- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hate leaving big points on the bench.
Posted on 11/22/10 at 1:39 am to Dead Mike
Posted on 11/22/10 at 1:39 am to Dead Mike
He said he went with Hillis over Foster....
I would start Foster over Gore any day as well, Hillis however has been money all season and deals with majority of the Browns offense. He has performed week in and out even when he was splitting carries first 2 weeks he had double digit point totals. Gore has been consistent but he does make me worry about injury/ineffective offensive line although I understand I may be in minority.
quote:
I went with Hillis because he was against the jags and if he had 5 more receiving yards he would have ended the day at I think 25 points.
I would start Foster over Gore any day as well, Hillis however has been money all season and deals with majority of the Browns offense. He has performed week in and out even when he was splitting carries first 2 weeks he had double digit point totals. Gore has been consistent but he does make me worry about injury/ineffective offensive line although I understand I may be in minority.
This post was edited on 11/22/10 at 1:49 am
1
Posted on 11/22/10 at 2:08 am to tduecen
I'm not arguing who the OPer should have left out because frankly, i didn't have to make that decision. My opinion is that I just don't know how one can put the best player in his position on the bench. Congratulations to the guy who has 3 of the best RBs on his team and maybe i did go a little too far with the stupid bit, but i do think it was a decision that involved way too much thinking on his part.
Foster is lights out though. There is no other skill position player in the league that plays as big of a role in as big of an offense in the league. San Francisco and Cleveland have two of the worst offenses in the league so sometimes the matchup should only be minor factor.
And furthermore, how many 30 point games have Hillis and Gore posted? Zero from Gore and 1 from Hillis. Foster has 3 over 30 including his 40 point game. That alone shows he has the most potential out of the three backs. I don't know how you leave a guy with that much potential out of your lineup.
Personally, I'm a fan of diversifying your starting lineup if you have enough talent to do so. If you have a guy who has uber-potential but has a bigger deviation from the mean, play him and offset whatever potential he has to only score 10 with a guy who is a little more consistent. Therefore, you play a guy like Hillis who's deviation from the mean is likely the least of the three as a consistency play and then start Foster because you have to capitalize off of his potential to put up 30+.
Its what I did with my receivers the first half of the year before i had to trade Steve Smith(NYG) for a RB. I knew i had my playmaker in Roddy White. I had Smith as my possession guy who i knew was going to get somewhere between 6-15 every game depending on whether he notched a TD. And then I had Maclin who could go unnoticed or put up 20+ before you even knew the game started. I had a superstar, a sure thing, and a boom or bust guy. i know
Foster is lights out though. There is no other skill position player in the league that plays as big of a role in as big of an offense in the league. San Francisco and Cleveland have two of the worst offenses in the league so sometimes the matchup should only be minor factor.
And furthermore, how many 30 point games have Hillis and Gore posted? Zero from Gore and 1 from Hillis. Foster has 3 over 30 including his 40 point game. That alone shows he has the most potential out of the three backs. I don't know how you leave a guy with that much potential out of your lineup.
Personally, I'm a fan of diversifying your starting lineup if you have enough talent to do so. If you have a guy who has uber-potential but has a bigger deviation from the mean, play him and offset whatever potential he has to only score 10 with a guy who is a little more consistent. Therefore, you play a guy like Hillis who's deviation from the mean is likely the least of the three as a consistency play and then start Foster because you have to capitalize off of his potential to put up 30+.
Its what I did with my receivers the first half of the year before i had to trade Steve Smith(NYG) for a RB. I knew i had my playmaker in Roddy White. I had Smith as my possession guy who i knew was going to get somewhere between 6-15 every game depending on whether he notched a TD. And then I had Maclin who could go unnoticed or put up 20+ before you even knew the game started. I had a superstar, a sure thing, and a boom or bust guy. i know
Posted on 11/22/10 at 2:32 am to jm3
I am more of a fan of consistent and when Hillis starts I know I can count on 15-25 points out him. Going against a Jets team that was #3 in fewest fantasy points allowed to RB's is a touch decision. Foster ended up having a great game but he went with what seemed like the safer plays in Gore/Hillis.
Foster does have the most potential but out of the 3 he also has the most potential to be zoned out of the offense like he was against the NYG. It has helped that Houston has kept everyone close, I can count on even if San Fran/Cleveland get behind Gore/Hillis will be involved because they are everything to those offenses.
Just different philosophy, he played percentages and this time it bit him in the arse.
Foster does have the most potential but out of the 3 he also has the most potential to be zoned out of the offense like he was against the NYG. It has helped that Houston has kept everyone close, I can count on even if San Fran/Cleveland get behind Gore/Hillis will be involved because they are everything to those offenses.
Just different philosophy, he played percentages and this time it bit him in the arse.
Posted on 11/22/10 at 12:57 pm to tduecen
I am with the people being hard on the OP......it is inexcusable to ever bench A Foster.
You are either in a 4 team league or play with a bunch of jabronis........it should be impossible to get MJD and Turner on the same team, much less having Foster as well. I took Foster in the 3rd round of our draft and I almost took him in the 2nd.
quote:
In my league we start 2 rb and I started MJD and Turner and sat Foster
You are either in a 4 team league or play with a bunch of jabronis........it should be impossible to get MJD and Turner on the same team, much less having Foster as well. I took Foster in the 3rd round of our draft and I almost took him in the 2nd.
Posted on 11/22/10 at 2:02 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:Not really, MJD was a first round guy, Turner is a second or third depending on how much passing TD's count, and Foster went in 4-6th round in many drafts. I know he went in the 5th in our draft because he was an unproven commodity.
.it should be impossible to get MJD and Turner on the same team, much less having Foster as well.
Hell he was a 4th round pick in many ESPN drafts
Posted on 11/22/10 at 4:02 pm to tduecen
Dude Turner is a top 5-10 pick in most any format.
Posted on 11/22/10 at 4:06 pm to tduecen
quote:
Turner is a second or third depending on how much passing TD's count
Stop bro you're trying too hard. Turner was absolutely a first round guy and you're crazy if you think differently. His average draft position was 9.57 in all nfl.com leagues which ranked him 6th amongst RBs behind CJ, AP, MJD, Rice, and Gore and he averaged out getting drafted at the 6.6th pick in all yahoo leagues ahead of Gore.
quote:
Hell he was a 4th round pick in many ESPN drafts
Funny, the drafts you watched must have been the outliers. His average draft position in ESPN leagues was 9.4 LINK The guy may have reached for Foster but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about
Posted on 11/22/10 at 4:23 pm to jm3
quote:However the OP is also in a 10 team league hence I doubt that Turner went in the first round. Also if your league puts more emphasis on the QB as some do then the surge on QB's would push all running backs further in the draft.
His average draft position was 9.57 in all nfl.com leagues which ranked him 6th amongst RBs behind CJ, AP, MJD, Rice, and Gore and he averaged out getting drafted at the 6.6th pick in all yahoo leagues ahead of Gore.
Many mock drafts I looks at have Turner as anywhere from 9-14 depending on 10/12 team league. Hence the late first or early second round, as some people had concerns about injuries/workload of previous seasons. The third round was a bit of a stretch I will admit that as I probably used it to emphasize my point.
Now I will sit back and wait for the name calling, since that seems to be what you seem to be good at so far.
quote:Foster on ESPN leagues was the 49.3 Average pick so you are looking at 4th round in a 10 team league and 4th round in a 12 team league.
The guy may have reached for Foster but you clearly have no clue what you're talking about
Mock Having Foster in 8th
Pro Football Fantasy had him as 62 rated player
Foster Average 8th round yahoo
This post was edited on 11/22/10 at 4:44 pm
Posted on 11/22/10 at 4:46 pm to tduecen
I wasn't arguing with you about foster. I was actually agreeing with you. Its actually pretty funny when someone says they have Foster and a first round back and somebody gets on and asks how he got such a bad arse team.
Now to address your recent post,
I know, I just told you that in my post.
If your comment about the 6.6 position on yahoo was supposed to go before the above statement to show that he is in a Yahoo league, I don't understand how you could say you doubt that he went in the first round. 6.6 < 10. Its not fricking rocket science. 6.6 was his AVERAGE, not his lowest draft spot. that means he was picked up both before AND after that spot.
You keep trying to cover your arse but I don't think you realize that you said Turner was a 2-3rd round guy. I just proved to you he averaged inside the top 10 in 3 major fantasy league host sites. I'll throw in another one, he was 5.5 in kffl drafts. It doesn't matter what you think, his average draft spot shows that he is a 1st round guy. You were wrong its that easy
Now to address your recent post,
quote:
His average position was 6.6 Yahoo
I know, I just told you that in my post.
quote:
However the OP is also in a 10 team league hence I doubt that Turner went in the first round
If your comment about the 6.6 position on yahoo was supposed to go before the above statement to show that he is in a Yahoo league, I don't understand how you could say you doubt that he went in the first round. 6.6 < 10. Its not fricking rocket science. 6.6 was his AVERAGE, not his lowest draft spot. that means he was picked up both before AND after that spot.
You keep trying to cover your arse but I don't think you realize that you said Turner was a 2-3rd round guy. I just proved to you he averaged inside the top 10 in 3 major fantasy league host sites. I'll throw in another one, he was 5.5 in kffl drafts. It doesn't matter what you think, his average draft spot shows that he is a 1st round guy. You were wrong its that easy
Posted on 11/22/10 at 4:52 pm to jm3
Yes it is the "average" however that does not mean he went at that position in every draft hence average. He went early second in two of my leagues that I am in as one has the point per completion so Manning/Rivers/Brady/Brees all went a bit earlier than the "average" position they are ranked. In a 10 teams league I could very well seeing Turner sliding into second round which would be the 11th pick. I admitted that the 3rd round was a stretch as a point of emphasis for my point.
Posted on 11/22/10 at 5:00 pm to tduecen
quote:
Yes it is the "average" however that does not mean he went at that position in every draft hence average
Hence the meaning of average, he went above 6.6 and he went below 6.6, averaging him out at 6.6. A 6.6 average = first round guy. Just because:
quote:
He went early second in two of my leagues
does not mean he's a 2-3rd round guy as you put it. He is absolutely a first round guy. You ran to the rescue and you were wrong. If you're going to try to prove your point that he's a 2-3rd round guy by telling me that a 6.6 average does not mean he went at that position in every draft, I could could make the same argument saying he's a top 2-4 pick. Its an average. You cannot sway an average ranking inside the top 10 to prove your ridiculous statement saying that he's a round 2 or 3 guy.
I couldn't care less to be honest with you, but you're the one trying to pull an average number over to your side of the fence to prove an argument that you know was wrong. Just realize you were wrong thats all
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News