Ray_T

ok point made. it has happened twice.

I'd be surprised if he falls into round 3. I'm just telling you where I assess the risk.

yep and people have been drafting people coming back from ACL surgery ever since because one phenominal athlete came back from the surgery in 8 months (or something stupid like that) and performed like a champ. I dont think I've ever seen this happen before or since. ADP is just one hell of an athlete with some kind of superhuman abilty to heal from injury. Others would call him a freak of nature (in a good way) to that end, I never put people on a DND list. I always project a value taking the injury(and risk associated with it) into account and when I hit that point I pull the trigger. but I am very meticulous about how I apply my modifiers when I make adjustments for injury. often it gives me an advantage, but sometimes I blow it. there are times when you project a guy to return in 24 months and draft him and guess what.... hes not ready or it turns out hes done. that happens too. like it or not an ACL injury still has the potential to end the career of some players. its not as common as it once was, but it still will occasionally happen. so its not an exact science. its mostly about calculating the odds and getting it right. and when you pick a guy coming back from an ACL tear there is still like a 3-5% chance that injury was a career killer. likely a 3% chance he recovers like ADP did. but for the rest, its typically 16-20 months. +/- a couple months.

I also agree he is the real deal. in the draft analysis I looked at the tape and found his to be the most impressive. then I stupidly went out and spent a lot of draft capital to take Caleb in my keeper league because I felt he had better talent around him and was more likely to make an early impact. I rejected my own analysis because I felt the situation was better and Caleb had far better WR and I've regretted it since. this kid is so good that none of that actually mattered. I'd be surprised if he regressed and if he does it will be a mild regression. This kid has it. There is no denying that.

I thought there was some risk last year due to the large workload he has had over his career. but he was 30 at the time and was going from a lesser O ine to a better O line. While a lot of RB's hit the wall at around 30, I figured the odds were pretty good the two would offset each other. I also figured a lot of his game is built around power. Not speed. so losing a half step will affect him but not by as much as other RB's but now he is 31. in terms of the # of RB who put up RB1 numbers at this age, the field has shrunk fairly substantially compared to the # of RB's who have put up RB1 numbers at the age of 30. for me he has reached a tipping point in terms of this and I'd say the odds are at least 50-50 that he will disappoint if taken in the first 2 rounds. So risk wise, hes a coin flip if going in round 1 or 2. if he falls into round 3 the odds drop off a fair bit as the bar is considerably lower. There is no doubt in my mind that whether he produces or not, this is likely his last year being drafted as a RB1(at least some will still draft him as a RB1). and he has had one Hell of a Career. I will admit. I am a fan. not many RB's in the history of the game actually run through people like he does/did. but he is very close to the end of the line. I really hope he has another big year, but a part of me feels like he will put up a Meh type year or will get injured and that will be his last hurrah. to be clear, most RB careers at this age end in injury and when they come back they are unable to perform. food for your thoughts.

looks like he went Zero RB. Strategy can work if you nail your WR/QB picks, and I do like his WR and Hurts at QB is about as good as it gets for fantasy. I think he does have a chance to pull it off if the RB he does select outperform their draft position. It has been my experience that the Zero RB strategy has its best chance to work when you are the only one in the draft using that general strategy. Robb also went Zero RB, so I guess we shall see how that works out for the two of them. Overall I think it was a well done draft. good job guys.

Yeah, thats what it feels like doesnt it?

more often than not I've found this to be more of a joke thread myself. occasionally you will see some serous predictions but there is a lot of nonsense here too. My recommendation is not to take this thread TOO seriously.

I get where you are coming from. but at the same time there are definitely some players who get injured more than average and some who just never seem to get hurt. while this is not the sole reason to pick or reject a player, I'd suggest that its important in determining risk. there are an awful lot of people who ignore this in their risk analysis, and players prone to injury will sometimes not be drafted when they should. without a doubt injury history of the player needs to factor into your analysis and ranking system. if you dont do it, you probably should. determining risk of a player with injury isnt just about saying hes injured and not performing. you actually need to research the reasons and the recovery timelines as well. ACL injuries are generally 16-20 month injuries. you can usually play in 12 months, but likely wont be able to perform at 100% at that point. There are exceptions to this, but not many. If the ACL is combined with an additional ligament injury or meniscus, you can likely tack on 6-12 months onto that recovery time as the rehab is slower and more difficult. there is also the risk of additional soft tissue injuries after returning from surgery (especially if you return early) these are the numbers I go with and I've researched this fairly extensively a couple years back so I'm reasonably confident in this recommendation. I have also not seen anything recently that suggests the numbers have changed on this recently. if you go back I have made similar posts to this effect. feel free to reference those if you like.

if you mean the burgers at the tailgate party, then yeah hes gonna cook.

agreed. the Raiders might have been one of the top 3 dysfunctional organizations in the NFL over the last 10-15 years. they may not have been the worst every year, but they were consistently very bad. There were a number of years where if someone asked you to name his WR most of the people in the fantasy community couldnt do it. Thats how bad his WR were and even then he managed to put up average to above average numbers (depending on the year) not saying he deserves to be in the hall of fame or anything, but hes better than his stats would indicate.

yeah that was a classic case of ruining the QB by not investing in your O line. it puzzles me that teams still do this. you would think they'd learn their lesson but that is clearly not the case. If I had a poor line and I was spending big time to move up in the draft to grab a QB or using a #1 overall, the first thing I'd do is I'd see if I have a good defensive player that I could trade straight across for an O lineman. throw in a draft pick if need be but get at least one solid O line guy. 2nd round pick could likely get you a decent guard or centre. and you can likely sign a free agent to plug a third hole. At that point the line still has holes, but likely at least is borderline passable. then what you do is you dont start your new QB in game 1. let him watch a few games and aim for a start after the teams bye week (or mid season whichever is later)and work on some things to get him ready. if he gets a cup of coffee in the 2nd half of the season, you have draft picks next year to draft a plug and play O lineman in year 2. Maybe sign a solid free agent as well at that point and the line (hopefully) isnt an issue. sure the defense you robbed to fix the line will need work but my general belief is that defenders are more likely to make an immediate impact than offensive guys who can sometimes take a couple years. so the opportunity will be there to rebuild the Defense. it is a process. but too many teams decide to go for the shiny new prospect on offense (wr, RB, TE) when they should be making the non sexy OT/OG pick.

well, on this one issue I'll say this. it does not matter how good your player is if they are not on the field. to that end the best ability is availability but nearly all players have it. so then you go to the tiebreakers. which would involve the skill of the player

one thing I will say. in most leagues it has been my experience if you have a RB injury, RB's seem to be harder to trade for than WR most of the time. for that reason I give the tie to the RB when I value a RB and a WR roughly equally. but that is my personal preference

I really liked Ray davis when I saw him play. I'd like to see what this kid could do with more playing time