Tiger Shark
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016
Sand$: 543.92
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016
Sand$: 543.92
Sure, rushing TDs may be discounted, but not rushing yards. Only 25% of Lamar's fantasy rushing points last year came from TDs. There's validity to the argument, but most of Lamar's fantasy rushing values is in the yardage, less in the TDs.
Great White Shark
Posts: 4899
Joined: Thu Sep 7, 2017
Sand$: 11,637.32
Posts: 4899
Joined: Thu Sep 7, 2017
Sand$: 11,637.32
Sure, but his numbers are something like 200 ypg passing and maybe 80ypg rushing. That's more points than a 300ypg passer, but by how much depends on scoring rules for whatever league.
My point is not that he's not an upgrade to Ben, but by how much relative to giving up Montgomery for Deebo who doesn't look like he'd be anything other than bench filler for that team.
I'm also pretty high on Ben for this year to be a top 10 QB with a good chance at being top 5. Still, I wouldn't say it's a bad trade to get Jackson, I'm just not convinced it's a slam dunk.
I also believe in regression to the mean, though with Jackson there's not enough seasons to know what his mean should be, but I feel as though last year was probably better than average expectation. Baltimores offense is going to be better understood by the rest of the league (that may not matter for transcendent talents like Lamar appears to be) and his carries per game are slightly lower than they were last year (small sample size, I don't buy it as a trend necessarily).
Anyway, just a contrary view on that trade in particular. Honestly, I'd rather have Wilson or Dak this year, both those guys and teams look like they are going to be running up points week in and week out. Baltimore has a legit defense as well (Mahomes and the Chiefs aside), there will be weeks where the Ravens are in control from the beginning and just kill the clock the rest of the way.
My point is not that he's not an upgrade to Ben, but by how much relative to giving up Montgomery for Deebo who doesn't look like he'd be anything other than bench filler for that team.
I'm also pretty high on Ben for this year to be a top 10 QB with a good chance at being top 5. Still, I wouldn't say it's a bad trade to get Jackson, I'm just not convinced it's a slam dunk.
I also believe in regression to the mean, though with Jackson there's not enough seasons to know what his mean should be, but I feel as though last year was probably better than average expectation. Baltimores offense is going to be better understood by the rest of the league (that may not matter for transcendent talents like Lamar appears to be) and his carries per game are slightly lower than they were last year (small sample size, I don't buy it as a trend necessarily).
Anyway, just a contrary view on that trade in particular. Honestly, I'd rather have Wilson or Dak this year, both those guys and teams look like they are going to be running up points week in and week out. Baltimore has a legit defense as well (Mahomes and the Chiefs aside), there will be weeks where the Ravens are in control from the beginning and just kill the clock the rest of the way.
Tiger Shark
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016
Sand$: 543.92
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016
Sand$: 543.92
All good points. Though on the last one, Baltimore was pulling Lamar partway through the 4th quarter in a lot of their games last year (especially the second half of the season).
We may also disagree on Deebo. Not sure why he'd be bench filler when the WR2 appears to be Preston Williams (maybe Higgins or Jefferson). I think the roster needs Deebo a lot more than it needs Montgomery in the flex (with an understanding that there are still question marks around the rest of the Niners offense). Do you think the dropoff from Montgomery to Gaskin is that steep? Maybe I'm too flippant about RBs this season.
We may also disagree on Deebo. Not sure why he'd be bench filler when the WR2 appears to be Preston Williams (maybe Higgins or Jefferson). I think the roster needs Deebo a lot more than it needs Montgomery in the flex (with an understanding that there are still question marks around the rest of the Niners offense). Do you think the dropoff from Montgomery to Gaskin is that steep? Maybe I'm too flippant about RBs this season.
Great White Shark
Posts: 4899
Joined: Thu Sep 7, 2017
Sand$: 11,637.32
Posts: 4899
Joined: Thu Sep 7, 2017
Sand$: 11,637.32
Well, I'm pretty down on the 49ers offense generally, I suppose I may be too harsh on Deebo, but I guess we should assume he is fully recovered and while it might be another week for him to get fully reintegrated, if he looks like he did, and his usage is similar he's better than bench filler.
I'd still rather roll out Montgomery though, but it might be closer than I'm giving credit for. Gaskin is too much of an unknown for me, but again, I might be undervaluing him as well. I don't know what to make of the Dolphins generally, the one game I watched Gaskin looked like the guy who was getting the touches but didn't impress me hugely as anything more than JAG.
I dunno, that trade is reasonable, just wanted to go deeper on it I guess.
I'd still rather roll out Montgomery though, but it might be closer than I'm giving credit for. Gaskin is too much of an unknown for me, but again, I might be undervaluing him as well. I don't know what to make of the Dolphins generally, the one game I watched Gaskin looked like the guy who was getting the touches but didn't impress me hugely as anything more than JAG.
I dunno, that trade is reasonable, just wanted to go deeper on it I guess.
Megalodon
Posts: 15349
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003
Sand$: 39,226.70
Posts: 15349
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003
Sand$: 39,226.70
bowwhizzle wrote:wmharley wrote:
you have Kamara, James Conner and Drake and Robinson. Not sure if that is it. I'm sure you probably have a 2RB and 1FLEX spot.
If Conner gets hurt, you now are short. Not sure what you WR lineup is. With RBs getting hurt, and as mentioned about handcuffs, I'd want to keep as much starting stud RB depth, than trying to figure out if the cuffs will do the job AND if you'd be able to nab them.
I personally hoard RBs, so I'm biased. I DO have Conner and Robinson, and dropped Snell once Conner came back, so I could add to my depth (McKinnon). So now I have CMC (IR), Conner, Robinson, Sanders, Hines, and McK (who I dropped Snell for).
Of your guys, I'd probably ship out Drake first. No one else on waivers for TE?
My ppr league starts 2 rbs, 2wrs, 1 te and 1 flex (rb,wr, or te)
I feel like my bench is stacked and could use an upgrade at TE. Giants offense looks terrible so Im looking to replace Engram.
Henderson who I picked up last week looks like a potential stud and possibly J.Jefferson too.
My waivers got guys like Mo Cox or Gronk best available.
My squad looks like this
Qbs: Brady, Tannehill
Rbs: Kamara, Drake, Conner, James Robinson, Henderson
Wrs: Ridley, Metcalf,Obj, Fuller, Jefferson
Engram
I'd cut Engram for Alie-Cox
_______________________________________
"If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker."
-Mike McD, Rounders
-Mike McD, Rounders
Whale Shark
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,291.06
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,291.06
RB: Sanders, Chubb, Ekeler, Edmonds, Hill
WR: Robinson, Ridley, Lamb, Gage, Beasley, Samuel
TE: Schultz, Akins
1/2 PPR: Would you trade Chubb or Ekeler for Kelce? I'm kind of thinking yes, and Chubb being the guy. What do you guys think?
WR: Robinson, Ridley, Lamb, Gage, Beasley, Samuel
TE: Schultz, Akins
1/2 PPR: Would you trade Chubb or Ekeler for Kelce? I'm kind of thinking yes, and Chubb being the guy. What do you guys think?
Megalodon
Posts: 15349
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003
Sand$: 39,226.70
Posts: 15349
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003
Sand$: 39,226.70
BG3eb wrote:RB: Sanders, Chubb, Ekeler, Edmonds, Hill
WR: Robinson, Ridley, Lamb, Gage, Beasley, Samuel
TE: Schultz, Akins
1/2 PPR: Would you trade Chubb or Ekeler for Kelce? I'm kind of thinking yes, and Chubb being the guy. What do you guys think?
Ekeler, yes. Chubb, no.
_______________________________________
"If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker."
-Mike McD, Rounders
-Mike McD, Rounders
Whale Shark
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,291.06
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,291.06
I guess my thought process is that the Browns are about to hits some negative game scripts and that's going to hurt Chubb. Seems like the Chargers are going to be up and down now so that keeps Ekeler in the mix. May be best just to keep them lol.
Megalodon
Posts: 15349
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003
Sand$: 39,226.70
Posts: 15349
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2003
Sand$: 39,226.70
BG3eb wrote:I guess my thought process is that the Browns are about to hits some negative game scripts and that's going to hurt Chubb. Seems like the Chargers are going to be up and down now so that keeps Ekeler in the mix. May be best just to keep them lol.
I think Chubb will continue to roll, and I like him as a good RB1 most weeks (and Hunt as a good RB2). I'm not worried about Ekeler, but if I had to choose one to keep, it would be Chubb.
With that said, Schultz will be a solid TE and regular red zone threat, and I wouldn't be in a hurry to trade either guy for an upgrade at TE.
_______________________________________
"If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, then you are the sucker."
-Mike McD, Rounders
-Mike McD, Rounders
Whale Shark
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,291.06
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,291.06
hard 10 wrote:BG3eb wrote:I guess my thought process is that the Browns are about to hits some negative game scripts and that's going to hurt Chubb. Seems like the Chargers are going to be up and down now so that keeps Ekeler in the mix. May be best just to keep them lol.
I think Chubb will continue to roll, and I like him as a good RB1 most weeks (and Hunt as a good RB2). I'm not worried about Ekeler, but if I had to choose one to keep, it would be Chubb.
With that said, Schultz will be a solid TE and regular red zone threat, and I wouldn't be in a hurry to trade either guy for an upgrade at TE.
The fact that Schultz seems to be peppered targets a decent amount helps quell the urgency to get something done. A lot of guys in a 12-team league are struggling to find a second RB so three is an extreme luxury. I guess I'll hold for now. Thanks!
Tiger Shark
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016
Sand$: 543.92
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016
Sand$: 543.92
ubertaco wrote:Well, I'm pretty down on the 49ers offense generally, I suppose I may be too harsh on Deebo, but I guess we should assume he is fully recovered and while it might be another week for him to get fully reintegrated, if he looks like he did, and his usage is similar he's better than bench filler.
I'd still rather roll out Montgomery though, but it might be closer than I'm giving credit for. Gaskin is too much of an unknown for me, but again, I might be undervaluing him as well. I don't know what to make of the Dolphins generally, the one game I watched Gaskin looked like the guy who was getting the touches but didn't impress me hugely as anything more than JAG.
I dunno, that trade is reasonable, just wanted to go deeper on it I guess.
Really appreciate you going through the thought process. Solid takes all around. As a Dolphins fan I'm not 100% sold on Gaskin's fantasy value myself; my personal view being that Jordan Howard's work inside the 5 isn't going to go to Gaskin anytime soon.
Megalodon
Posts: 21806
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006
Sand$: 11,599.78
Posts: 21806
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006
Sand$: 11,599.78
might have paid too much in shorting my bench, but traded OBJ, RoJo, and Gallup, for D Adams
bench is now J Taylor, B. Hill, Hardman, Claypool and hopefully change Snell into Chark
bench is now J Taylor, B. Hill, Hardman, Claypool and hopefully change Snell into Chark
_______________________________________
At this point, if a clown invited me into the woods, I would just go.
We are not your kind
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
Afterwards one sometimes learns that one has been through Dunwich.
We are not your kind
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
Afterwards one sometimes learns that one has been through Dunwich.
Megalodon
Posts: 10513
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010
Sand$: 24,002.18
Posts: 10513
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010
Sand$: 24,002.18
I like it.jstr2112 wrote:might have paid too much in shorting my bench, but traded OBJ, RoJo, and Gallup, for D Adams
bench is now J Taylor, B. Hill, Hardman, Claypool and hopefully change Snell into Chark
_______________________________________
In remembrance of Walter, D-Day veteran and my friend. Never forget.
Megalodon
Posts: 21806
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006
Sand$: 11,599.78
Posts: 21806
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006
Sand$: 11,599.78
bluemist wrote:I like it.jstr2112 wrote:might have paid too much in shorting my bench, but traded OBJ, RoJo, and Gallup, for D Adams
bench is now J Taylor, B. Hill, Hardman, Claypool and hopefully change Snell into Chark
thanks!
plus I have ARod as my 2nd QB in a super flex
_______________________________________
At this point, if a clown invited me into the woods, I would just go.
We are not your kind
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
Afterwards one sometimes learns that one has been through Dunwich.
We are not your kind
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
Afterwards one sometimes learns that one has been through Dunwich.
Mako Shark
Posts: 653
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014
Sand$: 2,654.67
Posts: 653
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014
Sand$: 2,654.67
What do think it would take to get Antonio Gibson right now?
It was a strange draft this year -- 14 team, 0.5 PPR, short bench. I took Zeke as #3 off the board, then everyone went RB crazy.
The team with Gibson has:
RB: Miles Sanders, Mixon, Gibson, Edmunds, Martinson, and Zack Moss
WR: Stefon Diggs and Allen Robinson
I have:
RB: Zeke, David Montgomery, Latavius Murray, and J.K. Dobbins
WR: Nuk Hopkins, Tyreek Hill, OBJ, and Tyler Boyd
We play 2 RB, 2 WR, and a RB/WR flex.
Clearly I'm hurting at RB, but everyone hurts somewhere in a big enough league.
May be willing to offer Boyd for Gibson. Maybe Boyd and Murray for Gibson and Edmunds, or just Gibson. Am I in the ballpark?
Seems crazy to try to go with only two WRs, but he's dodged injuries so far. Boyd seems like Burrow's top target, so I don't see it as a chump deal. Maybe I'm better off hanging onto Boyd a while longer...
It was a strange draft this year -- 14 team, 0.5 PPR, short bench. I took Zeke as #3 off the board, then everyone went RB crazy.
The team with Gibson has:
RB: Miles Sanders, Mixon, Gibson, Edmunds, Martinson, and Zack Moss
WR: Stefon Diggs and Allen Robinson
I have:
RB: Zeke, David Montgomery, Latavius Murray, and J.K. Dobbins
WR: Nuk Hopkins, Tyreek Hill, OBJ, and Tyler Boyd
We play 2 RB, 2 WR, and a RB/WR flex.
Clearly I'm hurting at RB, but everyone hurts somewhere in a big enough league.
May be willing to offer Boyd for Gibson. Maybe Boyd and Murray for Gibson and Edmunds, or just Gibson. Am I in the ballpark?
Seems crazy to try to go with only two WRs, but he's dodged injuries so far. Boyd seems like Burrow's top target, so I don't see it as a chump deal. Maybe I'm better off hanging onto Boyd a while longer...
HybriDD theme Copyright © 2016 by Dion Designs. All Rights Reserved.