Fantasy Football General Discussion - 2012

[Bronn Stone]

Bronn, I don't get the continues Vick love...which means I'm wrong on him likely...but will he even see a full season?

You can be sure that if I am getting Vick, I am getting another QB in the Cutler/Roethlisberger/Luck/Locker tier to cover for him. But the upside is so high, at some point you gotta pull the trigger. In my draft, he was the 10th QB taken (by me). He went after RG3, fergawdsake.

ETA:

QB by round, in order taken in my draft today- backups in italics

1: Newton, Rodgers, Brady, Brees

2: Stafford

4: RG3, Eli

5: Ryan

7:Romo

8: Vick, Rivers, Peyton

9: Cutler

10: Roethlisberger, Flacco

[Prince of the North]

Bronn, I don't get the continues Vick love...which means I'm wrong on him likely...but will he even see a full season?

Odds are he won't considering...I'm not sure he's ever played sixteen games in a season and, if he has, it was way back in Atlanta, wasn't it? Anyway, it's been awhile. I agree with those who think when you draft Vick you're in pretty good shape but you have to plan on him missing games. He and the rest of that Philly team are capable of putting up the fantasy stats, though ;)

[grozeng]

What's the budget in w3?

[Bronn Stone]

What's the budget in w3?

Experts had $200. Yahoo default. Gotta be the same

[Mexal]

Trade in W2 between The Steel Curtain and myself.

I give up:

Big Ben, Wilson, D. Brown

I receive:

Locker, Harvin, Bush

I think Locker will be good this year and I don't see a massive difference between Ben and him. I like Wilson a lot and it was hard to give him up but I think Harvin is a really nice addition to my WR core and should make it stronger. Bush is superior to Brown in my eyes though I know others don't necessarily agree.

Anyway, should be a pretty fair trade. My team now looks like:

QB - Romo, Locker

RB - Rice, Smith, Hillis, Bush (some random depth guys)

WR - A. Johnson, Lloyd, Harvin, Meachem (Wright, Little and some other random depth guys)

TE - Gronk

Should be a stronger starting line up I hope.

[Bronn Stone]

Anyone in W2 looking for a QB can still contact me. I have Brees, Cutler and Ryan and would move any one of them for the right deal.

[Young Wolf]

Anyone in W2 looking for a QB can still contact me. I have Brees, Cutler and Ryan and would move any one of them for the right deal.

Wasnt interested in trading Newton. I need WR help more than anything.

[Kalbear]

Trade in W2 between The Steel Curtain and myself.

I give up:

Big Ben, Wilson, D. Brown

I receive:

Locker, Harvin, Bush

I think Locker will be good this year and I don't see a massive difference between Ben and him. I like Wilson a lot and it was hard to give him up but I think Harvin is a really nice addition to my WR core and should make it stronger. Bush is superior to Brown in my eyes though I know others don't necessarily agree.

Anyway, should be a pretty fair trade. My team now looks like:

QB - Romo, Locker

RB - Rice, Smith, Hillis, Bush (some random depth guys)

WR - A. Johnson, Lloyd, Harvin, Meachem (Wright, Little and some other random depth guys)

TE - Gronk

Should be a stronger starting line up I hope.

I veto.

Wait, you're not in my league. Okay - I cross-ninja veto.

Locker is crap. He's always been crap. He wasn't particularly good at Washington and was mostly beloved because he could have left early and didn't. He's always been inaccurate, made poor decisions and in general looked confused. Both Ben and Wilson are going to have significantly better years than Locker. And past that - what are you getting? Harvin and Bush? I'm just confused why you would do this.

And you do know you don't start 4RBs, right?

[Mexal]

I veto.

Wait, you're not in my league. Okay - I cross-ninja veto.

Locker is crap. He's always been crap. He wasn't particularly good at Washington and was mostly beloved because he could have left early and didn't. He's always been inaccurate, made poor decisions and in general looked confused. Both Ben and Wilson are going to have significantly better years than Locker. And past that - what are you getting? Harvin and Bush? I'm just confused why you would do this.

And you do know you don't start 4RBs, right?

Yes, I'm aware I don't start 4 RBs. I forgot to put him in the (). Oops.

I don't agree with your assessment of Locker which is why I would do it. I also find Harvin to be a massive upgrade over what I currently have and R. Bush to be an upgrade at RB.

Pretty simple. Locker does not equal much of a downgrade from Ben, especially with the OL issues with the Steelers and Harvin is a big upgrade over my WR3/4s since he's more or less a low end WR1 or WR2 depending on your thoughts. Reggie Bush is an upgrade over Brown and should end up an upgrade over Smith/Hillis. We'll see.

Not really seeing the issue here unless you thought I meant Michael Bush instead of Reggie Bush which would make sense.

[Bronn Stone]

I definitely think Locker is a better fantasy QB than real QB. Tennessee is assembling quite the cast of weapons.

I am not sure I would have made the deal if I were Mexal, but I can see his points about Reggie Bush.

I am seeing a lot of love for Russell Wilson, but still am not sure who he will be throwing to. I don't see a lot of love for any of his receivers. WInslow? Braylon?? Zach Miller??? Golden Tate???? Rice????? Baldwin/Obomanu/Butler??????

Hard for him to be 'fantasy playable' without at least ONE playable receiver, and I don't see it.

[Kalbear]

I like Wilson - but more accurately I like him a lot more than Locker. And I like Ben a lot more than Locker, and Ben has never needed an OLine to be productive. Giving up one of the better QBs in the league (reasonably top 10) + one of the better prospects at QB for Locker is in my mind a huge downgrade. Doing it to get Reggie Bush on what is looking more and more like a trainwreck team doesn't make a lot of sense.

Wilson probably won't throw for a ton. He however will run for quite a bit each game, is not prone to turn it over and will score quite a bit of points on running bootlegs. Locker will likely not.

As to 'hard to be fantasy playable without good receivers' that's not really reasonable as an argument; Brees doesn't have many playable fantasy receivers because all of them are good but not great (even Colston), and the same could be said about Brady in 2010 before the Gronksplosion.

[Mexal]

I like Wilson - but more accurately I like him a lot more than Locker. And I like Ben a lot more than Locker, and Ben has never needed an OLine to be productive. Giving up one of the better QBs in the league (reasonably top 10) + one of the better prospects at QB for Locker is in my mind a huge downgrade. Doing it to get Reggie Bush on what is looking more and more like a trainwreck team doesn't make a lot of sense.

Wilson probably won't throw for a ton. He however will run for quite a bit each game, is not prone to turn it over and will score quite a bit of points on running bootlegs. Locker will likely not.

As to 'hard to be fantasy playable without good receivers' that's not really reasonable as an argument; Brees doesn't have many playable fantasy receivers because all of them are good but not great (even Colston), and the same could be said about Brady in 2010 before the Gronksplosion.

I did it for Harvin and R. Bush and because I don't believe Ben is much of an upgrade over Locker. Pretty simple. The upgrades of Bush/Harvin outweigh the downgrade I see from Ben/Wilson to Locker by a fair bit. But that's my opinion hence why I did the deal and why you'll end up bidding $25 tonight on Wilson. We clearly have different opinions on players and the way to build a line up.

[Kalbear]

I won't be bidding that much on Wilson. However, I'll be happy to nominate Locker for you.

Just FYI, Mexal - I've lived in Seattle for 6 years. I've seen Locker play here a couple times in the flesh. He is athletic, fast, and has a great arm. His downsides are that he's inaccurate, prone to huge mistakes and turns the ball over all the time, and relied heavily on a running game to the point where in the only bowl game he won he didn't throw a completed pass in the first half at all (and his RB did).

If that sounds equivalent to a guy who has thrown for about 4k yards every year and been a top-10 fantasy QB for the last 5 years, good on you.

I do think that Harvin is an upgrade. I just don't think that the downgrade to QB where you're getting Locker of all people as your second QB (and do you even have any backups?) is really worth it. Here's my theory: you couldn't stand having a Steeler QB on your team and wanted to get rid of him because of that.

Maybe that's a better way to frame it. You traded (in my mind) a QB1 and QB2 for a worse QB2 and got a WR4 and RB4 for your trouble. That doesn't sound like a good trade to me.

[Bronn Stone]

What I am seeing is that Roethlisberger is either the best QB2 or the worst QB1. Locker is in the middle of the QB2 pack.

But Brees always had a top fantasy receiver. In the past, he elevated the average-talent Colston to that level. These days he has Graham and Graham is the TE to own, IMO. 2010 might be an exception for Brees - that was a year where Colston was gimpy. But that is the only one.

[Mexal]

I won't be bidding that much on Wilson. However, I'll be happy to nominate Locker for you.

Just FYI, Mexal - I've lived in Seattle for 6 years. I've seen Locker play here a couple times in the flesh. He is athletic, fast, and has a great arm. His downsides are that he's inaccurate, prone to huge mistakes and turns the ball over all the time, and relied heavily on a running game to the point where in the only bowl game he won he didn't throw a completed pass in the first half at all (and his RB did).

If that sounds equivalent to a guy who has thrown for about 4k yards every year and been a top-10 fantasy QB for the last 5 years, good on you.

I do think that Harvin is an upgrade. I just don't think that the downgrade to QB where you're getting Locker of all people as your second QB (and do you even have any backups?) is really worth it. Here's my theory: you couldn't stand having a Steeler QB on your team and wanted to get rid of him because of that.

Big Ben has been 13th and 17th respectively the last two years. He had a better year in 2009. The difference between Ben and Andy Dalton last year was a whopping 11 points. Want to guess how many people are drafting Dalton as a QB2?

Look, I get your point. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. Locker will be a good fantasy QB. I'm not asking for him to be a QB1. I'm happy to have him on my team, especially as I think Harvin is a stud and Bush an upgrade.

And fyi, I don't get worried about team allegiances when it comes to FF. I want the best team possible. See how many Bengals I have on this team? One. The defense.

[Kalbear]

Wasn't he 17th the year he sat out the first 4 games? Which is a fair cop, but it's not exactly a reasonable comparison to a bad starting QB. Same thing with last year - he started 15 games and threw for 4k yards. His per game average was significantly better than Dalton's in that regard.

Let me ask you this - why do you think Locker will be a good fantasy QB? What has he shown so far that would indicate as such? What have the Titans shown that would indicate that?

But Brees always had a top fantasy receiver. In the past, he elevated the average-talent Colston to that level. These days he has Graham and Graham is the TE to own, IMO. 2010 might be an exception for Brees - that was a year where Colston was gimpy. But that is the only one.

So, other than the years in which Brees didn't have a good fantasy receiver and other than the years that Brady didn't have a good fantasy receiver they had good fantasy receivers? Can't argue with that logic.

[Mexal]

Wasn't he 17th the year he sat out the first 4 games? Which is a fair cop, but it's not exactly a reasonable comparison to a bad starting QB. Same thing with last year - he started 15 games and threw for 4k yards. His per game average was significantly better than Dalton's in that regard.

Let me ask you this - why do you think Locker will be a good fantasy QB? What has he shown so far that would indicate as such? What have the Titans shown that would indicate that?

Yards isn't everything. TDs count too. Now they're moving to a more run oriented offense and they have an offensive line that's actually worse than previous years. My point is simply that within the realm of QB2, the point difference isn't that high.

Locker - decent OL, talented WRs/TE, talented RB, decent to mediocre defense. The dude is never going to complete 60% of his passes but he has the talent around him to put up acceptable QB2 numbers.

Again, my point isn't that Locker will be great. My point is that the downgrade from Ben to Locker isn't big enough to ignore the upgrade of Harvin over Little and Bush over Smith/Hillis/D. Brown.

[Bronn Stone]

Big Ben has been 13th and 17th respectively the last two years. He had a better year in 2009. The difference between Ben and Andy Dalton last year was a whopping 11 points. Want to guess how many people are drafting Dalton as a QB2?

Kal has the Ben part covered, I agree with him.

I AM drafting Dalton as a QB2.

There are 32 NFL teams. The following six can pretty much be eliminated from QB2 talk. Jacksonville, Cleveland, Miami, Arizona, Seattle, Minnesota

You have sixteen remaining teams from which to draw a QB2.

The bottom 7 are Cassel, Fitzpatrick, Dalton, Sanchez/Tebow, Alex Smith, Bradford, and Freeman

One of those guys HAS to start. Give me Dalton. At least he has a good WR and TE to work with. And not much of a running game.

[Mexal]

One of those guys HAS to start. Give me Dalton. At least he has a good WR and TE to work with. And not much of a running game.

Except you drafted him as a back up, not a starting QB2.

Anyway, Dalton's lack of running game doesn't necessarily help him. It just means he'll have more 3rd and longs since even if the Bengals can't run, they will attempt to run.

ETA: I do think Dalton has a good year but not necessarily a great fantasy year. We'll see.

[Bronn Stone]

Except you drafted him as a back up, not a starting QB2.

Anyway, Dalton's lack of running game doesn't necessarily help him. It just means he'll have more 3rd and longs since even if the Bengals can't run, they will attempt to run.

ETA: I do think Dalton has a good year but not necessarily a great fantasy year. We'll see.

I like having three QB 1-2. Always have. I think a good team's backup QB should be better than some starter somewhere.

He is QB2 for now for the team I drafted for Eric in Experts.