Big Country

Just let @Big John pull the list of Newbie Tool of the Year award winners - that would be a good starting point.

These stories bring back some good memories, but also, makes me realize how I do miss a few of the originals from here that are no longer with us (I swear I don't mean this to be a downer). A big cheers in heaven to our friends aqualung and Skippy (apologies if I missed anyone else), you guys are missed ---

Haha, darn whippersnappers, get off my lawn

Lots of newbies trying to claim OG status in this thread.....

I thought this was gonna be a repost of that classic thread where we got picks of the guy at the library cybering and they were sent to the person he was IMing with. Anyone remember who started that thread and can it be resuurected.... ETA: The guy next to me is a hairier version of whomper.

If you feel they are the best available at that point in the draft, then you take them. If Holt is there at the end of the second in a 12 team league, I'm probably jumping all over him. As irish stated, there is a legitimate strategy that many owners employ to stock up on players with the same by week, so that their team is at or near 100% strength for all but one week of the season. It could beat being down one or two regular starters for 3-4 weeks of the season. All depends on how you like to build your team. Only time I don't see this as a legit option is if you are in a league with fixed roster limits, like say you have to start 2 RBs but can only carry 3 (I hate these leagues, but that is another topic), then you have no choice but to pick RBs with different bye weeks.

You definitely opt for the #1 or #2 slot (depends on your feeling about LT and SJax and how much difference you see between them). I think a killer team can be drafted from either slot. If you like to look for trades, then take the 1 or 2 slot then start shopping. I really don't see you likely getting ebnough value to part with LT or SJax, but an owner may come through with a deal like your 1st 4th and 10th for a 1st 2nd and 5th or something like that.

tough call. Part of me says keep Johnson and flip a coin on the RB... but a lot of that is really dependent on where you draft and what RBs may be available to you at that pick.

Just looking at that, I would say that team 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8, and possibly 3 should be tossing their first round players back. I don't care who else is on his team, team 1 has absolutely zero value in protecting Rudi if he has the first overall choice. He can protect 2 different players and still draft Rudi if he deems him the best available player, which, based on what is likely to be put back in the draft is likely unless he wants to gamble ona WR like Smith or Holt going there and pray for RBs to come to him later.

SHould keepers be straight NFL style drafts? Sure, at a point. With onl one or two keepers, I say no, they shouldn't, with a more significant portion of the team protected or in a dynasty league, then yes, they should. Given your keeper rules, I would suggest that you do something whereby the first 3 rounds of the draft are NFL style, reversing with the start of the 4th round. Taken a hugh assumption of the top two picks being kept (obviously this won't happen, but bear with me), then your draft would "start" in the third round, where the last place team (well, I am a proponent of a lottery system to discourage tanking, but that is another discussion) would pick first, then flip back in the 4th as a standard serpentine draft. Every team should have two decent keepers, and when you factor in varying rounds being used to keep players, giving the last place teams the early picks in the first 3 rounds will more than compensate them for not being able to protect a guy like LT or SJax. 9On a separate strategy note, do they players with early first round picks not see the flaw in protecting their first round player? They can protect someone with a greater value ratio in a later round and then use their early first round pick to redraft their first round player, or theoretically an even better player that is unprotected.

As my last follow up said, RB is still a consideration. Ithink Gonzo, if he is there, is a definite pick. Then the debate is which RB or WR. I do not think that QB is an option at this point. THe .5 PPR does give WR a bit of value here, but, I do think Bell has the opportunity to put up much better numbers than his draft position would indicate, and if he comes out hot, you may be able to turn him around for a WR that is better than you can currently draft. None of the WRs jump out at me as way ahead of the others, I did mention the 3 I liked the most, but neither of them is a must have for these picks IMO.

To be fair, he ha shaved his lower back hair to look like an Angry G

I havent seen anything recently. You could always shop him and Brown, see who generates the better offers (focus on picks unless it is a legit tier 1 WR- Holt,CJ,Smith level), deal one and keep the other.

Lot of Qbs taken already... that bodes well for you. Of the remaingin QBs, I like Leinart (lot of weapons at his disposal) and Kitna the most. I don't think though that I jump on either here (both seem to be going around the mid 7th in the mocks I have seen, so you'd be a little early here, but I also doubt they both get back to you). We've discussed RBs. You have 3 starters. Taking the 4th, while possibly the right value play concerns me because of how long you have until your next picks. But, I doubt any of the 4-5 RBs BB mentioned will last until then. I'll need to give this some thought. At WR, Clayton, Hackett and Jackson are the 3 I'd most want. I suppose you could gamble at QB, maybe getting a Cutler or in your next pair of picks and go with the WR/RB pick here if you are that concerned about Portis' injury situation. As you stated that you don't believe Betts will cut into Portis' carries severely, that is the only reason to target him. I think Bell is the better pick as he has a very good opportunity to be the primary back which is a lot more valuable than the backup to one of your starters, as he covers you for all of them, not just one (see above diatribe on my thoughts about this). You could consider a TE here... not a bad value pick. I guess, given what you have stated is left, I would go with Tony Gonzalez and then either Bell/Betts or your favorite WR.

I guess my main concern is you are talking abouttaking a backup/handcuff over a player that will HAVE to start for you. If we were only talking 8-12 picks between picks, then I'd be less concerned and more behind snagging Betts, but we are talking about 24 picks between selections. I'm not saying not to take Betts here, it just seemed that the cost being an every week starter not being selected for another 24 selections was being glossed over, and IMO that is a fairly large factor in the decision making process here. I mean, if Betts is gone before the picks come up, is a 4th RB even a consideration? If the answer is no, then that means the injury concerns about Portis don't neccessarily warrant the selection of the handcuff over an every week starter. It will be a wasted pick if the OP or the advice givers don't feel RB is the need spot here regardless if it is a backup to one of your starters. If the answer is yes, an RB would be strongly considered regardless if Betts is the RB there or not, than Betts is simply towards the top of the list of available RBs at this point and then the other RBs that you mentioned in your orignal response (Bell, Dunn, Taylor and Brown) must be weighrd and considered. What I am trying to get out is that this situation is far from a simple yes or no on taking Betts. Given the RBs available, and the fact that Portis is filling the flex spot which can be filled by a WR as well, it would stand to reason that there are WRs currently available that would be of equal or greater value than the available RBs, so to be fair, they must also be considered as potential replacements for Portis in the event of injury, in addition to serving a role as a spot starter/backup for the starting WRs and also putting into consideration the scoring system of 0.5 PPR which gives a definite boost to those middle tier WRs over their RB counterparts. So, given the lineup requirements and scoring system and the players currently on the roster, I am not yet convinced that taking a player this early that will only start in the event of an injury to a particular starter (you won't be using him if Edge goes down, you'd be forced to throw in a WR most likely), so why not get the most versatile backup you can, which in this case could/would be a WR that can provide bye week and injury coverage for every single one of your RB/WR starters? Obviously, that determination would solely be based on what WRs are available. And, as the team still needs a QB and TE, it stands to reason that there may be some values there. Is it worth taking the 24 pick hit to your starting lineup to handcuff just a single player on your roster?