Kensat30 wrote:I read in an article recently that dimmed my expectations for Michael Clayton in '05. Granted he is already a solid option after his 1st year, but for those expecting massive improvement in year 2 should temper their enthusiasm.
Out of the last 20 rookie WRs who led their class in fantasy points in their rookie season, <b>95%</b> DECLINED in their sophmore season. Granted a lot of the WRs may have dropped less than 1 ppg in their scoring, but for anyone who thinks that Clayton is poised to take a big step forward (or even a small step for that matter), history is strongly against him.
Then again 1200/8 would be a step backwards for Clayton, so this is nothing to be too worried about. Just don't expect him to breakout and become a stud.
That's an outstanding stat. 95%. I'm staying away from him if there's proven guys like Donald Driver or Darrell Jackson available.
That's a solid strategy if you're looking to just make the playoffs, and not really dominate your league.
Invariably the teams that win their respective leagues and have dominant seasons are the ones whose owners took risks during the draft and selected players based on predictions and potential. Every season there is a team that looks amazing on paper based on the previous seasons numbers, quite often it is this team that struggles to maintain midtable position simply because things change. If you're in it to win it, take a risk. Mind you this strategy may also result in you totally missing the playoffs,I suppose it depends what your goals are.
Anyway, i'd like to know if it's possibly to filter that 95% stat to only include guys that put up 1200 and 8 in thier rookie season (virtually what Clayton did), and weren't injured the following season. My guess would be that those would be the guys in the 5% minority.