I Need YOUR Help!

[abrunn11]

Take Mathews and pick up D anderson as your second QB. I think most people will overlook him because of the last two seasons in Cleveland. I like his situation in AZ and I think he may surprise a few this season

He is being kept

[Kareighuis]

Ah, I see what your "problem" is- based on your rankings, I can't say Mathews deserves a 10 in the talent column. I wouldn't call him a 5, but more like a 7 or 8. His 1-year of production, history of injuries even in years he got very limited carries and lack of a top speed and good quicks are reason I'm not as high on him as others- never mind his situation. His talent ranking's far from my only disagreement with these rankings, but it might be the most relevant. The system certainly seems better than how I do it.

The more I think about this, the more I agree that Bradford could be the right choice. With guys like Tate and Hardesty not ranked, it's possible they might slip under the radar for other pros and thus be good cheap buys for next year. So, I'd consider going Bradford, spending gobs of money on guys like Turner/MJD, then get rookies like Tate/Hardesty cheap.

In another disagreement with these rankings- while this is a keeper league, this aspect of it is more like a dynasty league- where talent, not opportunity/situation, reigns supreme. I can't agree with ranking Max Hall above guys like CJ Spiller. Hall might, *might*, outproduce Spiller the first year, but I'd gamble on Spiller having the better career, even over the next 2-4 years.

Another- the computations don't seem to take account of a player's propensity to get injured, like these do. Translating that aspect into these rankings, I'd probably do a small subtraction (say a 2) for guys like Best, who has a history of concussion(s?).

[abrunn11]

Ah, I see what your "problem" is- based on your rankings, I can't say Mathews deserves a 10 in the talent column. I wouldn't call him a 5, but more like a 7 or 8. His 1-year of production, history of injuries even in years he got very limited carries and lack of a top speed and good quicks are reason I'm not as high on him as others- never mind his situation. His talent ranking's far from my only disagreement with these rankings, but it might be the most relevant. The system certainly seems better than how I do it.

The more I think about this, the more I agree that Bradford could be the right choice. With guys like Tate and Hardesty not ranked, it's possible they might slip under the radar for other pros and thus be good cheap buys for next year. So, I'd consider going Bradford, spending gobs of money on guys like Turner/MJD, then get rookies like Tate/Hardesty cheap.

In another disagreement with these rankings- while this is a keeper league, this aspect of it is more like a dynasty league- where talent, not opportunity/situation, reigns supreme. I can't agree with ranking Max Hall above guys like CJ Spiller. Hall might, *might*, outproduce Spiller the first year, but I'd gamble on Spiller having the better career, even over the next 2-4 years.

Another- the computations don't seem to take account of a player's propensity to get injured, like these do. Translating that aspect into these rankings, I'd probably do a small subtraction (say a 2) for guys like Best, who has a history of concussion(s?).

First of all, great insight, I really appreciate your opinion on this. Second, I should add that I have the 1, 9, 12, and 14 picks in the rookie draft. The Reason I do not have Tate or Hardesty in my rankings is because both of them will go for less than $7 in next year's auction. Third, I have Hall ranked as high as I do becasue I think he will be the starter there by week 7, making him as valuable as Bradford. If Hall had the Job already, he would be above Bradford becasue of the situation he is in. I have the opinion that it is impossible to predict injury, therefore I do not take it into account when doing my rankings.

I do disagree with you on the talent level of Ryan Mathews. I think he is THE most talented runner in this group. What he lacks in straight ahead speed (4.45 40 yd), he makes up for in vision and quick feet.

[Kareighuis]

Well, having so many picks is nice. They're far back enough, though, that I don't think I'd factor them in when deciding on what to do with the 1st pick, though I'd think about it.

Drafted rookies are $0 and will have a $7 salary in 2011... The Reason I do not have Tate or Hardesty in my rankings is because both of them will go for less than $7 in next year's auction.

How deep are the rosters? I've been getting both guys late/cheap in keeper drafts because everyone's focusing on this year. If one person (or more) is like me in your league, they'll just sit on them all year. Is it better to risk that for the chance to get them at less than 7$ next year, or make certain, though you won't get them for as cheap as might have been possible?

The way I see it, situation (such as lack of competition, or high draft status) can get a player a start or series of starts. It's the talent, though, that makes that permanent. Leinart got chances because of the money, while Felix Jones and Darren McFadden get them again and again because of the owner's man-love. In contrast, guys like Tashard Choice and Jerome Harrison languish on the bench, like Jamaal Charles previously. Hall might be next in line for Arizona's QB, I just don't think he'll stick. Skelton has a better skill-set and is more likely to hold the position if/when he gets his shot. The coaching staff is aware he needs to develop and he's shown he can do so quickly this offseason. While I expect Hall to be starting this season, I don't expect him to retain the job through till the end of next season.

Regarding injuries- yes, it's a violent sport. You expect injuries. But, some individuals have a more frequent historical record of injuries- whether listed as questionable, game-time-decision, out, or on IR. Westbrook is a prime example. On the flip side, there are some who seem to avoid injury despite their heavy workload- think Tomlinson. So, while there's an 80% or so of NFL players I don't think this pertains to, I think there's a fairly small percentage who one could dock for their injury history, while another group you could give points for because of their lack of injury history.

Finally, I'm not saying Mathews is devoid of talent. Nor am I saying he isn't the most talented rookie RB- I'm not prepared to say that yet. To me, though, a 10 rank in the skill level for rookies should be reserved for the best of the best, such as Adrian Peterson and Tomlinson. I just don't think Mathews is at that level yet. Perhaps, though, your 1-10 scale slides based on each draft's talent level.

[murphysxm]

You are already keeping 3 QB's and are contemplating keeping a 4th when there is a bona fide every down running back available? I don't get it. Bradford won't crack a line up all year, if you are playing for this year- your answer is pretty obvious.

[abrunn11]

Well, having so many picks is nice. They're far back enough, though, that I don't think I'd factor them in when deciding on what to do with the 1st pick, though I'd think about it.

Drafted rookies are $0 and will have a $7 salary in 2011... The Reason I do not have Tate or Hardesty in my rankings is because both of them will go for less than $7 in next year's auction.

How deep are the rosters? I've been getting both guys late/cheap in keeper drafts because everyone's focusing on this year. If one person (or more) is like me in your league, they'll just sit on them all year. Is it better to risk that for the chance to get them at less than 7$ next year, or make certain, though you won't get them for as cheap as might have been possible?

The way I see it, situation (such as lack of competition, or high draft status) can get a player a start or series of starts. It's the talent, though, that makes that permanent. Leinart got chances because of the money, while Felix Jones and Darren McFadden get them again and again because of the owner's man-love. In contrast, guys like Tashard Choice and Jerome Harrison languish on the bench, like Jamaal Charles previously. Hall might be next in line for Arizona's QB, I just don't think he'll stick. Skelton has a better skill-set and is more likely to hold the position if/when he gets his shot. The coaching staff is aware he needs to develop and he's shown he can do so quickly this offseason. While I expect Hall to be starting this season, I don't expect him to retain the job through till the end of next season.

Regarding injuries- yes, it's a violent sport. You expect injuries. But, some individuals have a more frequent historical record of injuries- whether listed as questionable, game-time-decision, out, or on IR. Westbrook is a prime example. On the flip side, there are some who seem to avoid injury despite their heavy workload- think Tomlinson. So, while there's an 80% or so of NFL players I don't think this pertains to, I think there's a fairly small percentage who one could dock for their injury history, while another group you could give points for because of their lack of injury history.

Finally, I'm not saying Mathews is devoid of talent. Nor am I saying he isn't the most talented rookie RB- I'm not prepared to say that yet. To me, though, a 10 rank in the skill level for rookies should be reserved for the best of the best, such as Adrian Peterson and Tomlinson. I just don't think Mathews is at that level yet. Perhaps, though, your 1-10 scale slides based on each draft's talent level.

My rankings were based on a sliding scale, not overall. The best players in the group got 10's and the rest went down from there. I am not saying that Bryant and Mathews are 10's compared to AP, MJD or Andre Johnson, just compared to the other rookies.

[Kareighuis]

My rankings were based on a sliding scale, not overall. The best players in the group got 10's and the rest went down from there. I am not saying that Bryant and Mathews are 10's compared to AP, MJD or Andre Johnson, just compared to the other rookies.

Ah, then everything makes sense.

Going to the question at hand- yes, as strange as it sounds, I'd support taking Bradford over Mathews, given this league's unique circumstances.

Murphysxm, after examining earlier posts, you'll notice this league is a QB-heavy where everyone 22 QBs will be kept. Given the numbers of high-quality RBs that will be available in the auction, and how much more money the poster will have over his nearest competitor, taking Bradford over Mathews makes sense.

To me, the last thing to consider is whether you'd be able to get your guy and trade down with someone who wants one of those RBs. Don't know if it'd be worth the effort/risk, though.

[abrunn11]

My rankings were based on a sliding scale, not overall. The best players in the group got 10's and the rest went down from there. I am not saying that Bryant and Mathews are 10's compared to AP, MJD or Andre Johnson, just compared to the other rookies.

Ah, then everything makes sense.

Going to the question at hand- yes, as strange as it sounds, I'd support taking Bradford over Mathews, given this league's unique circumstances.

Murphysxm, after examining earlier posts, you'll notice this league is a QB-heavy where everyone 22 QBs will be kept. Given the numbers of high-quality RBs that will be available in the auction, and how much more money the poster will have over his nearest competitor, taking Bradford over Mathews makes sense.

To me, the last thing to consider is whether you'd be able to get your guy and trade down with someone who wants one of those RBs. Don't know if it'd be worth the effort/risk, though.

I think I am going to go with Bradford. A sidenote on Hall, if/when he does get the starting job, I can move him for a king's ransom in my league. In a perfect world, I draft him in the rookie draft, he takes over the starting job in week 7 (after AZ's bye) and trade him to someone building for next year for a couple of players that help me win the title. Last year, a guy tried to trade MJD for Brady QUinn, it was vetoed, but you get my point.