Ok, I was just sitting at work today thinking about Seattle's wide receivers when I thought it might be a nice balance to just draft both of them if I get the chance. But then I realized an even better balance would be if you had SA as well. I realize that the chance of this falling together is not great, but a lot of people shy away from drafting a bunch of players on the same team. The way they are going in mock drafts you could feasibly get SA in the 1st, Jackson in the 4th and Robinson in the 5th. If you had them last year your stats would have added up to this (I combined rushing and receiving yards & TD's since they typically earn the same pts):
The points are based on standard yahoo scoring (1pt/20yds, 6pts/td, 0 for receptions). Robinson missed week 2 and Jackson missed week 16.
The downside is that you almost forfeit your bye week, but ~20 pts/wk out of your 1,4,&5 picks is not bad. And this year they play the Jets in week 15 and Arizona in week 16. With a high powered offense like Seattle's you are almost guaranteed to score good points every week and not have to worry about all your players not reaching the endzone. You could also grab a stud RB and QB with the 2nd & 3rd picks or draft a great 3rd WR if you start 3. Maybe even draft Tony G in the 3rd if you're into that sort of thing...
I dunno, it's just a thought. Seems like a good strategy if you're into consistency. There aren't many teams you could do that with, so I think if you get SA in round one, it's something you should think about. I'd love to have Edge and Manning but that's a completely different deal. Anyways, let me know what you guys think.
thats a flawed plan... first of all, anybody in seattle and first round (maybe hasselbeck) dont belong in the same sentance. Second of all there is a reason why people generally dont draft more than one of the same position from one team. Its because then your WR core would be splitting looks with eachother. OR what if hasselbeck has an off game, then BOTH your recievers bomb... Then there is the bye week situation... the faults far outweigh the benefits on this system.. You need to diversify.. The way you maintain consistantcy is to draft individual consistant players.. Its just that simple. Plus you need to play the game.. You need to pay attention to the matchups and plan accordingly, the consistancy can be controlled by starting the right players on the right week. Maybe dont start Harrison the week they play Oakland or Philly.
I don't know if I should dignify this w/a response but what the hell...
First, yes, SA belongs in the first round. There's not a person in this cafe that will argue that.
Second, you're correct in that Hasselbeck is a badass, but no QB belongs in the first round.
Third, your wide receivers are always splitting looks w/someone. If you've got both of them, then it will even things out. Especially if they are both studs on a strong offensive team.
Fourth, there is basically no such thing as consistant wide receivers, especially in the 4th & 5th rounds. That is why I thought of this draft strategy.
5th, you NEVER bench Harrison.
If you pass on SA in the first round, consider picking Hasselbeck in the first, and sit Harrison, then I hope you are in my league.
I guess it depends on your style of play. You really should always start your studs. But, when you encounter a "shutdown" defense and you have a viable alternative against a crappo defense, it may not hurt to go with the easier matchup.
I agree, Alexander is a first rounder, and you don't take a QB in the first round. I don't like the taking the two receivers from the same team though unless they're the only people touching the ball. I would use Bruce and Holt together maybe, or possibly even K-Rob and Jackson...but I don't think I'll draft that way.
This goes hand-in-hand with the QB/WR tandem question. It kicks butt when they are good, but it may cost you the game when they bust. The points leader in my league last year had Manning/Harrison...he either blew the opponent out by 30 points or lost by 5-10 points. His losses coincided with a week when the Colts had a bad passing game (and both times he played me that was the case!).
The One, the Only, the Incomparable Mercer Boy. My My YouTube.
Depending on how many WR you start, I just don't see anyone with a 3rd or 4th string WR that is a better bet than Harrison vs. any defense.
I do see what you're saying, but the QB/WR tandem is much less consistent than QB/RB or WR/RB since the QB/WR relies soley on the air attack. With the WR/WR/RB combo I have above, you can see how it balances out. Harrison/Wayne/Edge seems pretty solid as well, but Edge didn't play enough last year for me to run accurate numbers on that. It requires two dominant wide receivers and a 100% primary back. A dominant TE or goal line only back ruins the formula. The average score was 22.0 from my original combo and you can see that it wasn't always 22 but it was pretty close. Enough that you wouldn't experience the same problems that your buddy did with Manning/Harrison.
I wouldn't do Bruce/Holt because you absolutely have to have the RB for this to work and no one knows how Faulk will fare this year.