Fraft commentary for rounds 1-4

[whoisjgalt 0]

Here's where dolfan should have posted his SEAN comment - thanks.

 

[ 07-11-2003: Message edited by: whoisjgalt ]

[Guest dolfan02]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

Here's where dolfan should have posted his SEAN comment - thanks.

 

I'm over it.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by dolfan02:

 

I'm over it.

It's a good thing you're over it because I was just about to put a voodoo spell on Clinton Portis.

[Willie McGee 0]

I wanted Portis, but am happy to have McAllister.

[Walter34 3]

Looking to trade down perhaps. Any fockers interested?

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by Willie McGee:

I wanted Portis, but am happy to have McAllister.

I also wanted Portis, but I pretty much knew that I would have to choose between Alexander and McCallister. I have them 4-5 on my board, and they are interchangeable in my eyes.

[Guest dolfan02]

Originally posted by fricker66:

I also wanted Portis, but I pretty much knew that I would have to choose between Alexander and McCallister. I have them 4-5 on my board, and they are interchangeable in my eyes.

 

It's impossible to overlook the numbers Portis got last year playing basically half a season. The only knocks on him that I can see are that he's got less experience than LT2 or Ricky so hard to know if he can produce when defenses are keying on him. And there's always the chance that being in Denver they'll start experimenting with the RB they just drafted.

[whoisjgalt 0]

Originally posted by dolfan02:

 

It's impossible to overlook the numbers Portis got last year playing basically half a season. The only knocks on him that I can see are that he's got less experience than LT2 or Ricky so hard to know if he can produce when defenses are keying on him. And there's always the chance that being in Denver they'll start experimenting with the RB they just drafted.

 

I was making my choice between RW and LT - I have a hard time trusting Shanny's decisions when it comes to RB's.

[Willie McGee 0]

Originally posted by fricker66:

I also wanted Portis, but I pretty much knew that I would have to choose between Alexander and McCallister. I have them 4-5 on my board, and they are interchangeable in my eyes.

 

My sentiments exactly.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

I was making my choice between RW and LT - I have a hard time trusting Shanny's decisions when it comes to RB's.

I think that's the main reason that Portis is #3, and I agree with your analysis.

[Guest dolfan02]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

 

I was making my choice between RW and LT - I have a hard time trusting Shanny's decisions when it comes to RB's.

 

No question. RW and LT are probably the closest to sure things among the RB's, but of the rest Portis has the most "upside".

[whoisjgalt 0]

Originally posted by fricker66:

I think that's the main reason that Portis is #3, and I agree with your analysis.

 

The two years of age was the tiebreaker for me. Knowing that Marty ball means at least 350 carries per year and seeing his nice receiving numbers as an add-on sold me.

[Willie McGee 0]

I have Portis #1 on my current draft board.

 

2. LT2
3. Ricky
4. Alexander
5. McAllister  

[gratefulted 14]

Originally posted by Willie McGee:

I have Portis #1 on my current draft board.

 

2. LT2
3. Ricky
4. Alexander
5. McAllister  

 

Damn near picked him, I just could'nt pass up Ricky.

[Guest dolfan02]

Damn near picked him, I just could'nt pass up Ricky.[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

That's too bad. I would have enjoyed a full year of Bouve-like Ricky manlove.

 

[ 07-10-2003: Message edited by: dolfan02 ]

[Walter34 3]

enough with you bastards talking about your stud RBs.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by Walter34:

enough with you bastards talking about your stud RBs.

Ron Dayne is still available.

[Willie McGee 0]

Faulk at 1.06 could be an absolute steal.

[whoisjgalt 0]

Originally posted by Willie McGee:

Faulk at 1.06 could be an absolute steal.

 

I got him at 1.07 in the Dungeon fraft earlier this Spring - I was happy.

[Walter34 3]

top 7 are very predictable. Now it gets interesting ...

[whoisjgalt 0]

Pennken has no work access. He leaves work at 4pm ET and will likely be online here at 5pm ET. Meanwhile, we have a frafting break.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by Willie McGee:

Faulk at 1.06 could be an absolute steal.

In a re-draft league, I would have ranked Faulk ahead of both McCallister and Alexander, and perhaps ahead of Portis.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

Pennken has no work access. He leaves work at 4pm ET and will likely be online here at 5pm ET. Meanwhile, we have a frafting break.

Is Pennken going to provide some lists or pre-drafts for the future of this draft? Otherwise, those of us who draft after him in round 2 might as well take off until Monday.

[whoisjgalt 0]

Originally posted by fricker66:

Is Pennken going to provide some lists or pre-drafts for the future of this draft? Otherwise, those of us who draft after him in round 2 might as well take off until Monday.

 

Yes. But for today we're not forcing that yet. Starting tomorrow everyone will know that we're frafting so a call at work out of the blue won't be a shock (mongo and I have his work number). For today, we'll live with a more leasurely pace.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

 

Yes. But for today we're not forcing that yet. Starting tomorrow everyone will know that we're frafting so a call at work out of the blue won't be a shock (mongo and I have his work number). For today, we'll live with a more leasurely pace.

That's what I figured. Good stuff.

[Guest dolfan02]

Rookie question -- How does the pre-draft work? Do you just enter a list of players and then when your pick comes up it automatically takes the top player on your list? Is there any way to separate it out by position in case you have to run more than one pick?

[whoisjgalt 0]

Originally posted by dolfan02:

Rookie question -- How does the pre-draft work? Do you just enter a list of players and then when your pick comes up it automatically takes the top player on your list? Is there any way to separate it out by position in case you have to run more than one pick?

 

Yes and No respectively. If you need to be more sophisticated in prefrafting, email your list to a couple geeks with very exacting instructions.

[whoisjgalt 0]

Hoos First is prefrafted for 01.12 and 02.01.

[whoisjgalt 0]

According to Mike, Hoos First now has access. We should see him start posting here when he's done with work tonight.

[Guest dolfan02]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

 

Yes and No respectively. If you need to be more sophisticated in prefrafting, email your list to a couple geeks with very exacting instructions.

 

Got it, thanks. Also, my share of your exorbitant league fees are in the mail.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by dolfan02:

Also, my share of your exorbitant league fees are in the mail.

I gave you a $.25 tip.

[Dalem 0]

C'mon pennken; you're just asking for a spanking.

[whoisjgalt 0]

If we want to have a pool on the side - someone please feel free to arrange it. It'll be voluntary, but I'd chip in. Just need:

 

1) Name and address for payment.

2) How much?

3) What happens if none of the participants wins the league? Carry the money over or something else?

4) How to payout the winnings?

 

In Chimi last year, 6 of us chipped in $15 each and everyone choose a restaurant to which they'd get a gift cert if they won. The money carried over. Any interest? If so - start a new thread for that.

[fricker66 91]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

If we want to have a pool on the side...

I like the idea of a small side pool -- If nobody else wants to take the reigns on that, I'll volunteer and start a new thread about it.

 

[ 07-10-2003: Message edited by: fricker66 ]

[Guest dolfan02]

Originally posted by fricker66:

I like the idea of a small side pool -- If nobody else wants to take the reigns on that, I'll volunteer and start a new thread about it.

 

[ 07-10-2003: Message edited by: fricker66 ]

 

I'm in if you want to fuhner the baby pool.

[whoisjgalt 0]

I think everyone was hoping someone else would spare them from having to pick Holmes. At #8 overall, this could be a fabulous value - or a total bust. If he holds out or isn't at full health - then you have an old RB. If he's playing at full strength behind his great line, then you've got the ability to get the league's top point scorer at the 8th pick. Risky, but probably lot's more upside than any other choice here.

[Guest dolfan02]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

Holmes

 

A good pick at that spot from a risk/reward perspective. I wouldn't have taken him any earlier, particularly with the younger RB's available.

[pennken 0]

Originally posted by whoisjgalt:

I think everyone was hoping someone else would spare them from having to pick Holmes. At #8 overall, this could be a fabulous value - or a total bust. If he holds out or isn't at full health - then you have an old RB. If he's playing at full strength behind his great line, then you've got the ability to get the league's top point scorer at the 8th pick. Risky, but probably lot's more upside than any other choice here.

 

I had a hard time making this pick. If this wasn't a dynasty league, I would have picked him no questions asked. But his age and injury were certainly a concern. I then remembered a stat that I once read about the average NFL tenure for the RB position. I think it was like 4 years. This helped me remember that any RB can get injured at any time and many of them do. So since there is no sure thing, I took a gamble. Hopefully it will pay off.

 

You're right whoisjgalt, the rest of the RB's didn't exactly excite me either at 1.08.

 

And I thought it was a little too early for David PatterN.

[gratefulted 14]

Originally posted by pennken:

 

David PatterN.

 

PatteRn

[pennken 0]

Originally posted by gratefulted:

 

PatteRn

 

PatterN, PatteRn, PattErn, you can't deny that he's got mad skillz.