remote controller 143 Posted August 17, 2010 After the complicated last turn Ray faced, this one was a no brainer and he nailed. There were no other options for these picks with what he already had rostered. Clark/Crabtree Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 4,207 Posted August 17, 2010 After the complicated last turn Ray faced, this one was a no brainer and he nailed. There were no other options for these picks with what he already had rostered. Clark/Crabtree There goes the blind squirrel/nut euphemism.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted August 17, 2010 20 picks before I picked again + only 2 qbs left I would feel comfortable as my starter + 4 owners without qbs = Rivers pick here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevinv86 1 Posted August 17, 2010 May be a little early but this man is a animal when it comes to receptions. Yes only few months off injury but 5th round im willing to take the risk. Wes Welker 5th round had to do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 4,207 Posted August 17, 2010 Welker at 5.03 is early for my taste. There are still plenty of equitable producers still out there without injury concerns... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ICEMAN 44 Posted August 17, 2010 Welker at 5.03 is early for my taste. There are still plenty of equitable producers still out there without injury concerns... Heads up, RLLD. If Kevin didn't take him, I was going to select him. Welker will be ready to roll Week 1. He may not be up to full speed until a few weeks into the season, but barring future injuries, I would expect at least 90 receptions and 7 TD's from Welker this year. I live just south of Boston and everyone says that he looks fantastic. He is just going to be held out of the first couple of preseason games as a precaution. ICEMAN Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 4,207 Posted August 17, 2010 Heads up, RLLD. If Kevin didn't take him, I was going to select him. Welker will be ready to roll Week 1. He may not be up to full speed until a few weeks into the season, but barring future injuries, I would expect at least 90 receptions and 7 TD's from Welker this year. I live just south of Boston and everyone says that he looks fantastic. He is just going to be held out of the first couple of preseason games as a precaution. ICEMAN Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FeelingMN 273 Posted August 17, 2010 I would have taken Welker over Bowe, so I think it was a good pick. Every player in this area of the draft has some sort of question mark, but all accounts have Welker's knee looking fine. If he doesn't suffer any setbacks, I think it's feasibile he puts up 100/1000/6....easily. I'm not sure there are any other receivers available that can match those numbers.....good pick Kevinv86. I'm a little skiddish about Bowe....and the Chiefs in general. It's hard to draw conclusions after just one preseason game, but it looks like the Chiefs O-line is horrible. That's probably not such a bad thing for Charles who can make people miss, but it doesn't speak well for your top receiver who won't have any time to get downfield. Points in garbage time are just as valuable as at any other time, so that's what I'm banking on here. I'm not drafting Bowe as anything other than a WR2....and I would have preferred to pair him with a WR1 stud (Calvin/White) but the early run on receivers squashed that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gladiators 1,984 Posted August 17, 2010 I really wanted to take Finley over Gates, but just couldn't pull the trigger. Gates is the model of consistency, but Finley has a TON of upside. I'll definitely be targeting him in my drafts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteWonder 2,729 Posted August 17, 2010 Gates is my top ranked TE. was hoping he might slip. oh well, ill take Addai who is sneaky good in PPR. One glaring RB still on the board but i found it easy to pass on him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WhiteWonder 2,729 Posted August 17, 2010 nice pick of Celek, Jeepz. He was my target at TE. I think he will be great this year based on the relationship he has with his QB. Very much a Romo/Witten type butt-buddyness. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 143 Posted August 17, 2010 nice pick of Celek, Jeepz. He was my target at TE. I think he will be great this year based on the relationship he has with his QB. Very much a Romo/Witten type butt-buddyness. 'cept Celek GETS redzone targets. It was a solid pick! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeepz 0 Posted August 17, 2010 HAHAHA, I was really stressin' over that pick, went back and forth once then just left it, THEN I read the comments here and I feel better. We'll see if it does me any good, my RBs are atrocious! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted August 17, 2010 Also don't like Welker this early; it could pay off, but just have my doubts that a player with ACL issues and game is predicated on speed and precision routes is going to just 'bounce back'. Bowe is player I considered when I picked Rivers. See Gates pick, but think Finley/Witten just a touch early, but as much as I like Celek (had great games with Kolb at qb last year), think that was too early for him by like a round. Ice that RB corp could be monster...or fall right on it's face. Though considering WRs there I don't blame you. Just thought you would have went Beanie instead. Like Addai pick, boosted in ppr format...another player I considered at my pick...if we started a flex I may have taken him there. Now Beanie pick I like there Jeepz...not sold on him overall, but value here, he's a solid pick. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeepz 0 Posted August 17, 2010 I waffled, big time, and then just left if. Probably should have gone RB/RB given my roster, but opted for leaving Celek there a) because I wasn't sure if I should change it once it was on the board and 2) eh, I just wasn't excited by the RBs period, so why take two of them. Sorry for any confusion for anyone that saw the Celek/Wells/Celek change there. Hope I didn't break any sort of unwritten rule there, but it's back to what it originally was. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted August 17, 2010 NO worries Jeepz...hey, you're taking this in stride, but your pick is your pick...we're just giving our opinions in effort of learning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeepz 0 Posted August 17, 2010 NAn, on Celek, I agree that he could be better value down half a dozen or so picks, but for me, thing was, he was NEVER gonna last til my next turn. At the point where I'm looking at a bunch of borderline RB2s or a top-flight TE, I wanted SOMEone I could be excited about Especially when I'm looking to reposition my roster towards the pass catchers. So enough of that. Regarding Finley, I've got him tied at the top of my TE list, and am hoping to land him in my auction draft after The Other Top Five go for premium prices. I'm really looking forward to seeing what you all have to say about the TEs that round out the top 10. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted August 18, 2010 NAn, on Celek, I agree that he could be better value down half a dozen or so picks, but for me, thing was, he was NEVER gonna last til my next turn. looking back I have to concede this...it's same reasoning I used taking Rivers where I did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeepz 0 Posted August 18, 2010 I love it when I sound right! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RLLD 4,207 Posted August 18, 2010 looking back I have to concede this...it's same reasoning I used taking Rivers where I did. Agree. I try to view the pick as more than simply a "spot". The pick encompasses everything that has happened before, and will likely transpire up to my next pick. Therefore the pick has a value range, one that will either support or challenge a group of players that should hearken to the overall strategy, based on the current construct. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
