rookie TE greg olsen

8/14/2007 11:15:37 PM

am i the only one who thinks the "dont draft a denver rb" rule might not hold true this year? i might be just basing it off one game but damn did you see that one game?

8/15/2007 12:53:40 AM

hopefully you're right, I've got Henry as my #1 in one of my leagues.

8/15/2007 9:27:31 AM

would you pick Zach Miller or Desmond Clark?

V. Morency or M. Turner (SD)?

who will we be the go to back for GB?

Reggie Williams, Amani Toomer, Arnaz Battle or Greg Jennings?

and why?

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 12:00 PM. Reason : thx]

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 12:04 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2007 11:50:31 AM

^^^Hello and welcome to last month. Henry is a top 15 player.

8/15/2007 1:13:27 PM

So I am in a keeper league and can keep 4 players but lose a round-1 for the player, ie drafted 4th lose 3rd following year. Waivers you lose last pick.

Which player is better to keep as a waiver pick, QB Jason Campbell or WR Devery Henderson? I am not sure if Brees was unusually accurate last year and will be a bust this year or repeat his performance, same goes with Colston and so I am thinking keeping Campbell as a sleeper pick. I'm only losing a last pick so it doesn't hurt for either really.

My other keepers are Gore lose 1st round 7th pick and Norwood 10th.

8/15/2007 2:09:08 PM

i would think that Campbell is probably going to get you more points than Henderson but I could be wrong. Who are your other receivers and QBs?

Oh and back to my previous post:

would you pick Zach Miller or Desmond Clark?

V. Morency or M. Turner (SD)?

who will we be the go to back for GB?

Reggie Williams, Amani Toomer, Arnaz Battle or Greg Jennings?

and why?

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 2:18 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 2:18 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2007 2:13:43 PM

^
IMO

Clark as Miller is on the Raiders and they need a lot to improve however if it's true that TE are an easy target for bad offenses so he could have a good year.

Morency as he will be the most likely start versus Turner is a backup. I expect GB will be better this year their schedule is easier and various other reasons.

I like Williams or Jennings however it's really a toss up. You know Farve is going to mostly pass more, especially with a lesser RB. Williams because Jax will be a contender with their defense but it's hard to say really because they aren't a big passing team and I expect Jones-Drew and Taylor to be the bulk of production with their defense winning games.

8/15/2007 2:27:41 PM

Had the 7th pick, heavy rookies is a negative probably

QB Phillip Rivers SD
RB Joseph Addai IND
RB Adrian Peterson MIN
RB/WR DeAngelo Williams CAR
WR Steve Smith CAR
WR Tory Holt STL
TE Antonio Gates SD
D/ST Panthers
K Shayne Graham CIN

BE Deshaun Foster RB CAR
BE Jay Cutler QB DEN
BE Broncos D/ST
BE Calvin Johnson WR DET
BE Heath Miller TE PIT
BE Anthony Gonzalez WR IND
BE John Kasey K CAR

what do you think?

8/15/2007 2:44:43 PM

you should be good

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 2:56 PM. Reason : you are a little weak in the QB area but either QB could have a standout year]

8/15/2007 2:54:14 PM

^^ ya alot of young talent there.

Hopefully your QBs will be okay. I like Rivers but Cutler, well he's questionable, but should be okay.

Your RBs a re a bit weak. You better hope Addai performs, which may be hard cause I think they lost a good Tackle/Guard if I'm not mistaken.

But you got Gates, Holt and Smith and they all should be solid. Only problem is you are depending on Panthers and Chargers to perform well for your team as it's a large portion of your bread an butter players. But you got some good backups though.

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 2:57 PM. Reason : ]

8/15/2007 2:57:08 PM

i'd play foster over williams until/unless foster gets hurt

8/15/2007 3:04:17 PM

^^^^^ Good analysis, but I have a slightly different perspective:

I think Miller is the better choice out of those two options. Remember a few things here:

1) Culpepper will likely start the season as the QB and he loves the TE position as a first or second option (remember Jermaine Wiggins in 2004 and 05? He was statistically a great TE and has fallen off ever since Daunte left).

2) The Bears went out and drafted Greg Olsen as a TE. Apparently they werent too happy with Clark's streakyness and want to use clark as more of a blocking TE this year. Olsen has been superb and very athletic so far this offseason. At worst, Olsen cuts into Clark's looks this year. At best, he is the new Bears TE. I would stay away from both Clark and Olsen until things get clearer.

As for Morency vs. Turner...

Quote :

"There are many late-round backs to choose from this season thanks to shared backfields, aging veterans and injury concerns, but Jackson is starting to separate himself from that field. Morency may not take the field by the time most fantasy owners conduct their drafts, leaving Jackson as the most likely owner of 20-plus carries per game in Green Bay's backfield. Although Pittsburgh's defense shut down the Packers' running game early in the Cheeseheads' first preseason game, the Packers stuck with the rookie for more than half of the team's carries to get a good look at him. It's certainly better than looking at Herron, even if he did average five yards on his four carries. Jackson's 15-yard run in the third-quarter was impressive, and Green Bay hopes to see much more of that out of the former Cornhusker. And while getting a bulk of the duty is enough to boost Jackson's fantasy status already, a nice game or two before draft day could vault his stock even higher. "

Jackson will likely be the starter there, as Morency is hurt right now. Although you can't ever imagine LT going down with an injury, if he did, Turner would instantly be a top 15-20 RB. Add that to the fact that this is a contract year for Turner, so the Chargers will want to either play him to show off his value, or use him to rest LT, he is definitely worth giving up a last round pick for. Really, thats a steal to get Turner with the last pick in the draft.

In Regards to the WR question, the answer is Jennings. Absolutely no doubt about it.

Williams is really doing poorly in camp, and Wilford and Jones are ahead of him on the depth chart.

Toomer is now behind Plax and Moss on the depth chart. Add in Shockey and there just will not be enough touches to go around, especially for someone coming off of a season ending injury last year.

Battle could be a decent option. He had two TD's in his last three games last year, and SF loves the deep ball. Unfortunately for him though, Vernon Davis is healthy now and the 49ers added D-Jax and the speedster Lelie to the mix. Battle will have to battle for looks.

Jennings was a deep threat early and often last season before his injury. He finished with 632 yards receiving and had 3 TD's, with most of those totals coming before he was injured and missed a few games. I see him as a good #4 WR and a mediocre #3 WR. The good thing is that he is healthy this year, as fast as ever, and the Packers will be throwing alot. I will be targeting him in many of my drafts as well.

Hope this helps!

- The Guru

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 3:07 PM. Reason : asdf]

8/15/2007 3:06:27 PM

good deal, just one more question


as far as other TE's to look including rookies

my TE's right now are Desmond Clark and Cooley


Owen Daniels and Zach Miller are still available. Any other recommendations on my team?


This is my team:

Marc Bulger
(StL - QB)
Marques Colston
(NO - WR)
Santana Moss
(Was - WR)
Laveranues Coles
(NYJ - WR)
Steven Jackson
(StL - RB)
Maurice Jones-Drew
(Jac - RB)
Chris Cooley
(Was - TE)
Marty Booker
(Mia - WR)
Greg Jennings
(GB - WR)
Warrick Dunn
(Atl - RB)
Ben Roethlisberger
(Pit - QB)
Santonio Holmes
(Pit - WR)
Desmond Clark
(Chi - TE)
Vernand Morency
(GB - RB)

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 3:23 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2007 3:23:09 PM

i have my first draft tomorrow night

i TAKE IT this year Yahoo! isnt giving TE eligibility to Colston are they? I mean seriously last year he might've had better numbers than Gates,/]

8/15/2007 3:27:57 PM

no they are not


KC or CIN DEF?

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 3:33 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2007 3:29:47 PM

Is Eric Johnson still available?

I'm not a big fan of having two TE's...personally, I'd rather have two defenses, but it sounds like you are.

Eric Johnson is the TE for the Saints. He should be used quite a bit this year. If he is there, drop Clark pick him up. If not, drop Clark and go with Owen Wilson.

One more thing...

after all of that damn typing, i'm not asking for the world, but you can give me a better reply than

Quote :

"good deal, just one more question"

.

LOL.

Do you agree or disagree with what I said before? I like to hear what others think of my feedback as well. Kinda like a performance review.

As far as other advice though...I would seriously look into upgrading your RB bench. You have one solid starter, one RB who will have a tough time repeating last year, and two second string RB's. See if you can wheel and deal for a starter...any starter.

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 3:35 PM. Reason : asdf]

8/15/2007 3:33:26 PM

right now i have 2 DEF teams, PHI and CIN

thats why I asked about whether KC would be better than CIN this year


as far was what you said, I know nothing about Zach Miller which is why I asked


Eric Johnson is not available
I agree with what you said about the WR's thats why I picked Jennings first


and who is Owen Wilson?

8/15/2007 3:37:38 PM

LOL. Pick Owen Wilson up off of waivers!



Damn Zoolander last night!

I meant Owen Daniels.

8/15/2007 3:39:24 PM

Hey man I like your advice and agree with you. It's very detailed and I like how you counteresed my opinions with some good background info. I didn't know all this information and I see why you are the "Guru"

8/15/2007 3:41:44 PM

hahahahahaha i know but that was funny



i think i am going to wait and see what Clark and Daniels do in the first few games


Clark just had SIGNIFICANTLY better numbers last year than Daniels did and I wanna see how much passing they are actually going to do without Thomas Jones and Cedric Benson. I think that not having Jones this year will cause them to run less and pass more.

8/15/2007 3:42:35 PM

^could be a good call. But I dont think they are too anxious to be pass happy considering how streaky Grossman is. Considering their QB situation, they wouldnt have let Jones go if they didnt believe they could successfully run Benson to death.

I think HOLDING is a smart move right now, especially when talking about a backup TE.

8/15/2007 3:46:36 PM

so KC or CIN DEF?

Quote :

"Hey man I like your advice and agree with you. It's very detailed and I like how you counteresed my opinions with some good background info. I didn't know all this information and I see why you are the "Guru""

Panthro knows his shit for the most part. I will definitely give him some credit for helping me win the last three leagues I have played in


although having LT three seasons in a row helped as well

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 3:50 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2007 3:48:17 PM

Cincinnati.

When you are ever in a toss up on a defense to select, oddly enough a key tie breaker will usually be the offense of that team. Can the offense of that team score enough points to put the opposition in a spot where turnovers can be forced?

For the Chiefs, the answer is no. No O-line, No WR's and an average QB at best. The Bengals on the other hand are one of the leagues most potent offenses. Chances are they will force other teams to pass because of the score, and that along with VERY opprotunistic Cornerbacks should equal high chances for picks, pick-6's, sacks, and fumbles!

Go with Cincy's D over KC

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 4:04 PM. Reason : asdf]

8/15/2007 4:02:12 PM

w0rd

8/15/2007 4:03:20 PM

In our league Defense is actually worth something (unlike most where they are on par with fucking kickers) and I had a tough decision in naming my keepers.

One was Maroney, but the other was between T.O., Gates, Bulger or Chicago... ended up keeping Chicago even though I dont think they will be as good this year as they were last year

8/15/2007 4:19:16 PM

holy cow...

you kept Chi's D over T.O., Gates and Bulger!?

Oh yeah, you are the one in the league that gives astromical point totals for defense right?

8/15/2007 4:22:32 PM

Chicago's D over TO isnt that bad of an idea

Gates not so much

Bulger...verdict is still out

8/15/2007 4:24:33 PM

^^ if you mean the league which makes something that is 1/3 of the actual game and that represents 11 players actually worth a somewhat equivalent amount, than yes


^ yeah, normally wouldnt do gates, was only thinking of that when I didnt know how the other keepers would go and where I would get placed in the draft order

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 4:25 PM. Reason : d]

8/15/2007 4:24:49 PM

I can see the logic...but if thats the case, do you give TE's more of a point value than WR's since there are typically 2-4 WR's on every play and usually 1 TE?

Probably not, but just a thought...

8/15/2007 4:37:24 PM

Just finished my 2nd draft, had the 3rd pick. Weak in TE's, and little thin at WR.


QB Phillip Rivers SD
RB Larry Johnson KC
RB Marshawn Lynch BUF
RB/WR Deangelo Williams CAR
WR Steve Smith CAR
WR Torry Holt SD
TE Vernon Davis SF
D/ST Panthers
K Adam Vinateri IND

BE Matt Leinart QB ARI
BE Vincent Jackson WR SD
BE Brandon Jackson RB GB
BE Heath Miller TE PIT
BE Steelers D/ST
BE John Kasey K CAR
BE Sinorice Moss WR NYG

still relying on SD and CAR i guess, but i tried to take the best available, what you think?

[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 4:43 PM. Reason : .]

8/15/2007 4:39:25 PM

^^ um, no. Because we arent saying 1 position = 1 position, we are saying 1 player = 1 player.


1 TE should have the POTENTIAL to score the same as 1 WR


so the 1 Team Defense which represents 11 players should be at least SOMEWHAT equal to a similar amount of offensive players, obviously we dont make it equal to 11 Offensive playes, but we tried to make a good defensive performance equal to about 2-4 offensive players


just because TEs are used less in the current NFL than WRs doesnt mean you should artificially bump their point totals up to make them equal, thats dumb. In the real game, a catch/TD/yards etc gained by a TE counts just the same as a catch/TD?yards gained by a WR, so they should count just the same in a fantasy league too.



[Edited on August 15, 2007 at 4:42 PM. Reason : f]

8/15/2007 4:41:43 PM

^^Very good draft.

BOOBS, where are you? I thought you would like to read this!

Quote :

"Running The Wrong Way Chris Henry is falling down the Titans depth chart this preseason. This April, for the second straight year, the Titans used a second-round draft pick on a running back in hopes of finding a guy who could be their bell cow. This time around they selected Chris Henry, a back out of Arizona that failed to rush for a 1,000 yards in any of his college seasons but was a workout warrior who impressed teams at the Scouting Combine. Fantasy owners were intrigued by the idea of Henry heading to Tennessee because the Titans starting running back job was wide open with Chris Brown still unsigned and LenDale White coming off a disappointing (and gluttonous) rookie season. But now that the Titans are neck-deep into training camp and have a preseason game under their belt, it has become apparent that Henry's chances of having a significant role are very slim. The Quote: "Well, this coming week we'll switch them and assume LenDale [White] is going to get the start and hopefully he'll get 8-10 carries early. ... And we will continue toT rotate them," head coach Fisher told the Tennessean after the team's first preseason game. Fantasy Outlook: If you glance at Saturday's box score, you will see that Henry led the Titans in both rushing attempts and yardage. Why then is his stock heading south? Because, as Fisher indicated above, Henry was only a one-game starter and next week that role (and most of those carries) will be given to White. Even worse for Chris, reports are that he following week Brown will be the team's starter. Basically Henry was given his chance with the starters in the most meaningless preseason game simply to get his feet wet, not because it is a sign of things to come. In fact, it is becoming increasingly likely that White will win the starting gig before the end of training camp, as he's finally slimmed down to a reasonable weight and there are multiple reports indicating the coaching staff favors him in this three-way battle. Even if LenDale can't secure the starting role all to himself, fantasy owners shouldn't get too excited about Henry because he'll still have to vault over Brown on the depth chart and the team could use LenDale first at the goal line. With all this uncertainly and underachieving in Tennessee, Henry is now only worth a look in the late rounds of deeper fantasy leagues. "

OUCH! Sorry Boobs. You get no apology from me. I WAS RIGHT! I told you Henry doesnt stand a chance!

8/15/2007 4:47:24 PM

he is in our league... our draft is Sunday, I hope he picks Henry

8/15/2007 4:51:34 PM

How's Hester looking as a WR?

Quote :

"In our league Defense is actually worth something"

Quote :

"between T.O., Gates, Bulger or Chicago... ended up keeping Chicago"

Quote :

"1 TE should have the POTENTIAL to score the same as 1 WR"

This is why you suck. This is why you suck...

8/15/2007 5:05:57 PM

um.... ok?



right on buddy

8/15/2007 5:44:00 PM

I've followed the NFL very very closely the past decade or so, but I'm new to fantasy football this year, so if this question sounds moronic, my apologies.

I recently landed the 2nd pick in my 10-man league. I know the general consensus is to take either LJ or Steven Jackson, but can you answer me why I shouldn't take Peyton Manning? With the offensive scheme the Colts run, coupled with the insane amount of weapons he has, he seems (to me at least) to be much more valuable than the two aforementioned RBs.

I know there's the thought that you can get quality QB's in later rounds, but it just seems that if you have the chance at taking the best QB in the league, you do it. Thoughts? Would I be endlessly ridiculed for taking Manning no. 2?

8/15/2007 10:38:39 PM

Maverick, welcome to the cult club that is fantasy football. It's really one of the most addicting and consuming things that you can ever do.

Ok, so the general rule in Fantasy Football is that with your first pick in the draft, no matter what number it is, you should maximize your potential point total with that pick, meaning that you should pick the player who has the best chance of being the highest point producer.

While it is absolutely justifiable (depending on league settings) to take Manning at the end of the 1st round or the beginning of the 2nd, you SHOULD NEVER see Manning go any higher than 8 because on most occasions, the top ~8-10 RB's (the 1st round basically) are the focal point of the teams offense and have a much greater chance of scoring TD's by either rushing or receiving, than a QB, even Manning, does with passing. I guess it boils down to the fact that a RB can just step in, rush for 1 yard on the goal line, and get 6 fantasy points, whereas a QB's relys on his WR's to get open and score fantasy points.

Anyway, as a whole, fantasy owners insist on selecting a pair of rushers with their first two picks because they consider the running back position to be the most important in fantasy football. This is arguably the oldest, most common, and generally safest of all draft strategies. I can assure you, no one will laugh at you if you take 2 RB's in the 1st two rds.

I hope thats a good start. One more word of advice. As soon as LT goes off the board in your draft, take Stephen Jackson with your second pick. You won't regret it.

- The Guru

8/15/2007 11:03:39 PM

Quote :

"I recently landed the 2nd pick in my 10-man league. I know the general consensus is to take either LJ or Steven Jackson, but can you answer me why I shouldn't take Peyton Manning? "

It's simple: opportunity cost.

The argument you have to make to yourself is simple: "If I don't pick Peyton Manning and have to settle for some other quarterback, how many points am I giving up (and giving the other guy)?" Looking at the data from my league last year:

- There was a 60 point difference between Manning (362) and the #2 quarterback (302). So, by not picking Manning before everyone else, I lose at least 60 points at the QB position.
- What about the worst case scenario where I don't pick Manning AND everyone else picks a QB before my next pick? The #10 QB had 140 points less than Manning. Just considering QBs, not picking Manning had an opportunity cost of 140.

Now, what is the situation with running backs?

- The difference between LT and the #2 RB was 100 points!!
- The difference b/w LT and the #10 RB was 245!

I hope the rational strategy is clear, now: not picking a RB in the early rounds has a HUGE opportunity cost. Another thing to consider -- the opportunity cost can actually be double the figures mentioned above since you are denying an opponent the chance to those points.

This problem is compounded by the fact that you only need one QB on a team. In other words, there is little demand for the QB position. Noting that the point dropoff between QBs is flatter, your chances of getting one QB who is just about as good as anyone else is very high.

In most leagues, you can have up to 2 to 3 RBs. So, demand for RBs will be higher and the drop off of RB production is dramatic (you quickly get into non-starter backs).

Given all of this, I would even go far as to argue that picking Manning at ANY position in the first round is a mistake. Any ranking model that properly takes into account opportunity cost will bear out the notion that you should go for RBs first and leave the QBs for the third or fourth round.

You would also note that, to a degree, it disagrees with the ^above advice to always chase the points in the first round. If you account for probable opportunity costs, the optimal strategy you get won't be greedy.

If you can graph point totals by position as they go down over the draft, you can get an intuitive sense about when it's OK to pick for another position (when the RB curve flattens out and gets lower than others).

FWIW, the guy who picked Manning in the first round of my league of pretty sharp players did poorly because he had crappy backs and receivers -- since everyone else snatched up the backs, he paid a huge opportunity cost for Manning lust. Meanwhile, the guys who got stud RBs were happy to settle for Drew Brees, Carson Palmer, Bulger, etc

(This is an interesting problem to study academically because it involves game theory, statistics, AI, economics)


[Edited on August 16, 2007 at 12:28 AM. Reason : sdf]

8/16/2007 12:06:13 AM

^ but he's not going to be able to get LT with the #2 pick. So he would be down to the #2 RB in the league or Peyton Manning.

According to your numbers (which I will take as fact) the difference between the #2 RB and #10 RB is only 145 points.

The difference between Peyton and the #10 QB is 140 points.

the gap isnt as wide anymore.

With that said, I would definetly take a RB with the #2 pick, because there is almost no way possible that every pick after you will take a QB, so you will likely wind up with a #2-4 QB by the time the draft gets back around to you.

8/16/2007 8:52:15 AM

^that's exactly my point.

8/16/2007 9:09:27 AM

Here is another interesting perspective on drafting Manning in the first round.

Quote :

"Every fantasy football draft is going to see at least one owner pondering over whether or not he or she should draft Peyton Manning in the first round. It’s generally the owner with a mid-round pick, 6-8 is usually the position where he is at a higher value than a running back. So, do you pull the trigger? What’s the earliest position where drafting Manning is a smart move? Let’s assume you have a 12-team league, the average and, in my opinion, optimum number of players. Your rules are also the average: 6 points for any touchdown except passing, 4 points for each passing touchdown, 1 point per 10 yards receiving/rushing, 1 point per 25 yards passing, -1 point for interceptions. LaDainian Tomlinson, Larry Johnson, Steven Jackson, Frank Gore, and Shaun Alexander are all off the board when the draft gets to you at number 6. Peyton Manning is still available, but so is Joseph Addai, Willie Parker, Brian Westbrook, and Rudi Johnson. Each of these runners is poised for a good season, though Westbrook is a more risky pick because of his history of injuries. The great thing about Manning is that there are a couple things you can be sure of: (1) he will not get hurt and (2) he will throw for at least 4000 yards and 30 touchdowns in 2007. Whenever you can predict with a great degree of accuracy those kinds of statistics, the value of the player is increased. Consistency (and health) are definitely gold when it comes to fantasy football. But, and this is very important, you must realize that by the time you draft again in the second round there will be at least 10 more running backs taken off the board. Considering that already 5 have been taken off the board, you’re looking at your top running back being the 16th overall. Me? I’ll take my chances with Westbrook while I still can for a couple reasons. One, he has 2000 yard potential and he’s the last remaining big time fantasy running back. After him, the dropoff begins. Two, if Donovan McNabb goes down — very strong possibility — Westbrook will be counted on that much more. Alright, so Manning is still on the board and the draft moves on to 7th overall. Willie Parker is the only running back I can see being worth as much as Manning because of his touchdown potential. With that said, Parker is where the dropoff at running back begins. So, being the shrewd fantasy guru I am, I’ll take Manning here. Why? Simple. When the draft rolls around next, 10 more running backs will have come off the board. That should leave me with someone like Ronnie Brown, Travis Henry, or Edgerrin James. At the very least, I’m getting a running back who has good potential. And my quarterback questions have already been addressed; with this position, I can use the next 10+ rounds on running backs and receivers/tight ends. Through my example, I’ve shown you that the earliest you should draft Manning is 7th overall (in a 12 person draft). With this position, he’s the best value and there is still some good backs in the second round. (However, if Westbrook or Alexander or any of the other top 6 picks are still on the board, draft them. They are upper-tier running backs who will definitely produce.)"

Lowjack, you defintely have some valid points in your argument, but as the above article states, there are other variables that arent in your Opprotunity Cost theory such as durabilty and reliability. Manning has been one of the, if not THE most consistent Fantasy players in the past ~4 years. While I never would draft him any higher than 8-10 in the first round (and thats only if LT, SJ, LJ, SA, Addai, Gore, Westbrook, and Parker were off the board), He really makes an interesting pick, especially when you can come back and get a solid (but not superstar) RB only a few, if not one, pick later. In a 10 man league, its a tougher decision, but in a 12 man league, Manning will far produce anyone that you could pick at the and of the first round. Just my opinion though.

8/16/2007 10:22:32 AM

doing a league for fun with my nephew and my brother, but I'd like an analysis of my team. It is for fun but I want to win so I don't hear crap from them all year. (Had the number 10 and 11 pick in a 10 man league)

QB
Matt Hasselbeck, Sea

RB
Rudi Johnson, Cin

RB
Laurence Maroney, NE

RB/WR
Brandon Jacobs, NYG

WR
Larry Fitzgerald, Ari

WR
Hines Ward, Pit

TE
Vernon Davis, SF

D/ST
Broncos D/ST

K
Robbie Gould, Chi K

Bench
Fred Taylor, Jac RB

Bench
Laveranues Coles, NYJ WR

Bench
Vincent Jackson, SD WR

Bench
Brandon Jackson, GB RB

Bench
Jay Cutler, Den QB

Bench
Reuben Droughns, NYG RB

Bench
Drew Bennett, StL

..is their someone you would drop to add another D/ST or are their any weak areas I could try to improve on waivers..(other defenses out there are Seattle, Green Bay, Cincy..)

[Edited on August 16, 2007 at 11:03 AM. Reason : a]

8/16/2007 11:01:11 AM

who would i take at #3, LJ?

8/16/2007 1:51:12 PM

Panthro and lowjack -- you guys are the shit. Thanks for breaking that down for me. I'll probably go with Jackson at 2, and hopefully pick up either Rivers or Hasselbeck in the 4th or 5th.

Looking at receivers, do you guys see anyone having a break out season, ala Lee Evans of last season? I'm thinking Vincent Jackson and Reggie Brown could both have monster years. Anybody else?

8/16/2007 3:20:19 PM

^^^You did pretty well. Don't worry about defenses.

^^That's not so easy to answer. A lot of people are raising questions about his holdout, teammates, etc., but he can still be #3.

8/16/2007 3:27:07 PM

Yes, LJ could be a #3, but at this point in time, even the holdout aside, Gore, Addai and Shaun Alexander seem to be safer choices.

I just dont think most people realize how big of a blow losing another lineman to retirement and another to injury is going to hurt LJ.

What was once the best O-line in the NFL will now be an assortment of journeymen who arent all that talented at all.

8/16/2007 3:42:15 PM

gore and alexander are both big injury concerns tho.

8/16/2007 3:54:17 PM

Yeah, I've got half a mind to put Addai #3.

8/16/2007 3:56:44 PM

is Alexander's foot still bothering him?

..if not I don't see him as being much of an injury concern.. in the previous 4 seasons before last year he had only missed 1 regular season game and that was in 2003. I would see Gore as more of an injury concern than Alexander unless I have missed something and his foot is still an issue/concern.

8/16/2007 4:15:36 PM