Week 3 Studs and Duds

[TD Ryan2 314]

FootballGuru -

Our first disconnect is that you are judging "good" based in fantasy points - I am judging based in how they play the "real" game of football.

But I'll play along with your fantasy points scored as a way to judge: 13 and 15 points is NOT good fantasy production out if a QB. How many points do you expect the bottom tier QBs to put up? QBs don't generally score less than 10 fantasy points - sure there are outlier games where a QB throws 5 or 6 int and ends up with 0 or negative points - but that's an aberration.

I'm not going to do the legwork for u here - but go research how often ANY QB scores less than 10 fantasy points - with your thinking and analysis you'll probably conclude that there has Never been a good defense in the NFL.

[loqutis 0]

It's 20 points for QBs. 13 for everyone else.

[loqutis 0]

Earl Bennett?!?!?!

He's had just as many 100 yard games as Dez Bryant since the midway point of 2010.

[loqutis 0]

It's 20 points for QBs. 13 for everyone else.

I would also argue that certain players at each position fall on the top or bottom of the scale . You expect far more points from A. Foster . (70 yards and a TD would be considered a poor game) but at the same time if B. Tate has this game, you'll be pretty happy, if you're forced to start him.

[loqutis 0]

Kolb tripled his output from week one to week two and Guru was brave enough to have faith in Kolb for week two telling people to go ahead and give him a start.

[TD Ryan2 314]

Kolb tripled his output from week one to week two and Guru was brave enough to have faith in Kolb for week two telling people to go ahead and give him a start.

Of course he did - he didn't even start the first game.

News flash! Starting against a good defense will yield more points than sitting against any defense (good or bad).

Bad QBs still average 10-15 fantasy points per week - go look at the PPG of QBs - you'll find the Ponders and NFL bottom dwellers hitting those numbers - you simply cannot say 13points or 17points means a guy played well or even was a good start as a fantasy QB.

[Djgb13 2,338]

Of course he did - he didn't even start the first game.

News flash! Starting against a good defense will yield more points than sitting against any defense (good or bad).

Bad QBs still average 10-15 fantasy points per week - go look at the PPG of QBs - you'll find the Ponders and NFL bottom dwellers hitting those numbers - you simply cannot say 13points or 17points means a guy played well or even was a good start as a fantasy QB.

 

 

I agree with this. To me good numbers for QB has to rank at least in the 20s. Anything below that is a bad performance.

[Matt Mueller 146]

The problem with 'recommending' Kolb is that no one, not 1 single person in any league anywhere, is going to be starting him in a normal 1 QB league this week. Someone who went QB late might be considering your other picks like Flacco, Palmer, Luck, ect but I guarantee you no one is starting a qb that is only 4% owned in yahoo leagues.

[Football_GURU 0]

Earl Bennett?!?!?!

 

yep. what makes you think he is not an option in a deeper league? I am always open to debate my picks.

[sperri40 12]

Martin? Charles Johnson?

 

What year is this?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This thread sucks.

[TD Ryan2 314]

The problem with 'recommending' Kolb is that no one, not 1 single person in any league anywhere, is going to be starting him in a normal 1 QB league this week. Someone who went QB late might be considering your other picks like Flacco, Palmer, Luck, ect but I guarantee you no one is starting a qb that is only 4% owned in yahoo leagues.

Correct.

and that is because he is not good and has not looked good under any circumstances this year. Nor has the New England defense looked bad at any point this year.

This is the whole debate for me.

Kolb and Locker have not looked good. New England defense has not looked bad. But this is what they're claiming.

 

Now recommend Flacco starting against New England this week - that is not bad advice - but it's because it is a home game and Flacco has looked very good so far. This is one of those games that looked like it could be a loss for New England before the season even started. New England defense looking bad to this point has nothing to do with why you may start Flacco this week.

[loqutis 0]

The problem with 'recommending' Kolb is that no one, not 1 single person in any league anywhere, is going to be starting him in a normal 1 QB league this week. Someone who went QB late might be considering your other picks like Flacco, Palmer, Luck, ect but I guarantee you no one is starting a qb that is only 4% owned in yahoo leagues.

 

You would have to have a big set to start Kolb but I wouldn't be shocked to see him out score Schaub, Frreman. and a couple other potential FF starters.

[KryptonKnights 6]

You listed Alfred Morris as a Stud, but would you start him over Murray or Curtis Martin?

 

I have Spiller in my flex spot, but can't decide whether to start Morris over Murray or Martin.

 

PPR league, so my gut says bench Morris.

 

Curtis Martin is back? Oh hell yeah:pointstosky:

[BuschWack 56]

Curtis Martin is back? Oh hell yeah:pointstosky:

 

Those were the days!

 

Curtis Martin Hall of Fame Speech

 

Could Doug and Curtis related?

 

[Football_GURU 0]

FootballGuru -

Our first disconnect is that you are judging "good" based in fantasy points - I am judging based in how they play the "real" game of football.

But I'll play along with your fantasy points scored as a way to judge: 13 and 15 points is NOT good fantasy production out if a QB. How many points do you expect the bottom tier QBs to put up? QBs don't generally score less than 10 fantasy points - sure there are outlier games where a QB throws 5 or 6 int and ends up with 0 or negative points - but that's an aberration.

I'm not going to do the legwork for u here - but go research how often ANY QB scores less than 10 fantasy points - with your thinking and analysis you'll probably conclude that there has Never been a good defense in the NFL.

 

Cam Newton scored under 5 points Thursday. Its a fantasy football discussion so how a team or player looks in real life isnt too much in the thought process.

 

again, someone could play Kolb or another low tier qb if their starter has a tough match up if you are a player who looks at latch ups. if i got 17 out of my back up qb and he outscored my starter that I sat I would be happy. That is what our advice is suppose to do, give you the not so obvious.

 

So, seeing how strong the giants D has played the last 2 weeks and if I have Vick, I may not want to play him next week so I would look at other options. Not many teams have 2 top 15 qbs. So, on a week like that id take 17 pts from a low tier qb.

 

wow, the horse has been fallen and beaten unmercifully.

 

bottom line, NE defense will be exposed on how bad they are and will be all year. Thats ok though.

[Matt Mueller 146]

again, someone could play Kolb or another low tier qb if their starter has a tough match up if you are a player who looks at latch ups. if i got 17 out of my back up qb and he outscored my starter that I sat I would be happy. That is what our advice is suppose to do, give you the not so obvious.

 

Just so I'm clear it would your recommendation to start Kolb vs the Eagles over Peyton, Freeman, Dalton, Vick and Rodgers this week?

[TD Ryan2 314]

According to FFToday Stats - the 21 - 35th ranked QBs in 2011 all averaged 15 to 17 PPG.

I still do not see where scoring 13, 15, or even 17 points is good or even above expectation as this is the average for the very worst

[Joey Gladstone 33]

Correct.

and that is because he is not good and has not looked good under any circumstances this year. Nor has the New England defense looked bad at any point this year.

This is the whole debate for me.

Kolb and Locker have not looked good. New England defense has not looked bad. But this is what they're claiming.

 

Now recommend Flacco starting against New England this week - that is not bad advice - but it's because it is a home game and Flacco has looked very good so far. This is one of those games that looked like it could be a loss for New England before the season even started. New England defense looking bad to this point has nothing to do with why you may start Flacco this week.

 

I get your point, but for one drive, after Skelton got hurt in week 1, Kevin Kolb did look pretty damn good.

[TennisMenace 156]

Whether you agree or not, this is by far the best thread on this board.

 

Hey Blitz, I love your style here. I apologize for the rudeness you have received here. They know not what they say.

 

:cheers:

[TheUsualSuspect 207]

Cam Newton scored under 5 points Thursday.

 

Please explain your scoring system. He earned 9 points in most leagues I come from. And this is not a debate about Cam, but do you ever state facts? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but you put out statement after statement with no credibility or logical reasoning.

[PATSSOX 22]

Mark Sanchez could be the worst QB in the history of the NFL. Well wait his backup may hold that title.

[PATSSOX 22]

Mark Sanchez could be the worst QB in the history of the NFL. Well wait his backup may hold that title.

 

I say it again, MARK SANCHEZ IS FOCKING AWFUL

[loqutis 0]

lol

 

Jackie Battle must start!!!

 

you fail

 

While he didn't Have the big game we thought he would, he was still the most productive RB in a San Diego uniform.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,603]

While he didn't Have the big game we thought he would, he was still the most productive RB in a San Diego uniform.

 

how the hell do you figure that???

 

A guy gets a 52 yard run in the last minute of the game, for a grand total of 3 carries and you're gonna take credit for that

 

BTW Ryan Mathews had 76 yards total, and 5 catches, (-1) for fumble he put up 11.6 in my league

[Matt Mueller 146]

Fock me I started Mark Sanchez and sat Darren McFadden.

[loqutis 0]

According to FFToday Stats - the 21 - 35th ranked QBs in 2011 all averaged 15 to 17 PPG.

I still do not see where scoring 13, 15, or even 17 points is good or even above expectation as this is the average for the very worst

 

You don't need us to tell you to start Ryan, Breese, Rogers every week. Those would be amazingly cheap and easy calls for us. once you eliminate the top no brainer starts every week, you're left with guys that hope to score more than 20 points a week. We try to offer an educated opinion on who you may want to take a second look at each week based on their matchup and past performance.

 

Kolb had 238 total yards 2TDs and 0 ints. I call that a good game for him and a nice call by Guru. But with your hard line standards that's 17 points and sucks.

[Matt Mueller 146]

how the hell do you figure that???

 

A guy gets a 52 yard run in the last minute of the game, for a grand total of 3 carries and you're gonna take credit for that

 

BTW Ryan Mathews had 76 yards total, and 5 catches, (-1) for fumble he put up 11.6 in my league

 

Let's not bring statistics and yards into this. We are talking production.

[Matt Mueller 146]

You don't need us to tell you to start Ryan, Breese, Rogers every week. Those would be amazingly cheap and easy calls for us. once you eliminate the top no brainer starts every week, you're left with guys that hope to score more than 20 points a week. We try to offer an educated opinion on who you may want to take a second look at each week based on their matchup and past performance.

 

Kolb had 238 total yards 2TDs and 0 ints. I call that a good game for him and a nice call by Guru. But with your hard line standards that's 17 points and sucks.

 

Not trying to give you guys a hard time, I actually do appreciate people posting projections and original thoughts here so we have something to discuss, but what about Kolb vs Philly looked good, either based on matchup or past performance?

 

Going into week 3:

 

Arizona was the 30th ranked passing offense with 350 total yards, 2 tds and 1.

 

Philly was the 4th ranked passing defense with 325 yards given up, 1 td and 5 int.

 

Kolb ranked no better than 22nd on anyone's start list this week.

 

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/players/kevin-kolb.php

 

 

It's easy to toss out a bunch of predictions and cherry pick the ones you hit but I just don't see any rational argument for recommending Kolb.

[nikki2200 4]

You don't need us to tell you to start Ryan, Breese, Rogers every week. Those would be amazingly cheap and easy calls for us. once you eliminate the top no brainer starts every week, you're left with guys that hope to score more than 20 points a week. We try to offer an educated opinion on who you may want to take a second look at each week based on their matchup and past performance.

 

Kolb had 238 total yards 2TDs and 0 ints. I call that a good game for him and a nice call by Guru. But with your hard line standards that's 17 points and sucks.

 

It might be a good game "for him" but it's not like it was a good week for a quarterback in FF. Which will probably put him in the bottom 50% of QBs in scoring this week. So who would your other QB option have to be to want to start Kolb?

 

This thread is confusing.

[TD Ryan2 314]

 

Not trying to give you guys a hard time, I actually do appreciate people posting projections and original thoughts

 

It's easy to toss out a bunch of predictions and cherry pick the ones you hit but I just don't see any rational argument for recommending Kolb.

[Stewburtx8 67]

Not trying to give you guys a hard time, I actually do appreciate people posting projections and original thoughts here so we have something to discuss, but what about Kolb vs Philly looked good, either based on matchup or past performance?

 

It's easy to toss out a bunch of predictions and cherry pick the ones you hit but I just don't see any rational argument for recommending Kolb.

 

 

The rational argument for recommending Kevin Kolb is that the Eagles somehow have no game plan to stop Larry Fitzgerald. Most teams would double or triple team him. Most teams would have their best CB (Asomugha) shadow him. But the Eagles are just downright confused every time Fitzgerald lines up in the slot. It's almost like they say "Huh, they can line their #1 WR up in the slot? I didn't know that." Then Larry runs free against safeties and nickelbacks. It's comical to watch (as was the whole Eagles game plan yesterday).

 

The problem with my "rational" argument for Kolb is that they recommended to SIT Larry Fitzgerald. I just don't see how you recommend Kolb without recommending Fitzgerald. The only way an Arizona QB is going to have a big game is if Larry Fitzgerald has a big game. Which he has done now two years in a row against the Eagles: 16 catches, 260 yards, 3 TD's.

 

By the way, I only used this response to continue to complain about the Eagles awful coaching. The Kolb recommendation really didn't make sense to me when I saw it either.

[Football_GURU 0]

The rational argument for recommending Kevin Kolb is that the Eagles somehow have no game plan to stop Larry Fitzgerald. Most teams would double or triple team him. Most teams would have their best CB (Asomugha) shadow him. But the Eagles are just downright confused every time Fitzgerald lines up in the slot. It's almost like they say "Huh, they can line their #1 WR up in the slot? I didn't know that." Then Larry runs free against safeties and nickelbacks. It's comical to watch (as was the whole Eagles game plan yesterday).

 

The problem with my "rational" argument for Kolb is that they recommended to SIT Larry Fitzgerald. I just don't see how you recommend Kolb without recommending Fitzgerald. The only way an Arizona QB is going to have a big game is if Larry Fitzgerald has a big game. Which he has done now two years in a row against the Eagles: 16 catches, 260 yards, 3 TD's.

 

By the way, I only used this response to continue to complain about the Eagles awful coaching. The Kolb recommendation really didn't make sense to me when I saw it either.

 

Kyle and I have our own opinions. I liked Kolb as a sleeper and I was right, he didnt like Fitz. maybe we should break it down by who picked who. sorry for the confusion and thank you for the input

[Bruce Benedict 0]

I liked Kolb as a sleeper and I was right.

Standard scoring-wise, he currently sits at tied for 16th among the week's QB, with two to play. He might not have crapped the bed, and the Cards did well to win that game, but you weren't "right" by any reasonable definition in telling people Kolb was a start.

 

You were "right" on Flacco. And Vick. And clearly and certifiably "wrong" on, like, Sanchez and Dalton. Kolb is a nothing as a data point for this week, at best.

[Matt Mueller 146]

Kyle and I have our own opinions. I liked Kolb as a sleeper and I was right, he didnt like Fitz. maybe we should break it down by who picked who. sorry for the confusion and thank you for the input

 

Jeez. I hate to burst your bubble but no you were not 'right' on Kolb. To be 'right' on a QB sleeper they need to score like a QB 1 in the week you recommended them. Kolb is currently scored as the #15th best fantasy QB this week.

 

http://www.fftoday.com/stats/playerstats.php?Season=2012&GameWeek=3&PosID=10&LeagueID=133251

[shovelheadt 62]

this is blatant mis-information

 

Now it isn't.

[loqutis 0]

Not trying to give you guys a hard time, I actually do appreciate people posting projections and original thoughts

 

It's easy to toss out a bunch of predictions and cherry pick the ones you hit.

 

If we were going for the easy lay ups we would be sure to include the I brainer picks every week. Just to pad our stats. but we're not interested in saying "Look at us"

 

I feel we give solid advice backed by feasible logic in our podcast. I really hope you guys listen, take what we have to say, add it to the rest if the info you absorb every week and formulate your own opinion.

 

You can think we're crazy, think we're wrong, that's fine. But I hope you enjoy the show.

 

--------

 

By the way. Rodgers isn't looking too hot and NE gave up over 500 yards of offense against Baltimore.

[nikki2200 4]

If we were going for the easy lay ups we would be sure to include the I brainer picks every week. Just to pad our stats. but we're not interested in saying "Look at us"

 

I feel we give solid advice backed by feasible logic in our podcast. I really hope you guys listen, take what we have to say, add it to the rest if the info you absorb every week and formulate your own opinion.

 

You can think we're crazy, think we're wrong, that's fine. But I hope you enjoy the show.

 

--------

 

By the way. Rodgers isn't looking too hot and NE gave up over 500 yards of offense against Baltimore.

 

I stopped reading there. If you aren't interested in saying "look at us" why in gods name are you doing a "podcast" on FF and advertising it on low rent FF websites?

 

Brutha please.

[DrG 94]

I think the rush to get out the podcast produced some editorial miscues and this led to people complaining about misinformation ...

 

Football Guru has been doing this for awhile - there were some good calls made, but if you are going to go live ... the delivery has to be tightened up

[loqutis 0]

I think the rush to get out the podcast produced some editorial miscues and this led to people complaining about misinformation ...

 

Football Guru has been doing this for awhile - there were some good calls made, but if you are going to go live ... the delivery has to be tightened up

 

In the show or on this thread

 

Should we call it Studs Duds and guys that will perform better than expected.

[Matt Mueller 146]

Who recommended Michael Vick and said 'their defense is pretty bad in Arizona and they don't get any pressure on the quarterback? '

 

At least I listened right?