Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

08 Aug 2008

Taking a Pass: Fantasy Players to Avoid

by Bill Barnwell and Doug Farrar

Recently, reader Dave Gerczak commented in the Every Play Counts: Michael Turner article that when evaluating fantasy football prospects, "making a list of players to avoid can be as helpful as finding players to target." We certainly agree, and it got a couple of us thinking: Who are our players to avoid, beyond the obvious? As the draft lists round into shape, we thought we'd share the names that have us wondering. Note that these are our choices, and don't necessarily represent the opinions of every FO writer.

Quarterbacks

Bill Barnwell

David Garrard: Garrard threw only three interceptions in 325 attempts last year, an incredible rate that even Garrard admitted was lucky. Garrard threw a pick in 0.9 percent of his total attempts, a figure tied with Steve DeBerg's 1990 campaign for the lowest interception rate for any quarterback since 1983 (minimum passing attempts: 325).

When Garrard said he was lucky, though, he wasn't lying. DeBerg went from four interceptions in 444 attempts to 14 in 434. Since 1983, seven quarterbacks threw at least 325 attempts with an interception rate of 0.9 percent or lower, and also threw 325 passes for the same team the following year. In the second year, that rate went up to an average of 3.5 percent, higher than the average interception rate of 3.2 percent for all qualifying quarterbacks over that timeframe. There were 38 quarterbacks with a rate under 2.0 percent; in the second season, their rate averaged out at 2.9 percent.

In other words, Garrard has a major correction coming. Now, that doesn't just mean that he's going to lose 16 fantasy points for throwing eight more interceptions. The extra interceptions mean that drives that continued in 2007, with additional passing yards and eventual touchdowns, will instead end in 2008.

Jeff Garcia: Garcia's right up there with Garrard -- his 1.2 percent interception rate is tied for third in the same time period. Furthermore, Garcia had a healthy Joey Galloway and a strangely resurgent Ike Hilliard for the entire season. The effects of a Galloway injury on the team was obvious in the playoff loss to the Giants last year, and when you consider that all three players have had injury troubles in the past (and are a combined 108 years old), there's just too much propensity for this whole offense to blow up.

Doug Farrar

Brett Favre: We've run the new projections. Not good. Favre is moving to a team with a weaker offensive line, and away from perhaps the deepest receiver corps in the NFL. He relied more on short passes in 2007 than his gunslinger reputation might have you believe; 54 percent of his throws were listed by FO as Short (five yards or less), which was five percent higher than in 2006. Green Bay's receivers led the NFL in yards after catch in 2007, and they're certainly a good bet to do so again with Aaron Rodgers throwing a bunch of three-yard outs.

Of course, you're thinking that New York's receivers, used to compensating for Chad Pennington's "noodle arm," would have a bead on YAC, right? Nope. The Jets ranked 26th in YAC overall, and 15th in YAC by receivers. Oh yeah, there's also Ryan Grant and his 161 DYAR (11th among running backs) versus Thomas Jones and his -36 DYAR (just above Cedric Benson). So, there's your complementary running game down the tubes. Will defenses back off with Favre under center? To a point, but the message is clear. Brett Favre was the engine in an efficiency machine, and he's now in a situation where he'll have to make more things happen. Historically, the more he's "just havin' fun out there" because he has to, the more sacks and interceptions will pile up.

Jay Cutler: Cutler is on a lot of breakout lists. The tools are all there, as is the efficiency, despite a faith in the deep ball that will get him in trouble at times. If anything upends Cutler's stats, it probably won't be his newly diagnosed diabetes – it'll be his receivers.

Brandon Marshall is dealing with a three-game suspension to start the regular season, and preseason reports about his conditioning have been worrisome. The Broncos signed ex-Carolina washout Keary Colbert and the declining Darrell Jackson. They're working rookie Eddie Royal wide and in the slot, but Royal is more a return man than pure receiver (see Bill's comment about Devin Hester). Brandon Stokley is good inside, but Marshall's the one who can get separation and make Cutler's physical gifts transfer into touchdowns for the group. And if he's not on the field, or not optimal when he is, that's a major problem for his quarterback.

Running Backs

Bill Barnwell

Larry Johnson:: Some folks might think that Johnson, coming off a broken foot, would return to his halcyon days of 2005 and 2006. He won't. It's not the Curse of 370 as much as it is the fact that the offensive line Johnson played behind has disappeared. Branden Albert could end up being a stud tackle, but he's not likely to be in his rookie year.

Darren McFadden: As Kevin Lynch talks about in this year's book, the Raiders are in the process of switching to a zone blocking scheme. That's great in theory, but they don't really have much in the way of personnel to do it. Cornell Green is a journeyman at right tackle; on the other side, Kwame Harris is a competent run blocker, but his abortive attempts at pass protection make it incomprehensible that he'll be able to stay on the field. They'll have a new center in John Wade, and McFadden will be splitting time with Justin Fargas and, potentially, Michael Bush. Owners buoyed by the success Adrian Peterson had last year and see the impact rookie in this year's draft doing the same thing. He won't.

Doug Farrar

Michael Turner: You've heard that new Falcons offensive coordinator Mike Mularkey will split carries between Turner and Jerious Norwood. Turner's a possible 300-carry threat, but LaDainian Tomlinson's former backup has never performed well behind a below-average offensive line even in limited action, and the Falcons are far away from respectability in that department. Ovie Mughelli's blocking will help, and Turner will no doubt get a lot of red zone carries, but proceed with extreme caution from a yardage standpoint.

Earnest Graham: Graham's extremely positive KUBIAK projection is based on a few factors: His surprise starring role in 2007 after years as a backup; his ability to fall forward and create positive situations after first contact; the expected improvement of Tampa Bay's young offensive line; and Jon Gruden's "Pound That Rock!" philosophy. The questions revolve around the carries allotted for Michael Bennett and Warrick Dunn, and who will do what in the offense this year. There's also the possibility of Cadillac Williams's healthy return off the PUP list late in the season, but we're not holding our breath on that one. Graham's a good touchdown pick regardless of how things shake out.

Wide Receivers

Bill Barnwell

Devin Hester: If your league gives Hester points for his returns, then this situation changes. If you're drafting him strictly as a receiver, well, you're asking to be disappointed. If Hester couldn't cut it as a wideout at The U, why would he be able to do it on the pro level?

The skillset needed to be a successful wideout isn't the same as what's needed to be a successful returner. Returners are much more like running backs: you need vision and the physical assets to separate out of trash. As a top wide receiver, you have a cornerback's hands on you with the first step you take. Instead of accelerating away from defenders, you need to find the right place to settle amongst them. Does that sound like something Hester's a good fit for? As the slot guy with two excellent underneath receivers, Hester could be a worthwhile part, but as the lead wide receiver? Seriously?

Derrick Mason: Mason's yards per catch have dropped in three consecutive years and four out of the last five, a sign that his ability to separate from corners is fading. He had 164 passes thrown to him in 2007, largely due to injuries to Todd Heap and Mark Clayton; with the pair returning this year, Mason's numbers should experience a precipitous drop.

Doug Farrar

Roddy White: White was one of the few bright spots in Atlanta's nightmare season last year, putting up career highs in receptions, yards and touchdowns in 2007. But with a new "power offense" in place, the financial push to play rookie quarterback Matt Ryan sooner than later, the redefinition of the team's running game, and some major question marks along the offensive line, White's a player to approach with caution.

Roy Williams: Put Calvin Johnson on your watch list as well. New Lions offensive coordinator Jim Colletto has a back-to-basics style that will make Matt Millen happier than he's been since he unwrapped the cymbal-crashing monkey last Christmas, but the wild swing from Mike Martz's shotgun-heavy multiple receiver sets won't do Jon Kitna or his receivers any favors from a statistical standpoint (though a few more max protect sets will help Kitna stay alive). Neither Williams nor Johnson were top-20 YAC threats last year, though Williams was close. Doesn't mean they can't be, but major offensive changes in a conservative direction are generally danger signs for fantasy players.

Tight Ends

Bill Barnwell

Kevin Boss: Boss is overvalued because of the prominent role he had at the end of the year and during the playoffs. Unfortunately, he doesn't get to play against the Patriots and their decrepit linebacking corps every week. Boss is also competing for touches against a now-healthy Steve Smith, who shares a similar skillset.

Dallas Clark: Clark's hype has always outstripped his production; last year was his first season with more than 37 receptions, and it had a good amount to do with Marvin Harrison being injured. If Harrison's back for the entire season, Clark's role in the offense will diminish, and the likelihood of him scoring 11 touchdowns again (after 14 in the previous four seasons) is slim.

Doug Farrar

Vernon Davis: It looks like a dream combination. Davis has always been a square peg in the traditional tight end role, and between Mike Martz taking the reigns of a long-pathetic offense and general manager Scot McCloughan's Combine comments that Davis would be used as a receiver in Martz's frequent four-wide packages, you'd be forgiven for thinking Davis will be a fantasy steal. Balance that out with Davis's tendency to forget the little things –- route progressions, ball security, the snap count -– and you're left wondering if this high-flying scenario will pan out.

John Carlson: The Seahawks gave up their 2008 third-round draft pick to move up and grab Carlson in the second round, and he is the most NFL-ready in a big class of high-potential tight ends on a team that hasn't had a true threat at the position in the Holmgren era. But Seattle also signed Jeb Putzier in the offseason as insurance, and Will Heller can always be counted on to block and make the occasional big play. Someone will catch the 50 balls foolishly projected for Marcus Pollard last year, but it's just as likely to be a committee. Take care when thinking that one tight end will supplant any dropoff in Seattle's depleted receiver corps.

Posted by: Doug Farrar on 08 Aug 2008

42 comments, Last at 14 Aug 2008, 7:32pm by Chuck Norris

Comments

1
by NewsToTom (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:09am

that will make Matt Millen happier than he’s been since he unwrapped the cymbal-crashing monkey last Christmas
It's a very good thing I keep my door closed at work.

2
by kj (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:18am

Kubiak is pretty high on Garrard. To me, the concern is less an increase in interceptions (which can also lead to the Jaquars falling behind in a few games, resulting in more passing attempts), but the health of Porter and williams.

3
by Jon (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:21am

re: Kevin Boss, if you've been following the camp reports, he's looked very good catching the football.

And if you watched last night's game, you'd know that he's arguably the worst starting TE in the NFL at run blocking.

What will likely happen with the Giants is that "backup" Darcy Johnson will be on the field for a plurality of snaps, because Boss is too much of a liability in the running game to see a lage increase in touches.

4
by cjfarls (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:34am

I think the fear of a Cutler regression is far overblown (of course, I'm a Denver homer).

Would I start him the first 2 games vs. Nmandi & Cromartie without Marshall... not unless absolutely. But once Marshall is back is back you have a young, improving QB who put up good stats last year despite having a O-line that was torn to shreds by injury, while playing being 30lbs underweight due to undiagnosed diabetes.

This year, the O-Line (for now) is healthy with the return of our 2 best linemen in Hamilton and Nalen. If either guy is hurt again (Nalen is having knee troubles), they picked up KC's Weigman as insurance... not great by any stretch, but a vast improvement over last year's backup. Clady for Lepsis at LT is a push based on how Lepsis played last year (he just overpowered too many times). Last years starters on the right side (Holland, Pears) are now the backups so that is an improvement, or worst case a push. Basically, worse case scenario on the O-Line is the same as last year, since last years starters are now the backups.

As for the receivers, after Marshall gets back, this group is no worse than last year, and is likely better. Walker was hurt early in the year and gimpy/ineffective once he game back late. I'll take a committee of D.Jackson/Colbert/Royal over Glenn Martinez and Taylor Jacobs (who played opposite Marshall last year). For all the consternation here about Royal as WR, he's been the star of camp so far... we'll see what happens in games, but he's shown great speed, quick in/out of cuts, and very soft hands all camp. Scheffler at TE was hurt most of last season, but once healthy at the end was dominant... unless he gets hurt again, having him healthy for an extra half-season can only help Cutler. Plus, an improved O-line means it'll be less necessary for Graham (though I expect him to be helping Clady a bit, especially early in the year) to be held back in pass-protection every down, giving an extra target in the field which can only help the passing game.

Better field position from an improved DEF (new/moved LBs and no more rookies on the D-Line) and special teams (Royal) can't hurt Cutler's point projection either... and even if it doesn't improve, it can't get much worse than it was in '07.

Basically, all the fears about Cutler are basically the same or less than he played with last year... so why would they be a problem this year, when they weren't last? If Marshall gets hurt, sure, Cutlers stats will suffer... but no more than Brady's if Moss gets hurt or Brees/Colston and Romo/Owens. For the final 14 games, Cutler looks like a stud to me... I just don't get the FO's writers/KUBIAK's fear.

5
by Chris (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:43am

I don't really see anybody licking their chops to draft any of these guys...

Ohhhh let me pick up a steal like Roddy White, Jeff Garcia or Kevin Boss?

You need to try and point out more guys like Larry Johnson that people will actually try and draft. Frank Gore (your sleeper) would have been a good guy to AVOID last year.

Avoiding some of these guys late rounds isn't going to make a difference anyway.

6
by Chris (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:45am

4. Just having Sheff and anybody but Taylor Jacobs should help Cutler.

7
by Aaron N (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:59am

Avoiding players altogether in a fantasy draft is foolish. All players have value. It all depends on where you are in the draft.

8
by Boston Dan (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 12:13pm

With the offensive philosophy change made by the Lions and the Smith and Marshall suspensions, it is seems to be of utmost importance to get a top WR.

With the 5th pick in the first round of our (10 teams, 6 points for QB TD) draft I'll grab Moss and if Manning or Brady are there at 15th, one of them.

9
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 12:23pm

Re 5

No one in your league is going to draft Jeff Garcia or Roddy White? Is it a 4-team league or something?

10
by Eddo (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 1:06pm

8 (Boston Dan): With the 5th pick in the first round of our (10 teams, 6 points for QB TD) draft I’ll grab Moss and if Manning or Brady are there at 15th, one of them.
That depends on your league's scoring. With so few true workhorse RBs in the NFL right now, I'd be shocked if Manning or Brady fell out of the first round. Even in previous years, Manning was a mid-to-late first rounder, and with more teams moving to RB-by-committee, the top QBs are more valuable.
Though I agree that getting a top WR is supremely important (especially in my league, where every 7.5 yards receiving is one fantasy point).

11
by Wrong Manning (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 1:20pm

Doug,

Pet peeve of mine: the phrase is "taking the reins" (as of a horse), not "taking the reigns". Otherwise, nice post.

WM

12
by Chris (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 1:33pm

9. What round are these guys going in? Is avoiding a 12th round mistake on Kevin Boss really worth talking about? How about backup QB Jeff Garcia? What round is Roddy White going to be in?

Maybe you should tell FF players not to draft Tavaras Jackson too while you are at it.

13
by kevin (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 1:38pm

Not saying that I completely disagree with mcfadden, but before last season everyone thought peterson would split carries with chester taylor too.

14
by Cyrus (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 1:46pm

Find it amusing-- Turner is on the list, because "has never performed well behind a below-average offensive line even in limited action."

When has he been behind that line? Is there evidence of this?

And then R. White is downgraded because Turner will be getting all the carries.

I think people have found plenty of reasons to not like Turner, so nobody is looking for reasons to like him. He will be the goal line back, he will get a ton of carries, hes big and fast... I am buying him as an RB3 with RB2 upside.

And FYI-- RBBC make the stud RB's you find in the first round MORE valuable. All you people who say "Well, RB's are less valuable because there are so many RBBC... instead of grabbing a stud in the first round, who doesn't split carries, I am going to go with a good QB." make me laugh. LT, AD, Sjax, Westy, Addai, Portis, Gore, Lynch, Barber are all RB's I'd want before any other position, Brady or Moss definitely included.

15
by Ted Max (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 2:18pm

Garrard threw a pick in 0.9 percent of his total attempts, a figure tied with Steve DeBerg’s 1990 campaign for the lowest interception rate for any quarterback since 1983 (minimum passing attempts: 325).
When Garrard said he was lucky, though, he wasn’t lying. DeBerg went from four interceptions in 444 attempts to 14 in 434. Since 1983, seven quarterbacks threw at least 325 attempts with an interception rate of 0.9 percent or lower, and also threw 325 passes for the same team the following year.

Maybe I'm just being dense, but how is this possible? Since 1983, seven quarterbacks had an interception rate of 0.9 percent or lower. Yet, apparently Garrard and Steve Deberg tied for the lowest rate since 1983, 0.9 percent.

So which is it, seven guys had 0.9 percent or better since 1983 with 325 attempts or more, or just these two guys?

16
by Becephalus (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 3:26pm

If an article like this is to be useful you need to highlight where people are going and where you think they should go.

Mentioning the downsides of players is not helpful, all players have downsides.

This is just opinion mongering of a level you could find on any fantasy forum out there...

17
by JR (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 3:28pm

15 - I was also confused by that. Later, he writes that 1.2% is 3rd best over the "same period", so my best guess is that the 7 with a rate 0.9% or lower is what's wrong.

5,12 - Brandon Funston of Yahoo! has Roddy White as #44 on his board. I am in a 12 team league, so that implies 4th round. He was 8th in the NFL in receiving yards last year. OK, I wouldn't take him in the 4th round, but I have no idea why you are singling him out.

In that 12-team league, we are required to start a TE. I sometimes wait until late to take a TE if I don't grab an elite TE. If I do that again, knowing which guy to grab late is valuable.

18
by Parker (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 3:37pm

RE:8

If QB TD's (I assume that means TD Passes) are worth 6 points with all other scoring being fairly standard, in a 10 team league, the value of QB's shoots way up. There is no chance that Brady is still there at 15. In fact, you'd probably be wise to grab Brady at 5, or Manning.

19
by cjfarls (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 3:51pm

Re:14

I agree completely about the effects of RBBC on first round picks... where RBBC changes things is in the 2nd round, because it effectively makes the 2nd tier of RBs bigger... so I'll likely take a stud RB first, and then get a WR/QB in the 2nd.

So while RB-RB-WR-QB may not hold up well anymore, RB in the 1st still is critical (although I still think there may be call for a Manning/Brady in the very end of the first, if the top RBs are gone).

20
by Jerious Norwood for President (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 3:52pm

RE: 12

I'd expect KUBIAK readers in a 12 person league to grab Garcia or Tavaras Jackson as a backup.

21
by DigitalAutumn (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 4:33pm

You guys realize this forum is free, right? What's the point of griping that these fantasy football comments aren't good enough for you?

Yes, the article would be more thorough if it talked about position and more players. If you want to write such an article just link us to it and stop griping.

22
by Parker (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 5:02pm

That's like suggesting that since network TV is free, we shouldn't grip about Two and a Half Men or CSI: Miami.

Additionally (and a much better point), these forums provide direct feedback to the writers of the articles that gives them opportunities to better understand their consumers desires. Who wouldn't want that? I agree there is no need to be overly snarky, but sharing legitimate concerns with the product is, in my view, helpful.

Writing, 'Don't take Larry Johnson' isn't very helpful, nor is 'Don't take Larry Johnson too early'. Certainly there is a point at which Larry Johnson starts to become an attractive pick.

23
by Becephalus (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 6:25pm

22- exactly

Just because something is free doesn't mean we have no reason to complain, presumably a large part of the reason they take comments is to get feedback. A site that is only interested in positive feedback is not going to do as well in the long run as one that listens to
criticism.

21- No one was saying these are horrible writers and they hate the site (that is not useful criticism and kind of odd (why be on a site you hate?)), but complaints regarding a particular article ARE useful feedback. Its important that the difference is understood.

If you want even more constructive criticism I would prefer the article look something something like:

QB
WRITER 1

Garrard
ADP: 14thQB
AAV: 8$
suggest draft position: 18thQB
suggested auction value: 8$

BLURB Why?

BLURB Why should he be lowered below the people right below him in more traditional analysis (rivers/campbell/rogers/cutler)?

Garcia ditto

WRITER 2

Favre ditto

Cutler ditto (also since the above thought cutler should maybe be above Garrard and this person thinks cutler should be even lower at least attempt to resolve this tension).

If the response is that he only thinks Garrad should be dropped 1 or 2 spots, well is that really even worth mentioning? The margin of error on analyses like these is VERY large.

24
by Becephalus (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 6:27pm

In the example article the suggested auction value for Garrard should be 6$, oops!

Anyway I hope that was helpful to the writers.

25
by Alex51 (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 8:07pm

Not saying that I completely disagree with mcfadden, but before last season everyone thought peterson would split carries with chester taylor too.

Well, Peterson did split carries with Taylor, about 60-40, so it's not like people were really wrong about that. What many people probably didn't expect was that Peterson would be so prolific in spite of splitting carries.

26
by Adam H (not verified) :: Fri, 08/08/2008 - 11:46pm

I don't get it, are you staying away from Earnest Graham or not?

27
by Bobman (not verified) :: Sat, 08/09/2008 - 12:34am

#11 I like "taking the reigns..." it sounds like kidnapping royalty or something.

Dallas Clark is the right cross of his team--he won't win every battle and there's a lot of competition for big scores, but after the jabs and uppercuts have softened up the opponents, he's there to keep them honest and knock them silly a few times a game. And if the opponent "stays honest" and covers him tightly all game, it just leaves them more exposed to the other weapons. So he catches 40 including 5 TDs this year--big deal.

In a fantasy league, yeah, I can see skipping him. In real football, I am very happy to have him on my team.

28
by bob40 (not verified) :: Sat, 08/09/2008 - 10:06am

This article falls short of what I consider FO standards. For starters, 7 hit the nail on the head. Each of these players has value if we include what round we're talking about.
There were enough problems just with the Garrard analysis to set the tone for what was to follow.
15 points out the internal inconsistency of saying Garrard tied for the lowest INT rate since '83, then comparing him to 7 other QBs with the same or lower rates during that period.
In addition, when these 7 QBs are examined we get their aggregate INT percentage for the following year. That shows a regression to the mean (actually beyond the mean) but it obscures the data spread. That is, how many of those QBs came reasonably close to duplicating their low INT rate the following year and how many just stunk up the joint? (thus raising the aggregate average).
Then there's the INT rate itself. Every QB who finished higher than Garrard last year had a higher INT rate, including Brady, P Manning, Romo, etc. So how useful is that stat by itself in evaluating a QB?
Lastly, there's the question of player development. Garrard was thrown into the starter's role on the eve of the season last year. Is there any reason to expect that he'll be a better NFL QB in his second season as starter? Maybe make better reads, hit more receivers for first downs or TDs?
I agree with 16 that FO is/ should be better than mere opinion mongering.

29
by Zac (not verified) :: Sat, 08/09/2008 - 2:31pm

David Garrard: Garrard threw only three interceptions in 325 attempts last year, an incredible rate that even Garrard admitted was lucky. Garrard threw a pick in 0.9 percent of his total attempts, a figure tied with Steve DeBerg’s 1990 campaign for the lowest interception rate for any quarterback since 1983 (minimum passing attempts: 325).

I'm sorry, is this a joke? Garrard has the lowest interception percentage when you place the minimum passing attempts right at the number he threw? I think they call that cherry-picking. Maybe the numbers look exactly the same if you put it at, say, 250 attempts, but when I see a number like that, I assume statistical chicanery is afoot.

30
by Keith Cockrell (not verified) :: Sat, 08/09/2008 - 5:29pm

Can't find the right place to post this, but has anyone noticed that Eagles owner Lurie used a Footballoutsiders stat, YPA, to dis Lito Sheppard? FBO on the rise!

31
by Bill Barnwell :: Sat, 08/09/2008 - 5:34pm

Since 1983, seven quarterbacks threw at least 325 attempts with an interception rate of 0.9 percent or lower, and also threw 325 passes for the same team the following year.

0.9 should actually be 1.5. I apologize.

32
by socctty (not verified) :: Sat, 08/09/2008 - 6:30pm

I was eyeballing Garcia as my #2 QB.

It's funny that Boss was brought up; I've been arguing with my league commish about having the TE position as a separate position, and he points to Boss as a legitimate fantasy player. We'll wait and see who drafts him...

33
by justanothersteve (not verified) :: Sun, 08/10/2008 - 1:04pm

23 - Becephalus, I think your proposed format or something similar is what was needed in the article. While most of these players could be bargains later, you don't want to take a player too early. Had it been written your way with projections on where said player would be worth taking, I think few people would have serious gripes about the selections. (Unless someone is a homer for a specific player like cjfarls is for Cutler. And cjfarls, don't take it personally. You may be right. Your post is just the best example.)

34
by stx_jay (not verified) :: Sun, 08/10/2008 - 8:06pm

About Roddy White and having Matt Ryan throw to him: he had Leftwich, Harrington and, gasp, Redman at QB last year and he still managed to go for 1,200/6.

Mike Mularkey was the Steelers OC when Hines Ward had his 90+ catch seasons a few years ago. So #1 WRs tend to get a lot of looks in his system. And let's face it, ATL will be behind most games and will throw quite a bit.

Lastly, White was a high draft pick with excellent measureables and is entering his 3rd season. This is when the lights go on for an awful lot of WRs.

I took Roddy in the middle of the 6th round (12 team league). I'm certainly comfortable about his value there.

35
by Blaine (not verified) :: Sun, 08/10/2008 - 9:50pm

RE 34

Roddy White is a playmaker on the rise. I don't think anyone could make the case for saying that the Falcons haaven't improved dramatically this offseason. We don't know what to expect from Atlanta this year, and they will most likely be on the bottom half of the rankings, but if they get desperate in alot of games, we can bet that Roddy will be looked to to make the plays. That said, he may not be my choice for anything better than WR-3.

36
by Stevie (not verified) :: Sun, 08/10/2008 - 11:03pm

Dont draft a 37 year old reciever from the Ravens? Uh thanks for the tip there Bill

37
by Ryan (not verified) :: Sun, 08/10/2008 - 11:54pm

36: It's not as bad as the Roddy White comments, but Mason was very valuable in ppr leagues last year, with his 103 catches.

38
by Fred (not verified) :: Tue, 08/12/2008 - 4:37pm

Re #34: I agree completely. Roddy White is gonna be huge this year. I don't see how the Falcons can get anybody on earth but Joey Harrington to play QB and somehow people think their passing attack will get worse. Especially since we know they will suck and will be playing from behind a lot of the time.

And I figure I'd stay within the article subject and give a few of the guys I'm going to avoid... in the order I picked em out off the ESPN top 200.

Brady,Manning- I won't take a QB round one. I just can't do it.
Reggie Bush - Don't trust him to produce till I see it.
Run DMC- ESPN has him at 39. Don't take him in the third/fourth round. It's not worth it.
Fred Taylor - He's been healthy what 2 years now? He's due to blow out his knee.

39
by scott (not verified) :: Tue, 08/12/2008 - 5:09pm

Geez, guys, give the FO staff a break here.

I think the writers give FO readers the benefit of the doubt that we know (roughly) what round these guys will be going in. Hell, I'll take Larry Johnson in the 4th rd if he's available...but won't in the 1st rd because that O-line scares the heck outta me.

40
by Jim (not verified) :: Wed, 08/13/2008 - 1:29pm

The reason for the Roddy White debate is that he is consistently available in the 6th and 7th rounds of on-line mock drafts, where he offers tremendous upside and value. He is being drafted well after older players with limited upside, such as Hines Ward and Chris Chambers.

Bowe is being selected two full rounds ahead of him, and Berrian has an almost exact ADP as White, yet all three have tough QB situations, and Roddy had the far superior stats of those three in 2007.

As a #3 WR or flex pick, White should be a player to target in the mid rounds- not avoid.

41
by Sexy Rexy (not verified) :: Wed, 08/13/2008 - 2:31pm

Good lord, you people aren't very bright, are you? These examples are all relative. Just because Kevin Boss isn't as valuable as Larry Johnson doesn't mean that knowing he's overhyped isn't inherently valuable. No one puts LJ and Boss (or Garcia or Mason) in the same category. But some might put Boss in the same class as Tony Scheffler and Greg Olsen, and that is the implied audience Boss' capsule is written for.

FFB leagues have changed and diversified so much over the years that knowing where Mason, Boss, et al fall in the pecking order means something, at least to some. Ever heard of 14-team leagues? Two-quarterback leagues?

And anyone who competely dismisses Roddy White or claims late-round picks "don't mean anything" is clinically insane. Sorry.

42
by Chuck Norris (not verified) :: Thu, 08/14/2008 - 7:32pm

I agree w/ the rest of the posters, White has tremendous value where he is being drafted. If anything he showed he did not need a good quarterback to have a good season. The best sleeper picks are the guys w/ lots of talent but bad situations. The NFL is not static from year to year and if those awful situations turn around those guys w/ talent are going to excel. (example Braylon Edwards in Cleveland) I also think Earnest Graham has lots of value where he is being drafted. He was a top 10 back at the end of last year and he is going in the 6th?! Even the writer of the column said he isn't too worried about Cadillac coming back and that is the only thing that would scare me away. I might be crazy but I'm not too worried about the carries Michael Bennett and Warrick Dunn might take away from him. Lastly, love the post about not drafting the 37 year old Ravens WR, lol thanks for the advice.