rattsass Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I'm not sayin...I'm just sayin. Colbert-CAR/Williams-JAX. Huddle Ranking for Colbert: 35 Huddle Ranking for Williams: 46 937563[/snapback] Curious indeed. I like Colbert. Maybe worried about Gardner stealing numbers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I'm not sayin...I'm just sayin. Colbert-CAR/Williams-JAX. Huddle Ranking for Colbert: 35 Huddle Ranking for Williams: 46 937563[/snapback] An excellent case in point for why rankings are only guidelines once you are searching for backups. The most likely scenario is that I think Colbert will out perform Williams (though really only marginally). However, I already have my starters for wideouts and instead of looking for "the next guy" on the rankings, I would rather take a chance on a couple of players that could step up and displace my current starters. I like Colbert but I think his production is largely capped in that offense with Steve Smith there. While Williams most likely scenario may be slightly below Colbert's, I see Williams as having far more upside and a much better chance of having a big season with a chance to do more than Colbert. The way I look at it, at this point in the draft, you could take about the next 20 wideouts and there likely is not a lot of difference in any of them (hence their ranking). So I would rather have upside players that I like as my own "sleepers". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulOttCarruth Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Is it me, or is the average age of the players on Dorey's roster 19? I think he's compensating for his own greying hair... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 It is a league for the young. Think about it - the best players last year Curtis Martin, Tiki Barber, Muhammad, Horn... um, wait a minute... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 An excellent case in point for why rankings are only guidelines once you are searching for backups. The most likely scenario is that I think Colbert will out perform Williams (though really only marginally). However, I already have my starters for wideouts and instead of looking for "the next guy" on the rankings, I would rather take a chance on a couple of players that could step up and displace my current starters. I like Colbert but I think his production is largely capped in that offense with Steve Smith there. While Williams most likely scenario may be slightly below Colbert's, I see Williams as having far more upside and a much better chance of having a big season with a chance to do more than Colbert. The way I look at it, at this point in the draft, you could take about the next 20 wideouts and there likely is not a lot of difference in any of them (hence their ranking). So I would rather have upside players that I like as my own "sleepers". 937712[/snapback] That is an excellent point. And that is what sleepers are all about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 An excellent case in point for why rankings are only guidelines once you are searching for backups. The most likely scenario is that I think Colbert will out perform Williams (though really only marginally). However, I already have my starters for wideouts and instead of looking for "the next guy" on the rankings, I would rather take a chance on a couple of players that could step up and displace my current starters. I like Colbert but I think his production is largely capped in that offense with Steve Smith there. While Williams most likely scenario may be slightly below Colbert's, I see Williams as having far more upside and a much better chance of having a big season with a chance to do more than Colbert. The way I look at it, at this point in the draft, you could take about the next 20 wideouts and there likely is not a lot of difference in any of them (hence their ranking). So I would rather have upside players that I like as my own "sleepers". 937712[/snapback] With my point being you could have easily had Thomas Jones at the 10.09, securing the running back situation of one team, instead of grabbing a #3 WR. With Jones secured, as the draft fell, you could have swooped up Colbert as your #3 WR. I know hindsight is 20/20, but is this a better team with Jones/Colbert or with Pittman/Williams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 3 hrs on average per pick over 10 picks is 30 hours we have waited on just you. Save the I have a life comment as we all do, which is no excuse because MFL allows you to predraft which is exactly what WW told us to do if we were going to be gone any length of time. Why not have some respect for your Boss and everyone else's time, and use the predraft function with your future picks.So much for finishing this in 5 days like WW and DMD had asked. 937872[/snapback] I will say this, at this point in the draft it gets pretty easy to figure out who you want next. Unless you are just "winging it". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 With my point being you could have easily had Thomas Jones at the 10.09, securing the running back situation of one team, instead of grabbing a #3 WR. With Jones secured, as the draft fell, you could have swooped up Colbert as your #3 WR. I know hindsight is 20/20, but is this a better team with Jones/Colbert or with Pittman/Williams? 937862[/snapback] Seeing how I have to use my WR4 three times to cover byes (at least) and that I probably would never use my RB4 at all, I like what I did. I was going to take TJ with my next pick (and he went immediately before I went). I just cannot see spending too high of a pick backing up a back up. If Benson was my RB2, then sure - I would have taken TJ there and maybe even earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispirons Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 i think pauls team looks the best thus far. i would give honorable mention to phil, darin, and bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Seeing how I have to use my WR4 three times to cover byes (at least) and that I probably would never use my RB4 at all, I like what I did. I was going to take TJ with my next pick (and he went immediately before I went). I just cannot see spending too high of a pick backing up a back up. If Benson was my RB2, then sure - I would have taken TJ there and maybe even earlier. 937931[/snapback] I had to take TJ, despite the Bears offense destined for ruin again, most likely. While I was uncertain whether or not we would allow for trades , the value at that point in the draft for a starting RB that is so involved in the passing game was too good to pass up. Even if Benson DOES report and start, Jones may be a decent bye-week fill-in or trade bait, should we include trades. I'm likin' the looks of my team, that's for certain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 i think pauls team looks the best thus far. i would give honorable mention to phil, darin, and bob. 937936[/snapback] Agreed... Paul's is one dangerous looking squad! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trainer_Phil Posted August 20, 2005 Author Share Posted August 20, 2005 I will say this, at this point in the draft it gets pretty easy to figure out who you want next. Unless you are just "winging it". 937906[/snapback] For the record, I'll take a live draft (like nearly everyone else) over this format anyday. At the same time, I can succeed in this type of format but I prefer to look at the draft once its my pick and make a decision from there. Unfortunately I'm not infront of a PC all the time. I do try and pre-select my choices but I think it defeats the purpose of a draft if you have over 12 players selected and you have no control over what players gets picked if say the flow of the draft changes or if there is a run on a certain position. I'm not trying to hold up the draft, I'm just trying to have the best draft I can (2 hours and 30 mins per pick can't be that big of a deal). That being said, its easier to pre-select now because we are closing out the draft and we are only trying to fill out our rosters so there isn't much strategy left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Love Posted August 20, 2005 Share Posted August 20, 2005 i think pauls team looks the best thus far. i would give honorable mention to phil, darin, and bob. 937936[/snapback] On a first pass, I also liked Phil's team, except for the lack of defense at this point. Upon further review, Paul's team is probably my favorite. 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.