Vicster Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 This was a stupid risky move that paid off. That's all. 985360[/snapback] Just curious though... In the Huddle MVP Challenge, 33.49% of the 4327 participants took Willie Parker to start for their teams this week. It's not like having a choice between one or two backs on your team, but all of us had our choice between all the backs in the league and over a 3rd took Parker over studs like Edge and so on. Edge, btw, had a whopping 0.37% utilization. This isn't the exact same thing as head to head matchups, but it does speak volumes on what many of the people here at the huddle was thinking going into this weekend. While I agree, that in most cases you are going to start your studs, there are times to pay attention to maximizing your points through other players. This happened to be one of those times and there will be others that creep up during the season. I'll qualify any and all statements/opinions I make here at the huddle with my whopping 0-5 record this weekend with my 5 leagues. Only saving grace is the MVP challenge where I am currently sitting at 449. Nothing to see... move along... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skippy Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Vicster - I am one that used Parker in the MVP as well as another game that is like the MVP challenge. It's not that I thought that Parker was the best back for week. It's that I did expect a good game out of him and this may be one of the few times that I will get that game out of him. Plus, I can save all my other backs for different weeks. (you can only use a player once in that game.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicster Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Yeah, I agree. I did the same exact thing. But you only illustrate my point further by pointing out that starting the guy while you can is the idea. Parker will only go down in value as the season progresses and the other backs get healthy. But Parker had a favorable matchup with a powerfull line vs a weak defense. It really doesn't get much more basic than that. I think had I had the opportunity to make that call myself, I would have had to go with Parker over Edge this one time. But alas, this is fantasy football, and everyone has an opinion and none are 100% correct 100% of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollywood_69 Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 (edited) again, i have almost the same backs you have, i'm wondering if i should start parker over sjax also, i did start edge though, no biggie i won, but would have had 20 more points!! how did sjax look? i'm torn again what r u doing? parker or sjax dexter? Edited September 13, 2005 by hollywood_69 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehand Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 You called it Dexter, I bow to your formidable FF acumen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tally Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 (edited) This was a stupid risky move that paid off. That's all. 985360[/snapback] Why? Why was it "stupid"? I think "always start your studs” is stupid, and in alot of cases, it’s the lazy way out. Why can’t Willie Parker permanently win the starting job in Pitt? What the hell has Duce Staley ever done that’s so great, that guarantees him this job all year? Certainly nothing I can think of, at least not of the top of my head. Did you all forget what W.McGhee did just last year? It's a similar situation. Travis Henry gets hurt; McGhee gets his chance to start and never gives the job back. And now Henry's on a different team. There's no reason it can’t be a similar situation that’s forming in Pitts. I’m not saying he gets Bettis job. Bettis will still get the goal line/short yardage carries, But Parker could replace Staley and if he does, Parker becomes a good start when the matchups are right. Always start your studs is the worst cliché is fantasy football, it should be changed to usually start your studs, but don’t forget to carefully consider your other matchups..... that’s a logical slogan. I wouldn’t argue that. Edited September 13, 2005 by Tally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Why? Why was it "stupid"? I think "always start your studs” is stupid, and in alot of cases, it’s the lazy way out. 985970[/snapback] Then please, run your team that way. Your league mates will love you. Starting a back with very little experience over one of the best RBs in the league on one of the most potent offenses in the league sounds stupid to me. I like Willie Parker, but if I had to choose between him and Edge, I'd pick Edge last week, this week, and next week. This was one week. Lets see how it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tally Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 (edited) Then please, run your team that way. Your league mates will love you. Starting a back with very little experience over one of the best RBs in the league on one of the most potent offenses in the league sounds stupid to me. I like Willie Parker, but if I had to choose between him and Edge, I'd pick Edge last week, this week, and next week. This was one week. Lets see how it goes. 985981[/snapback] Contrary... my league respect me, they certainly don’t love me, cause I’ve won way more championships than any of them. I would start Edge 9 out of 10 times or in my case DD 8 out of 10 times but to "always" start him, that’s the only thing stupid in this conversation. You choose not to quote the rest of my argument, so again I ask the question... what has Staley done that’s so great that guarantees him this job? Why cant this be a similar situation to Buffalo last year? Give me logic, don’t give me that "always start your studs" nonsense Edited September 13, 2005 by Tally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DexterDew Posted September 13, 2005 Author Share Posted September 13, 2005 The number of Parker threads this year may top Thomas Jones from last year. Tally makes some good points about Parker being able to maintain the starting position the rest of the year., and I don't think it will depend on Staley's health, it will depend on Parker's production. Behind that offensive line, I think a combination of Parker/Bettis is outstanding. Just like last year with Big Ben, Cohwer may just stick with Parker if they keep winning, and Staley will lose his touches. The debate is going to shift to who is better, or who gives the Steelers a better chance at winning: Parker or Staley? I don't think anybody is going to say that Staley is faster or more durable, but Parker is an unknown quantity, which will make it very difficult for DEF's to prepare for him. And if PIT does take a page out of PHI playbook and how they utilized Westbrook on screens, he could be a an absolute stud (in FF and the real world). I'm not saying that PIT should line him up in the slot or as WR, but they need to throw more than one screen a game to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 Starting a back with very little experience over one of the best RBs in the league on one of the most potent offenses in the league sounds stupid to me. 985981[/snapback] I like the Parker start over Edge a lot. Edge was going against the Ravens D, argubaly one of the toughest and Manning is a pass-first QB. And not that it matters, but I had Edge last year and I definitely didn't want him again this year. Parker on the other hand was the undisputed starter week 1 for a great run-first offense against a lousy D in which Pitt figured to be up and running the ball even more than normal. Not sure why you think it's stupid to start a guy in that situation other than spout the typical lemming reply that it is in fact "stupid" 'cause you say so. Bottom line is the guys that started Parker over their otherwise so-called "studs" likely scored more points than if they hadn't. Seems smart to me, not stupid. I thought after all, that the object was to score the most points possible. Am I missing something? If so, please enlighten me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted September 13, 2005 Share Posted September 13, 2005 I don't think it was stupid at all either... it was a calculated risk that paid off...some times it will bite you in the ass but this time it worked, kudos for that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tally Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 (edited) The number of Parker threads this year may top Thomas Jones from last year. Tally makes some good points about Parker being able to maintain the starting position the rest of the year., and I don't think it will depend on Staley's health, it will depend on Parker's production. Behind that offensive line, I think a combination of Parker/Bettis is outstanding. Just like last year with Big Ben, Cohwer may just stick with Parker if they keep winning, and Staley will lose his touches. The debate is going to shift to who is better, or who gives the Steelers a better chance at winning: Parker or Staley? I don't think anybody is going to say that Staley is faster or more durable, but Parker is an unknown quantity, which will make it very difficult for DEF's to prepare for him. And if PIT does take a page out of PHI playbook and how they utilized Westbrook on screens, he could be a an absolute stud (in FF and the real world). I'm not saying that PIT should line him up in the slot or as WR, but they need to throw more than one screen a game to him. 986946[/snapback] The more I think about this situation in Pittsburgh the stronger I fell that this guy is never giving Staley back his job. Regardless it's Parkers show again for week 2. I'm starting him again this week over D. Davis. I know your decision is harder than mine cause you have the better RB, but the Jag's did a great job of contaning S. Alexander last week, They do have a strong D. So I'm just curious if you were considering him over Edge again? Also, don’t you love the way "the always start your stud" crusaders have disappeared? I don’t see any of those numbskulls banging their heads against the wall now Edited September 15, 2005 by Tally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DexterDew Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 the debate this week is between Edge and S Jackson. I think Parker will have a great game against HOU, and it doesn't look like Staley or Bettis will be much of a factor this week. By week 5, we will know if PIT will stay with Parker the rest of the year (and they have a history of not messing with a streak, and have used back-ups to provide a spark and keeping them in, i.e., Maddux, Roth). Cadillac at home is a good thing, but not versus BUFF. It is only his second game in the NFL, and in all honesty, he had OK numbers until he broke his long one at the end of the game. The positives are that he ran hard, and can break the long one anytime. Edge is a paradigm of consistancy. I see 100+ total yards and possibly a TD this week. Week 3 will be his coming out party vs CLEV. In fact, I can see that line no matter who or where his opponent is. And for the record, that is why I took him 4th overall. You just don't find that consistancy from a RB. In fact, last year he finished fourth in our league in RB scoring, and was over 20 pts every week, he was the only back to do so. And that is what you want from a RB1. I am fortunate to catch a little lightning in a bottle with Parker, and maybe Cadillac, too. So every week, I have to make choices. I think Jackson is an interesting play because of what ARZ did last week vs the NYG RBs (they gave up ***), and their starting MLB is out. But he is in a throw first system, just like Edge. The difference being that Edge is an established RB, and Jackson (and Parker and Cadillac) are not. And if you think about it, neither Jackson or Edge will get more than 25 touches, that is not what their systems do. So the question is who will do more with the finite touches? I think Jackson has more break-away speed and is going against a weaker DEF on the road, and Edge is playing in his home opener vs a tough JAX run DEF. I guess the question becomes, which RB is more likely to get touches inside the 10 or the 5? If I had to guess right now, I would say Edge. One final thought on the ASYS theory: I was fortunate to have Volek in the playoffs last year after picking him up off the WW. Despite his heroic effort in week 15 vs OAK, I was knocked out of the playoffs and finished third (scored a sh*tload of points, though.... has anybody noticed how few FF points were scored last week? Really strange). There is no doubt that if I would have won in the semi-finals, I would have started him in the finals. We all remember what happened in week 16 for Volek, he got knocked out. My bench QB, a supposed Top 5 stud, Hasselbeck, rode the bench the entire playoffs. I think Parker is very much like Volek was last year. You just never know when the ride is going to stop. If the goal is to start the player who you think will score the most points, you are playing to win. If you are going to start the player who will score you a pre-ascertained minimum amount of points (a floor, if you will), I think you are playing to not lose. If you have a diversified line up of solids players, with a chance for some upside, you'll do allright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Also, don’t you love the way "the always start your stud" crusaders have disappeared? I don’t see any of those numbskulls banging their heads against the wall now 991684[/snapback] 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.