park with that offer and run the risk of him just ignoring you from here on out. You are offering up a bunch of scraps for what many consider to be the best lock in many years as a dynasty #1 pick.
  14. Browns fans: Read this long rumor!

    Which is why they are floating the idea of going QB/QB...... I highly doubt they go that route, but have read it at a few different outlets. My working theory is they are floating that idea so that the teams that want a QB will up their offers for a pick.
  15. Brandin Cooks traded to the Rams

    But this is the internet - we're supposed to disagree and tear down each others points
  16. Brandin Cooks traded to the Rams

    Which speaks exactly to my point - he may have been beating DBs, but Brady just doesn't necessarily have the arm strength he once did to get the ball to him. Brady is not going anywhere, so if the WR does not complement him, it makes sense to move on from the WR. Interestingly, I was able to find the stats on defensive PI calls by targeted WR. - https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr For the season, Cooks drew 5 PI calls for 141 yards, which tied him as the #6 WR in terms of drawing PIs (with Thielen, Diggs, Bryant and Green) and #4 in yardage (behind Hopkins, Antonio and Marvin Jones)
  17. RG3 to Ravens

    And Jamarcus Russell.
  18. Brandin Cooks traded to the Rams

    IMO, part of this is the evolution, or really the aging, of Brady. When Moss was there he had the arm strength to really air it out, plus Moss was freakish in his ability to go get the ball even over 2 or 3 defenders. Now, he (Brady) can still air it out on occasion, but Brady's strength is how quickly he is able to read defenses, find the gap and make the decision to squeeze the ball into tight spaces for his WRs.
  19. Brandin Cooks traded to the Rams

    Local radio (here in SoCal) did bring this up how New England is more of a horizontal passing game - lot of quick looks, slants, crosses, etc. which is not Cooks game. As noted in other posts, you can;t argue with the success of NE or Cooks still having a decent year, but as far as fit he was not the type of WR that NE features in their offense. Alternatively, the Rams have a bit more of a stretch the field in their passing game to ideally open up some stuff for Gurley as well. Cooks better fits the mold of the outside WR that keeps defenses honest and can keep a safety out of the box as they need to provide over the top protection because of his knack with the deep ball.
  20. OBJ trade?

    Lot of potentials - especially if something were to materialize for the 23 and 31, would certainly lead to some discussion about if they were offered Cooks and the 31 what was better for them. If they were offered that and rejected it, then it obviously means they value the first round pick more than Cooks. Could have to do with Cooks being in last year of his deal (if I read correctly) vs. getting an asset that would be on a rookie deal for 4 years, or presumable much easier to flip for other assets than Cooks.
  21. OBJ trade?

    Patriots have two first round picks now. Pretty sure just complete wishful thinking/speculation on the part of Pats homers, but have seen multiple places postulating that with this move, the Pats now have two first round picks (23 and 31) which just happens to be the starting point the Giants are looking for to deal OBJ. Crazier things have happened, but I'd think essentially turning Cooks and the #31 into OBJ would be a good move for the Pats. Giants move OBJ out of the conference and add two firsts to help the rebuild. They could then either use those picks, package them to move up in the draft, or ship one/both of them for additional assets.
  22. Landry to Cleveland

    Us bottom feeders pick what we can.
  23. Landry to Cleveland

    Not exactly a high bar to get over.......
  24. Bell Making it impossible to sign long Term

    In a vacuum they would be better with Bell back there, but in reality if they were to spend that much on a Bell, they would then have to take hits elsewhere on the field. If you add $12/mill to your RB spend, you have to make up for that elsewhere, perhaps taking a hit to the O-line or D-Line in the process that may cause a greater hit to the overall team than the improvement from your run of the mill $3-4/mill/year guy to Bell.
  25. I would have to think that unless the Browns brain trust thinks that one of the QBs coming out this year is transcendent (if they believe that, then use the #1 on the QB), they are better off doing some combination of the following: 1. Sign a bridge QB and give Kizer a year to develop to see if he can be "the guy" 1a. If they are already convinced Kizer is not their guy, could still do a bridge QB, or could go after a better FA QB 2. Use the 1 and 4 picks on greatest need. 2a. If no "generational" talent, then I'd shop the picks. A team out there will pay a pretty good haul for the #1. Let's say you can still get a top 10 pick this year, a first next year, and quite possible another 3rd. I'd lean that route, where I still have two top 10 picks this year, another 1st next year and an extra third. If they keep the 1 and 4 picks, and are set on taking a QB, I'd lean to taking that QB at the #4 pick and not first overall, unless they really have one of these guys well above the others. That way they can either do an offensive overhaul and take Barkley at #1 then QB at 4, can trade down as detailed above, take QB at 4 and still have another top 10 pick to address OL or DB. A lot of options here. At this early juncture, I'm not convinced any of the QBs coming out are transcendent guys and I think the Browns can do more for the long term good of their franchise by not taking a QB with the #1 overall pick.