Super Nomario said:I did.
Of course you did.
And I noticed, answered my question from last night in the slyest manner possible. Double internet points for you, sir.
Super Nomario said:I did.
It was the other Clemons that was taken (the safety) from the Browns, so you can still lose another player.Dgilpin said:With royal and Clemons being drafted the Lions should also now be off limits
Which question?soxfan121 said:
Of course you did.
And I noticed, answered my question from last night in the slyest manner possible. Double internet points for you, sir.
Super Nomario said:And Stills, Royal, and Jones were all available in this.
Super Nomario said:I was surprised you guys didn't protect Cyprien (especially over Travis Kelce and his lost year), but you got away with it.
I think you could afford to lose Bowe because you have a similar age / quality guy in Jennings and this draft is stacked at the position. I would expect you guys to draft a WR whether or not you lost one here, so I don't think it alters things too much.
I think that's a nice tiebreaker, but at the end of the day, we're all losing two players and gaining two players; it's more psychological than anything to poach from a divisional opponent. I wouldn't restrict myself to that (I did grab one of SSF's players, but that's because Galette was the best edge rusher available).
^soxfan121 said:Meaning Bowe wasn't the best WR available for an offense built around Brady?
Super Nomario said:Which question?
Marvin and Datone Jones were two of the better players available, IMO. You had some tough protection decisions (which makes you choice to protect your kicker all the more indefensible).Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
I was 95% sure Jones was a goner. I'm glad I was wrong.
Oh, I wasn't intending to. I thought the Bowe pickup was fine; I was just responding to you saying your pick was going to come from a division opponent.soxfan121 said:That one.
Well, I'm officially down to not have a single rosterable receiver. Super work. I didn't expect this.DaughtersofDougMirabelli said:Like a few others I had my eye on Jordan Reed. With the retirement of Tony G I need a big receiver and a good RZ target.
The San Francisco 49ers steal, TE Martellus Bennett
At 6'6" 265 he has the size to match Tony G. He may not have the same speed but he's got good hands and is much more competent in the blocking game than Tony G ever was. He was top 10 in Targets, REC, Rec yds, YDS/Rec, and YAC and was 11th in TDs. He's a top 10 receiving TE by almost all standards and he already has the chemistry down with Eli. In 2012 with Eli at the helm he was the 5th ranked TE by PFF's rankings and I'm hoping he'll match those numbers with the 49ers.
edit: Didn't think I'd feel bad stealing players but Laddie lost his two best receivers and is now done losing players.
Super Nomario said:Marvin and Datone Jones were two of the better players available, IMO. You had some tough protection decisions (which makes you choice to protect your kicker all the more indefensible).
I just think you misread how much kickers are valued. Armstead was your 10th round pick when we drafted last year, while no kickers were taken until round 21/22. We might see some specialists taken towards the end of the second stealing round, but I kind of doubt it.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
It came down to how hard it would be to replace him. I don't think this is like fantasy football where kickers are fungible. Special teams matter a little more here. It swayed my decision for more than a few polls.
Losing Armstead was completely unexpected. I thought I left some better players unprotected to shift focus away from my middle of the road o-line. How often does an NFL team lose it's rookie LT to free agency?
phragle said:I can only speak for myself but I didn't put a single RB on my board. Not enough value IMO. Not unless they can add to the passing game. I think if my run blocking and passing game is good enough I can put any RB back there and get 4 yards per.
Super Nomario said:I agree Tate was one of the best RB available, but edge rusher was a shallower pool (both here and in the rookie draft) and a bigger need for me, so I went with Galette. The guy I was surprised you left exposed (and got away with) was D.J. Hayden. Barron, too. You had some tough calls here as far as your protects.
Super Nomario said:And Stills, Royal, and Jones were all available in this.
Super Nomario said:I just think you misread how much kickers are valued. Armstead was your 10th round pick when we drafted last year, while no kickers were taken until round 21/22. We might see some specialists taken towards the end of the second stealing round, but I kind of doubt it.
For sure. And while Stills was extremely efficient on a per-target basis, he was also targeted very infrequently - just 46 times in 496 routes run. That's the lowest target rate of the 94 receivers in the PFF list. I think he's a talented guy but a lot of his production was a product of the offense.SeoulSoxFan said:Comparing Hilton vs. Stills, I had to go with Hilton despite how terrific Still is (not just the WR rating, but just 3.03 drop rate, 8th best among all WRs with 25% snaps played). I have a feeling Hilton would have been stolen just as fast as Stills if he was made available.
SeoulSoxFan said:I guess you can argue that Kenny Stills has more value than Marcel Reece, but I just couldn't let Reece go.
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:It came down to how hard it would be to replace him. I don't think this is like fantasy football where kickers are fungible. Special teams matter a little more here. It swayed my decision for more than a few polls.
Losing Armstead was completely unexpected. I thought I left some better players unprotected to shift focus away from my middle of the road o-line. How often does an NFL team lose it's rookie LT to free agency?
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
You're probably right. Nothing I can do about it now. It's why I had such a problem with this part of the process.
Super Nomario said:For sure. And while Stills was extremely efficient on a per-target basis, he was also targeted very infrequently - just 46 times in 496 routes run. That's the lowest target rate of the 94 receivers in the PFF list. I think he's a talented guy but a lot of his production was a product of the offense.
CaptainLaddie said:Well, I'm officially down to not have a single rosterable receiver. Super work. I didn't expect this.
phragle said:A lot of his production was a product of him getting open deep, but we didn't choose him just for what he's done. We chose him for what we think he's going to do. All players are projections in my mind, and at just barely 22 YO he projects well. There's a short list of WRs that put up over 620 yards and at least 4 touchdowns in a season before they turned 22. Here's the list.
I bolded the HOFers
- Randy Moss
- Keenan Allen
- Josh Gordon
- Percy Harvin
- Hakeem Nicks
- Larry Fitzgerald
- Jeremy Maclin
- Antonio Bryant
- Kenny Stills
- Andre Reed
phragle said:
I noticed that pretty quickly. This could be the downside of drafting all young guys.
Turrable said:Sorry about the delay. I just want you guys to know that I will be keeping this championship in proper perspective. You're all worthy opponents and the only thing this championship really "proves" is that I am the smartest poster on the site with the most football knowledge and the biggest penis and I should have mod privileges as well as the ability to post under sf121's name without his knowledge or permission. Nothing more than that. I would never let this go to my head.
soxfan121 said:
It is hard for me to see that list the way you intend because of era differences. Andre Reed's performance, in context with his era, is obviously more impressive than numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 with 6 being debatable*.
IOW, is it predictive? I have no clue.
*Both on the list and in whether he's a likely HOF player. On the way? Sure. Booking a hotel in Canton? Not quite yet.
Turrable said:Sorry about the delay. I just want you guys to know that I will be keeping this championship in proper perspective. You're all worthy opponents and the only thing this championship really "proves" is that I am the smartest poster on the site with the most football knowledge and the biggest penis and I should have mod privileges as well as the ability to post under sf121's name without his knowledge or permission. Nothing more than that. I would never let this go to my head.
I'll take Doug Free, RT
phragle said:I don't think Bowe is in decline, I think he's just too far away for dink and dunk Smith to target him.
phragle said:
Good pick! PFF just posted this!
Yeah, I don't fully expect Royal to repeat his 2013 TD numbers, but if he stays healthy and continues to improve he'll provide Rivers with a good option from the slot for my Broncos. Golden Tate isn't going to do it alone, and we need more weapons to get back to the AFCCG next season.Kenny F'ing Powers said:
A lot of that comes off his high TD rate though, right? Considering 5 of his 8 TD's came in the first two games of the season, I wouldn't think he'll be repeating that performance.
soxfan121 said:Eh, eliminating Kenny Britt and Murdernandez allows you to sneak Gronk on, which certainly strengthens your argument. However, without that, it's Larry Fitz, three guys coming off rookie years, a guy one failed drug test from suspension, a couple guys who showed potential and then got hurt or ineffective and Antonio Bryant.
Kenny F'ing Powers said:His best season came with "rocket arm" Matt Cassel throwing to him. Having CheckDown Smith throwing him the ball doesn't help, but I have a hard time believing it's the only reason he put up 800 yards two years ago and 670 last year.
His numbers last year match up pretty well with his 2008 and 2009 seasons (only he had less targets), and his YPC has fallen every year for the past 4 years. I don't have high hopes for his future.
Kenny F'ing Powers said:A lot of that comes off his high TD rate though, right? Considering 5 of his 8 TD's came in the first two games of the season, I wouldn't think he'll be repeating that performance.
phragle said:
Are you not clicking the links? These are not top ten lists, these are complete lists - everyone - it's coincidence both are ten players long. And these lists are saying he won't murder, or abuse banned substances. They're saying that his rookie year he had phenominal and rare production for such a young player, and puts him in elite company. Does that mean he can't fall off? Of course not, but all the players comparable to him at age 21 are pretty awesome.
bsj said:LaAdrian Waddle OL from the Cardinals
Sorry to burst your bubble again but Mankins was takenSeoulSoxFan said:
Steelers need to add depth everywhere on the offensive line, and Waddle was at the very top of my list. Thus, i was sad -- okay pissed -- to have him picked off just two picks before mine.
Steelers goes to its backup option, and break its rule of not drafting 27+ players by selecting:
LG Logan Mankins
We all know him and love him. He's one tough SoB and can play through injuries like no one else, even at age 32. Unlike some of the other viable linemen who were still available, Mankins has been very steady throughout the years.
Just to look at his 2013 year:
His pass blocking is a concern, but after assembling a very young roster Steelers FO thinks a true leader like Mankins is needed in the locker room.
- #6 in run blocking
- #19 overall ranking
- #22 in pass blocking efficiency
- #52 in pass blocking (9 sacks allowed)
With the enviable position of having the #1 overall pick in the non-snaking draft (nice), we're poised to fill out the rest of the OL from a pool of rookies as well as FA in making the unit be competitive in 2014.
Steelers are looking forward to building around two young and talented studs in LT Tyron Smith (#4 overall LT) and RG Brian Fusco (#4 overall RG), with LG Mankins mentoring and steadying the line.
Well without Britt and Hernandez they're both ten players long. I thought you were not clicking the links. You mentioned something about sneaking players onto the list. That's why I thought you weren't clicking the links. I'm not doing that, PFR is finding the qualifying players for me. The lists are short because it's just a rare accomplishment. Most players don't play at 21 never mind putting up great numbers at 21. The ones that do are pretty good.soxfan121 said:The second link is twelve players long, including Britt (who was 8th and an inconvenient data point for you) and Hernandez at 11, Gronk 12. Or am I clicking your link and going to some other list?
I am not disputing you are brilliant - your guy is way up that list. A Kudos bar is in the mail, I am so impressed.
soxfan121 said:What I'm saying is that the first list has largely the same names as the second list and this era is inflating passing stats to the point where comparing between eras is becoming near impossible. Is Keenen Allen, et. al. ranking with Larry Fitz (one era earlier) and Moss/Reed (indisputable legends) really impressive or is it a function of exponentially increasing passing stats due to the changes in the game? And if so, is that list as predictive as you are claiming?
soxfan121 said:I don't know. It's an interesting list. It might be useful. It might just be packed with still-unproven guys because of the era. It certainly contains Antonio Bryant - which is another data point in contrast to the 3 (Moss/Reed/Fitz) that have you so giddy. Oh, and I'm definitely saying that excluding Britt because he's a headcase (and a poor data point for your argument) while including Gordon (who is a headcase as well, but a good data point for you) is shady. Still, you didn't try to hide Antonio Bryant...though I bet you wish you could, as his existence allows me to retort in this manner.
bsj said:Sorry to burst your bubble again but Mankins was taken
SeoulSoxFan said:
Okay then. We go from one old OL to a really old OL (35), in selecting the #2 overall center in the league last year:
C Dominic Raiola
Had a career year in 2013 and seems to get better with age (also very durable):
Steelers center position was an absolute mess, getting by on scrubs and has-beens. Raiola can steady the line until a younger replacement can be found.
- 2013: #2 overall / 1156 snaps played
- 2012: #13 overall / 1230 snaps played
- 2011: #24 overall / 1134 snaps played
DanooMe PM'd.
No, the Eagles were the last one, I believe. The spreadsheet is up to date.phragle said:Have any teams become off-limits lately?
Darn....phragle said:
The Necks will take Sean Smith. Smith was a guy I was surprised to see go unprotected. After years of being an underacheiver in Miami he turned it around and did a lot to make the Chiefs defense a top five unit. He was 9th best in coverage snaps per reception, in front of guys like Talib and Haden. He's a scheme fit, still young, 6'3" and can match up vs any WR. Building the team with the division in mind, and all the good passing offenses in it, this pick makes a lot of sense.
PM sent
Super Nomario said:To cut down on a little confusion, I've updated the players tab, highlighting all stolen players in purple and noting their new and old teams. The teams tab has not been updated yet.
Good idea to put them in yellow. I'll start doing that going forward.DaughtersofDougMirabelli said:
I also just noticed when updating I've been highlighting the stolen player in yellow (on the team page). I don't believe you guys were doing the same. I just thought it was easier to remove them from the pool. Also since we are removing full teams in all yellow, once they have reached their stolen limit, only white players could be stolen.
I'd be willing to go back and put them all in white, or all in yellow, but as of now only some are in yellow.
Super Nomario said:Good idea to put them in yellow. I'll start doing that going forward.
DaughtersofDougMirabelli said:
I also just noticed when updating I've been highlighting the stolen player in yellow (on the team page). I don't believe you guys were doing the same. I just thought it was easier to remove them from the pool. Also since we are removing full teams in all yellow, once they have reached their stolen limit, only white players could be stolen.
I'd be willing to go back and put them all in white, or all in yellow, but as of now only some are in yellow.
SMU_Sox said:On mobile. Can't pm. Johnlimberakis@gmail.com.
you can even linkedin me.
bsj said:Darn....
Yeah. I like Smith. He was probably the next guy to protect if I could have. I only left him out there because I felt I had a number of other DBs who had similar seasons but seemed to have a higher ceiling...and felt a bigger need to protect them. but was hoping Smith would stick around. Oh wells...
ElcaballitoMVP said:Hey guys, I'm going to be away all weekend without internet. I'll send a steal option or two to the Proxy account, but if those guys are gone just skip me until I'm back on Sunday.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:Does anybody else that's checking this thread regularly (SSF, sf121, Phragle, KFP/SMU) want to have editing privileges on the sheet? That might help spread the burden around. If so, PM me with your email and I'll add you.