Ray_T

I do my own. I do usually look at one or two rankings. pick the one which aligns best with my own thoughts (so I dont have to make as many adjustments) and then tweak that sheet to fit my needs. there are always certain players where the person doing the rankings doesnt share the same opinion on certain players. I dont just do this randomly. I do based on my own research and knowledge. for example my QB ratings differ a fair bit from a lot of the big ranking sheets. though looking at some I have a sneaky suspicion some of those rankings are done by running a regression based on past performances. far less labour intensive, but also less accurate when a player has special circumstance surrounding poor production in one year. when I see a traditionally productive player have a bad year I usually try to find out why and if those conditions that led to the bad year still exist. if they dont, I usually throw out the bad year and write it off to whatever it is (injury, bad coach, injured starting QB) so I never go strictly based on the rankings and occasionally will go against those same rankings. if you do go against what the rankings tell you and you are right, it can mean you have one or two more impact players on your roster. a significant advantage. I also like to look at cases where one ranking has a player ranked high while another has that same player ranked low. that usuallly is a good sign you need to do extra research to find out who is right and who is wrong.

I cannot disagree. When fully healthy it could be Chubb but he will never be fully healthy again I suspect

this just reinforces that Mixon will be the guy once he gets healthy.... if you can get him as your RB3/4 you are laughing. he will come back and get some decent points in time for the stretch run and fantasy playoffs. He will help you at the right time and you wont need to pay a high draft pick to do it.

its close. but I do view cook as a possible keeper in future years. so due to age, thats where I value him more. the reality is the difference between the two is mostly personal preference. if we polled I'm sure the breakdown will be somewhat split. but I also think Cook is an underrated player in fantasy.

and I do think benson gets more love this year than he got last season. if the team is clearly not a playoff contender, you can bet they will be looking at options and one of those is at RB. they need to know if Benson can get the job done or if they need to draft someone. so I do think he gets a few games where he is the lead guy.

yeah the money is more of a one year time horizon. if you are looking at potential future keepers, that makes Cook the more valueable guy as this could potentially be the last year Conner is fantasy relevant. in keeper leagues its always present value + future value. (unless you are a contender for the title... then you lean heavily on present value)

I agree. we did it as an experiment one year and never looked back.

if these are the only choices Cook is your guy. It is also worth noting that Conner is 30 years old. At this point there is often a drop in production for a RB. Not as big a deal if you are Henry and getting 1900 yards on the ground, but for a 1000 yard rusher, that bumps you down the list into RB2 territory. I also suspect they may give Benson a heavier workload this year as they need to know if hes gonna be able to be the guy next year or if they need to draft someone. it is possible Conner hits the wall a year later at 31 but you shouldnt bet on that in a keeper league. Younger guys are almost always more valueable than the old guys unless they are putting up Derek Henry type numbers

I suspected when Harvey was drafted someone would go on the chopping block Estime's stats on the surface dont look too bad. I think 4.1 yards per carry. my guess is that maybe there is another issue none of us are aware of. Though he was only a 5th round pick, so maybe the team just didnt feel all that invested in him as a player.

I am surprised at that one. hes one of those guys when you need a yard, he gets you 3. when you need 4 yards... he still gets you 3. great short yardage back but not good for much else. but he has a very specific role. I figured hed be safe that way. I guarantee someone in need of a short yardage back will pick him up. he wont be unemployed for long

once in a while players like this who you think were gone will emerge again. Sometimes its not necessarily the player, but the situation. like it or not, all of us if put into the wrong situation can underperform at what we do. it doesnt matter if its football or the office, or even working doing manual labour. you get the wrong boss, have a few in the workplace you dont get along with, and suddenly you're struggling to keep your head above water. this isnt just a football thing. its a life thing. This happens in every profession. even football. Then perhaps said talented player has some off field issues (maybe a sick family member or their gal dumps him or who knows what else) and things fall apart. sometimes the difference between success and failure is a fine line. and if you dont play for a coach that understands you or if you play for an idiot of a coach, its hard for you to be the best version of yourself. either way, some of these guys were definitely in a bad situation. and bad organizations are pretty good at mishandling young talent. I'd argue if these guys are released, if the player was good enough, they will find themselves on another team. maybe in a better situation. this may not actually be the end.

no that was a salary dump. dude wants to get paid and they are not willing to pay him. in general, when you have to pay the player the price drops substantially unless that player is top 3 or so at his position.

sounds about right. hes not as one dimensional as you think. hes got some skills. Just not CMC skills. the reason hes the perfect add is that CMC actually isnt as good between the tackles and thats likely where hes gonna get hurt. In goal line situations, I'd likely run a 2 back set (maybe 3 back if you want a FB) and then split CMC out wide to take a person out of the box to cover him. then you can run up the gut or do a short pass depending on what the defense does. if the defense is dumb enough not to take a guy out of the box to cover CMC I suspect there will be a mismatch somewhere and a throw is the likely outcome. if they do, the run play becomes your likely result. its a nice damned if you do damned if you dont outcome. which is good if you are on the right side of that.

I think its clear you dont bring in a guy of Robinsons stature to be the third string guy. hes a #2 or a 1A if CMC isnt a full go. He was in the 1 or 1A role (depending on your perspective) last year with Ekeler. maybe hes leaning towards 1A here in San Fran, but I also think once CMC gets hurt hes the #1. I wouldnt even be surprised if they pull CMC in short yardage situations and keep Robinson to run it up the gut. Either way, I think this is a good move on the part of San Fran.