Weeks 15 and 16

[josebach]

Anybody besides me look at weeks 15 to 16 before picking number 1 backs?

I chose Priest:
week 15 - Detroit
week 16 - Minnesota

Faulk also looks good, though:
week 15 - Seattle
week 16 - Cincinnati

I know defenses vary from year to year but this extra bit of preparation could make or break a season.

Now watch me not even make the playoffs!!!

[MCG321]

Strength of schedule is a huge factor for me. Faulk has an easy stretch for the playoffs, so he's looking up.

[The Guru]

It's def important to look at strength of schedule when deciding on who to draft. If there are two guys I like equally, if one has a better favorable playoff schedule then I will pick him.

[Warpigs]

I admit that strength of schedule is HUGE. That's why I think that players from Seattle will all have better than expected seasons. They play the easiest schedule throughout the season. Arizona also plays a cupcake schedule, however the team is just so poor all around, it won't matter. If only they could play themselves. Overall, any St. Louis player is a great addition when looking to the final two weeks of the season. When playoffs come, having a Marshall Faulk (or Lamar Gordon by that time), Kurt Warner (or Bulger) and Holt could be the difference in winning the title.

[Guest]

I don't use scheduling factors when selecting my #1 RB. It is wisest to pick the best guy available. TO pick a player based on their week 15 and 16 starts is also very risky. IT wouldn't matter if Holmes faced a high school team in week 16 if your team doesn't even make the playoffs.

[Xtreme]

I think an equally important aspect is if your stud RB is even going to play in week 16. Take St. Louis for example. Let's say they bust out, and have the luxury of only playing their starters for half a game in the last few weeks. Then Faulk isn't as valuable. Sometimes it's better to have the starters on teams who will have to claw for everything.

[mister N]

I think an equally important aspect is if your stud RB is even going to play in week 16. Take St. Louis for example. Let's say they bust out, and have the luxury of only playing their starters for half a game in the last few weeks. Then Faulk isn't as valuable. Sometimes it's better to have the starters on teams who will have to claw for everything.

most of the time teams only partly play their players in week 17. usually in week 16 they are still fighting for at least a #1 seed. not to be picky, but im just sayin. i dont mean to anger your gorilla...

[brdmaverick]

well, your strategy of analyzing the schedule could be a big factor, but I think the parity in football makes things too unpredictable. It is difficult to imagine how things are going to shape up four months from now.

New defenses emerge every year, although the ones you have mentioned seem to be pretty tame year after year.

I will use scheduling for my bye weeks. I will pick the quarterback that has the best matchup during my starters' bye week. WEll, if it works out for you then that's great, but I think you should just take the best players available and worry about the playoffs when they come.

[Ousmagic]

I think an equally important aspect is if your stud RB is even going to play in week 16. Take St. Louis for example. Let's say they bust out, and have the luxury of only playing their starters for half a game in the last few weeks. Then Faulk isn't as valuable. Sometimes it's better to have the starters on teams who will have to claw for everything.

great point id go for the best available player, even if ur player is playing cincy in week 17 he mite not even play according to the circumstances so u mite as well just take the best available player

[moochman]

Strength of schedule is only a factor I’d consider if I have the top 1-5 picks. After that you have to take the best player available. I also try to consider end of season schedules for my QB picks, it can be my deciding factor. For example: Favre and Hasselbeck have great end of schedules. Usually though this doesn’t strategy come into play.