becks Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 I have to pick six players to keep in a 10 team league and there is no limitation on players based on position. I won the league this season! Scoring 6p rec or rush td 3p passing td 1 p for every ten yards rec or rushing 1p for every 25y passing bonus points over a 100y and 150y rec or rushing bonus points over 350 and 400y passing Players: Dillion Edge Rudi Lamont Randy Moss Tory "Big Game" Holt Lee Evans Mushin Muhammed Micheal Vick Brett Farve I have four automatics, Moss, Holt, Edge and Dillion. I am leaning towards also taking Lamont and Vick. The numbers Vick put up based on this system, he was average at best. I am actually thinking about going with the 4 running backs then Holt and Moss. Let me know what you think it would be appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ts Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 It would help to know how many starters you must have at each position, along with any "flex" position options, but at first glance, I'd lean towards keeping the following: Dillion Edge Rudi Lamont Randy Moss Tory "Big Game" Holt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becks Posted March 27, 2005 Author Share Posted March 27, 2005 We have 1 qb, 2 backs, 3 wideouts, 1 d and 1 kicker, no flex position, thanks for the reply Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAvirus Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 i'd have to agree with the 4 rbs, moss, and holt. it doesn't look like the value of qb's is really high in this system. by not keeping vick you'll have a solid backfield, 2 great recievers, and the chance to pick up an even beter qb in the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 i'd have to agree with the 4 rbs, moss, and holt. it doesn't look like the value of qb's is really high in this system. by not keeping vick you'll have a solid backfield, 2 great recievers, and the chance to pick up an even beter qb in the draft. 753250[/snapback] BAN HIM!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogo2146 Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I agree with the above stixk with the rb's and wr's then draft a qb and your set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 It would help to know how many starters you must have at each position, along with any "flex" position options, but at first glance, I'd lean towards keeping the following: Dillion Edge Rudi Lamont Randy Moss Tory "Big Game" Holt 753192[/snapback] I was thinking the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becks Posted March 28, 2005 Author Share Posted March 28, 2005 Thanks for your help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Furley Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 I was thinking the same thing. 753791[/snapback] Me too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 (edited) after seeing what you need to start i am leaning towards Moss, Holt, Edge, Dillion, Rudi, and then maybe Vick. I dont know, you can have an amzing backfield in which you wouldnt need to draft anybody if you take lamont over vick. but if you take vick then you would have a spot starter at QB at worst, and you'd still have a great backfield needing only a late rounder of some sort like marshall faulk (isnt he going to go late next year??) Edited March 31, 2005 by seminoles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becks Posted March 31, 2005 Author Share Posted March 31, 2005 after seeing what you need to start im am leaning towards Moss, Holt, Edge, Dillion, Rudi, and then maybe Vick. I dont know, you can have an amzing backfield in which you wouldnt need to draft anybody if you take lamont over vick. but if you take vick then you would have a spot starter at QB at worst, and you'd still have a great backfield needing only a late rounder of some sort like marshall faulk (isnt he going to go late next year??) 757294[/snapback] If I was going to go that route with Vick, would Lamont be a better pick then Rudi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 If I was going to go that route with Vick, would Lamont be a better pick then Rudi? 758283[/snapback] good point. Rudi has proven himself and also has something on the line. In Oakland, there are other RB's which will compete and might take a few games away from Lamont. Also i think Cinncinatti is better than Oakland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becks Posted March 31, 2005 Author Share Posted March 31, 2005 good point. Rudi has proven himself and also has something on the line. In Oakland, there are other RB's which will compete and might take a few games away from Lamont. Also i think Cinncinatti is better than Oakland 758977[/snapback] I dont think Lamont will be spliting time, he is a goal line back, can catch, has a good breakaway speed and is getting over 5 mill a season. Rudi is good but the upside with Randy Moss getting doubled leaves 7 man fronts for lamont all day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seminoles Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 I dont think Lamont will be spliting time, he is a goal line back, can catch, has a good breakaway speed and is getting over 5 mill a season. Rudi is good but the upside with Randy Moss getting doubled leaves 7 man fronts for lamont all day. 759117[/snapback] sounds good. since im not in your position i dont really have a true gut decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 If I was going to go that route with Vick 758283[/snapback] I agree Farve is clearly in the decline part of his career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 ok so how is it you have 5 players that were drafted by the end of round 2 in most league?? Edge/Dillon/Rudi/Moss/Holt I dont like keeping QBs or drafting them early so i would try and trade VICK for another keeper WR or another Position?? Vick should have more trade value then Jordan but I wouldnt want to keep a QB but thats me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becks Posted April 1, 2005 Author Share Posted April 1, 2005 ok so how is it you have 5 players that were drafted by the end of round 2 in most league?? Edge/Dillon/Rudi/Moss/Holt I dont like keeping QBs or drafting them early so i would try and trade VICK for another keeper WR or another Position?? Vick should have more trade value then Jordan but I wouldnt want to keep a QB but thats me 760556[/snapback] I drafted well plus had some good trades over the last couple years! I agree about Vick, he has great games, then tanks and then mediocore games. 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.