Arian Foster for Aaron Rodgers?

[githerdunn 0]

Obviously Foster won't run for 230yds and 3td's in every game, nor will he get 33 carries..So do you sell him high now?

 

Im hurt at QB with KOLB and Alex Smith.

 

If I pull the trigger on this trade my starting RB's will be Charles and Best..in a PPR league it could be a lot worse. My new team would be:

 

QB - Rodgers

RB- Charles / Best (with Ricky Williams on the bench)

WR- Moss / R. White

TE- Celek

DEF

K

 

1pt ppr 6pt all td's INCLUDING passing TD's. Make the trade???

[Axe Elf 0]

Absolutely not!

 

Foster may not get 230 yards every week, but don't rule out a regular 25-30 carries, so he's a threat for 100/TD in any given week--THE breakout RB of 2010. And you go down to Charles if you lose Foster? Sheesh, I'd rather go empty at QB than make that sacrifice.

 

Comb the wire... Bradford? Hasselbeck? Garrard? Anderson?

 

Who are your other WRs? Maybe shop Moss, who gets one or two big receptions, for a solid QB and then plug in a guy who gets more short receptions, like Naanee or Clayton?

 

But don't trade Foster, are you crazy???

[tbk420 3]

I would do it:

 

1. Don't assume that the pass first mentality is gone in Houston. They found something that worked that particular Sunday against a particular team. You can bet that there will be game planning for Foster, and Houston won't hesitate to go back to the bread and butter when it happens.

 

2. Rodgers could finish in the top 3 QB's, if not top overall. At 6 POINTS per TD in your league, that's a massive upgrade for you. You'll still be able to play the matchups at RB. Charles will get lots of carries, and Ricky will get his share too.

 

Just my .02

[WiljenFC 0]

Sell high! I'd make this trade in a heartbeat.

 

If you are lucky either Kolb or Smith puts together 2-3 good weeks and you can trade into another RB at that point. If not watch the wire as somebody will go down (AKA Ryan Grant) and a new starting runner (AKA Brandon Jackson) will suddenly be available.

 

for that matter if Jackson is available in your league, grab him then trade Foster.

[Axe Elf 0]

Wow. I wanna be in a league with you guys. A money league. A big, BIG money league.

 

Seriously? Did you guys trade Chris Johnson after Week 2 last year, because he couldn't possibly put up 197/2 every week? (He axually din't score again until Week 8, and only broke 100 yards 1 time in that span as well. Then he had 5 more 2 TD games and never went under 100 yards after Vince Young took over.)

 

Arian Foster is that guy this year. The Chris Johnson of 2009. The Marshall Faulk of 2000 and 2001. The Priest Holmes of 2002 and 2003. The Larry Johnson of 2005 and 2006. The guy who wins games for you all by himself.

 

YOU DON"T TRADE HIM! FOR ANYTHING! EVER!!!

 

What DO they teach in these schools...

[WiljenFC 0]

Seriously? Did you guys trade Chris Johnson after Week 2 last year, because he couldn't possibly put up 197/2 every week? (He axually din't score again until Week 8, and only broke 100 yards 1 time in that span as well. Then he had 5 more 2 TD games and never went under 100 yards after Vince Young took over.)

 

Arian Foster is that guy this year. The Chris Johnson of 2009. The Marshall Faulk of 2000 and 2001. The Priest Holmes of 2002 and 2003. The Larry Johnson of 2005 and 2006. The guy who wins games for you all by himself.

 

YOU DON"T TRADE HIM! FOR ANYTHING! EVER!!!

 

What DO they teach in these schools...

 

Did you go out and pick up Ryan Moats when he put up 1 stellar week last year? I'm not anointing Arian Foster as the next Marshall Faulk just yet. If you hold onto him a week yeah he might have another great game and his stock goes up even more. Then again, he might get hurt or suck and then you lose most or all of his trade value.

[Axe Elf 0]

His trade value? Din't I make it clear that you should NOT trade him? Under ANY circumstances? EVER???

Sigh.

 

Yes, of course, any player can get hurt in any given week. Let's bail on all our studs because they might get hurt next week. We'll load up our starting slots with the Chester Taylors and Michael Spurlocks of the world, so that if they do get hurt, we can get guys who are equally good off waivers and not lose any of their trade value.

 

Did I pick up Ryan Moats when he had an isolated good day in Week 8 on a team whose rushing attack is OWNED by Adrian Peterson? Of course not. There was no reason to believe he would continue to perform at that level. On the other hand, an astute fantasy football player could see Foster coming...

 

Slaton was disappointing. He had 437 yards and 3 TDs through Week 12. There were whispers about Houston making the playoffs, but questions about how far they could get, really, without a legitimate rushing threat to balance their passing attack. Enter Arian Foster. 41 yards in his first two games. Then 97 and a TD at Miami. Then he closes the season with 119 and 2 TDs against New England.

 

Gary Kubiak--offensive coordinator when the Broncos had such success with their rushing game and Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, and Clinton Portis--thinks he may have something here. Foster gets a long look in the preseason and goes 4/31/0 vs Arizona, 6/28/1 vs New Orleans, 18/110/1 (!) vs Dallas, and like all the starters, he was held out of the final tuneup vs. Tampa Bay.

 

Now Houston clearly has the rushing attack they so desperately desired, they clearly have Arian Foster installed as their feature RB, without any particular threats to share carries, they clearly WANT him to succeed at the position, and they clearly have an offensive line that can assist him to do just that.

 

Clearly, I drafted him in every one of my leagues this season.

 

He may not have another 230/3 day all season long, but he's going to have many, many quality weeks, and for any team that seriously wants to contend for a fantasy title in 2010, he's virtually untradeable. His "trade value" is a moot point; his roster value is unassailable.

[fingerbang!! 0]

1pt ppr 6pt all td's INCLUDING passing TD's. Make the trade???

 

You obviously should make this trade. I can't even believe someone is even offering you a quarterback, let alone a top two QB, because without one you would be easy pickings each week.

 

QB's account for huge weekly points in 6 TD leagues, and you clearly need one.

 

Also, I too am high on Foster - drafted him in all my leagues - but seriously...you'll be getting the top scoring player in fantasy football added to your team. Ridiculous. Do it.

[Axe Elf 0]

you'll be getting the top scoring player in fantasy football added to your team

 

Correction: The top scoring player in fantasy football (at least so far) will be SUBTRACTED from your team.

 

You weren't really thinking of taking the advice of someone named "fingerbang!!" were you?

[fingerbang!! 0]

Alex Smith = 250 points (approx.)

Aaron Rodgers = +400 points

 

Arian Foster = 250 + 20 ppr (if he continues to perform as a top 10 RB the whole season)

Jahvid Best = 150 + 40 ppr (Arian Foster's replacement in your lineup)

 

Now, take into account the points they have already produced:

 

Alex Smith = 250 - 7 = 243 points left

Aaron Rodgers = 400 - 17 = 383 points left

 

Arian Foster = 270 - 42 = 228 points left

Jahvid Best = 190 - 20 = 170 points left

 

So, for the rest of the season:

 

Alex Smith = 16.2 pts/game

Aaron Rodgers = 25.5 pts/game

 

Arian Foster = 15.2 pts/game

Jahvid Best = 11.3 pts/game

 

 

*Rodgers and Best should provide you with more points on a weekly basis than Alex Smith and Arian Foster in a 6 point all TD, PPR league.

 

Now, obviously these are just projections, but if anything I over-projected for Foster and under-projected for Rodgers. However, I am surprised at how close the scoring is (5.4 points per week). Keeping Foster also seemingly provides you with more depth on your roster in case a likely scenario involving Best or Jamaal Charles getting injured were to occur; Ricky Williams is a solid #3-4 running back as well so depth may not be a big issue for you.

 

So, assuming Arian Foster continues to perform as a top 10 running back (as Axe Elf believes he will), this trade really isn't as cut and dry as I first thought.

 

Personally, I would make the trade for Aaron Rodgers, but if you believe in Arian Foster as strongly as Axe Elf then ultimately keeping him may be a safer bet.

 

 

 

[Axe Elf 0]

Well, that was a lot of bluster to ultimately agree with me.

 

And you "underprojected" for Rodgers at "400+" points? That's an average of 25+ points per week when he only got 17 in Week 1, and he's potentially losing some of his run support with the Grant injury. Further, I never encouraged the guy to ride out the season with Alex Smith; I recommended that he pick up Bradford, Hasselbeck, Garrard or Anderson (preferably Bradford)--to get a better QB for free, rather than trading away his best player for one. So making a season-long comparison between Rodgers and Smith isn't particularly relevant anyway.

 

In any case, thanks for playing, sorry we don't have any lovely parting gifts for you.

[minnickman 0]

Obviously Foster won't run for 230yds and 3td's in every game, nor will he get 33 carries..So do you sell him high now?

 

Im hurt at QB with KOLB and Alex Smith.

 

If I pull the trigger on this trade my starting RB's will be Charles and Best..in a PPR league it could be a lot worse. My new team would be:

 

QB - Rodgers

RB- Charles / Best (with Ricky Williams on the bench)

WR- Moss / R. White

TE- Celek

DEF

K

 

1pt ppr 6pt all td's INCLUDING passing TD's. Make the trade???

i do it 6 points for passing tds and your two qb arent going to put up big numbers the qb is the most important position in your league

[fingerbang!! 0]

Well, that was a lot of bluster to ultimately agree with me.

 

And you "underprojected" for Rodgers at "400+" points? That's an average of 25+ points per week when he only got 17 in Week 1, and he's potentially losing some of his run support with the Grant injury. Further, I never encouraged the guy to ride out the season with Alex Smith; I recommended that he pick up Bradford, Hasselbeck, Garrard or Anderson (preferably Bradford)--to get a better QB for free, rather than trading away his best player for one. So making a season-long comparison between Rodgers and Smith isn't particularly relevant anyway.

 

In any case, thanks for playing, sorry we don't have any lovely parting gifts for you.

 

 

Even Rodgers admitted it was his worst game he has had, so yes, I believe 25+ points per game is to be expected especially with the loss of Ryan Grant. The league benefits heavy passers which Rodgers will now be asked to be, and his ability to run - even in the redzone - will come into play more often now as well. Mind you Aaron Rodgers put up 434 points last season with only 1/2 of that time spent with Jermichael Finley on the field.

 

Also, I don't know who is available on the waiver wire in his league at QB. Garrard could put up solid numbers over the course of the season, but none of the others listed would provide the value which Alex Smith or Kolb affords him. I simply picked Alex Smith because he offers the best known option (waiver wire is unknown) for weekly points on his current roster over the course of the season.

 

Mind you that my projection for Arian Foster at 270 would have put him solidly as the 5th best running back last season behind:

Chris Johnson (379), Adrian Peterson (308), Maurice Jones-Drew (308), Ray Rice (306), with Frank Gore sixth at 266 points. This projection is far more unlikely for a first season starter in a pass first offense than Aaron Rodgers' projection - a projection which he outperformed by

2 points/game last season (27.1). However, you failed to mention that aspect.

 

I didn't agree with you. I recommended making the trade of Arian Foster for Aaron Rodgers.

[Axe Elf 0]

This is the last I'm going to say on the subject, because it's getting a little silly now, nitpicking over 2 pts per week in a season-long projection and such. If you don't believe me now, you'll just have to wait until the end of the season to admit I was right.

 

You see, there's a little thing called "regression to the mean" that tells me that Rodgers won't have the same kind of year in 2010 that he had in 2009. It's a complicated statistical concept for most football-minded Neanderthals to grasp, but it basically says that after observing one particularly high or low sample, the next sample is much more likely to be closer to the average than further from the average. Thus, Rodgers being the #4 QB last year in both yardage and TDs is much more likely to rank LOWER this season than he is to rank higher, at #1, #2, or #3. Not that he can't still be a top 10 QB, but according to the laws of statistics, he will have fewer yards and fewer TDs this season than he did last season.

 

So much for the statistical argument. Statistics mean nothing, right? There's another little thing called a "schedule" which also tells me that Rodgers won't have the same kind of year in 2010 that he had in 2009. Since this piece of information is available to anyone who cares to look (unlike the statistical concepts that require a specialized area of education), I'm a little surprised that so many are so high on Rodgers this year. Still, since you seem to be one of the deluded, I'll have to walk you through it.

 

In 2009, Rodgers' interdivisional and interconference opponents included St. Louis, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, San Francisco, and Seattle, not to mention playind Detroit twice in intradivisional games. Rodgers' numbers in those games were, expectedly, quite solid--269/2, 246/3, 266/2, 344/2, and 237/1, respectively, and he raped Detroit for 358/2 and 348/3. When he played teams like Dallas and the two games with Chicago, his production was a little more modest--189/1, 184/1, and 180/0.

 

In 2010, the schedule gives Green Bay more Dallas-type opponents than St. Louis-type opponents. They started out vs. Philadelphia and Rodgers put up 188/2. In upcoming games, they get Miami, the Jets, Atlanta, New England, the Giants, Washington, Dallas again, and of course, their two games with Chicago. That's NINE games where you might expect little more than 200/1 out of Rodgers, based on his performance record against solid teams. Now, Green Bay does get Buffalo this week, and San Francisco again later in the year, and of course their two games with Detroit, but Ndamukong Suh might have something to say about his production in those games this time around.

 

So, for subtle statistical reasons and for obvious glaring reasons, Rodgers may indeed be a top 10 QB this year--but he won't be much more than that. Foster will easily be a top 5 RB, if not #1. Houston doesn 't want to be a pass first offense (research Gary Kubiak's coaching history), they just haven 't had a choice--until now. Trading Foster to get Rodgers is a mistake, and that's obvious to me now. I'm just trying to help people like you for whom it won't become obvious for several weeks. Take the help or reject it, it's all gonna work out the same in the end.

[T-Bone- 0]

I have foster and I knew he was gonna be huge and he was. I won my week 1 matchup by almost 80 pts...that said ,with 6 pt Pass TDs, I'd make that deal.