Building a Dynasty

2006-06-24T21:05:00.000-07:00

So while I wait for Mike's counter offer to hopefully end what looks like a bleak situation at tight end, I'm about a week away from making cuts. This is probably my least favorite time in dynasty leagues. I'm a packrat by nature. In fact, I never read C.S. Lewis' work The Lion, The Witch, And The Wardrobe, but once I saw Narnia the concept didn't surprise me. It's arguable I was able to travel back into the 1940's through the time portal known as my grandmother's closet. Who knew that a seventh floor apartment in Cleveland, Ohio housed the planes that went missing in the Bermuda Triangle?

This packrat gene naturally got passed down to my mother, a woman that has so much clothing stashed away, I'm sure the only reasonable explanation is she kidnapped a dressmaker and is holding her captive as forced labor until she produces enough wardrobe to fill a New York and Company. I'm not sure I fully inherited this trait, but it does show up prominently whenever my dynasty teams relax the roster limits. I just can't pass up on an inexpensive shot at potential. The problem is deciding who to cut loose. I've already rid myself of a number of players that I wish I kept (WR Ernest Wilford and S Glenn Earl among them).

Here are my current candidates that face my first waive of cuts--I'll need to drop between 5-9 players depending on those I stash on my taxi squad. So let's rummage through my junk drawer and sort the potential treasure from the trinkets:

QB Stefan Lefors, Carolina
QB Adrian McPherson, New Orleans
RB Andre Hall, Tampa Bay
RB Jarrett Payton, Tennessee
RB Quentin Griffin, Kansas City
WR Quincy Morgan, Pittsburgh
TE Garrett Mills, New England
TE Billy Miller, New Orleans
TE Wesley Duke, Free Agent
TE Adam Bergen, Cardinals

I do have some easier choices--specifically, Wesley Duke, the tight end I pegged as a darkhorse candidate to start in Denver that promptly got cut upon his triumphant return from NFL Europe. What a waste of $7 in free agent bidding. These are the pitfalls of attempting to build a team rather than maintaining a winner. Quincy Morgan is at best, the #3 WR for the Steelers and I doubt he'll be a much sought after player at this point of the preseason. Andre Hall and Jarrett Payton are most likely practice squad players on their respective teams, but RBs with talent hold more potential value on the depth chart due to the injury factor. I'll hold onto them this summer for as long as they are still on an NFL team. I think both players possess enough talent to at least produce in small stretches and my RB roster lacks starters.

While I've been writing this blog entry, I updated my offer to Mike:

Bobby Engram, Ian Gold, and now, my 2007 2nd round pick for Watson, a 3rd round pick or a 4th and rookie RB Wali Lundy.

To me this is a no-brainer for him to take. But I received a counter offer of McMichael for what I just offered for Watson.

The dilemma for me is what I think Watson's worth is compared to McMichael. Strictly on production, McMichael has been worth more than Watson. He's the generally the 8th-10th ranked tight end in this league. Not bad for a guy without a star quarterback. McMichael has also played in all 48 games from 2002-2005--another plus for the first of the slew of Georgia tight ends to go pro. McMichael catching passes from Culpepper seems like a nice possibility.

The downside? He was in trouble with the law for beating his wife. Personally reprehensible, and potentially one step away from suspension or major prison time in his professional life. Does McMichael have a higher ceiling of potential than the 8th-10th best fantasy tight end in this league? I'm not sure. Culpepper and Jermaine Wiggins hooked up enough to make Wiggins an option that rated just behind McMichael in 2004. Does that mean Culpepper will boost McMichael's stats even higher?

Ben Watson is all potential. He was the 18th ranked TE last year, but he split time with Daniel Graham and Christian Fauria. One is the subject of trade rumors and the other is in Washington. Training camp reports indicate Watson is getting looks as if he'll be one of the primary options, if not the primary option in the passing game. Watson is the more athletic of the two tight ends. Honestly, I think it's easy to be enamored with the guy's potential. Especially when you see him do things like run down Champ Bailey from across the field in a playoff game.

The downside with Watson? A torn ACL as a rookie and Belicheck's system. Daniel Graham is still there. Mike Vrabel is still catching TD passes. Plus, the Pats drafted Dave Thomas and Garrett Mills--two good prospects at the position! But it's clear both Mike and I feel Watson has far more potential than McMichael.

This is why Mike wouldn't take a 3rd round pick for Watson. He and I both believe Watson has the skills to be the next elite TE and he wants a big payday in return for giving him up.
But at this point a 3rd round pick is more than fair when you combine that with a starting quality LB like Gold and a Engram--a WR that provides excellent depth because he'll produce very well if he has to sub for either Jackson or Burleson.

But when I offer him a 2nd round pick, he doesn't budge on Watson. Instead he offers me McMichael. We'll it's already clear he not only dislikes McMichael, but has him ranked 3rd on his depth chart. This means he'd never use McMichael and value Watson higher than him.

So Mike, I'll consider McMichael, but giving you a second round pick is costly for a guy neither of us value as highly as Watson. Even if I admit my team is on the rise, that likely means I'll have the 7th-9th pick while you still have the 13th or 14th pick. In essence, if I give you a 2nd round pick, your 4th round pick is closer to a 5th round pick in value.

My other need is defensive end. Mike, you are loaded at the position. Freeney, Justin Smith, Ellis, and Bertrand Berry make a nice quartet. Berry missed half the year with a torn pec and his career span is likely limited in comparison to the other three you already have on your roster.

I'll give you Gold, Ingram, my 3rd round and 6th round picks for McMichael, Lundy, Berry, and your 4th round pick.

2006-06-17T06:21:00.000-07:00

Out To Lunch have proposed a trade with Toronto Toucans.

Out To Lunch (Waldman) will give up:
Engram, Bobby SEA WR
Gold, Ian DEN LB
Year 2007 Round 3 Draft Pick from Out To Lunch

Toronto Toucans (MacGregor) will give up:
Watson, Ben NEP TE
Year 2007 Round 4 Draft Pick from Toronto Toucans

Trade Comments: "Is this any better? I figure the crux of the trade is Watson for Gold and the 3rd, but if you want more I figure Engram is a useful depth player especially with Jackson coming off two knee surgeries last year. Since he was a pretty good depth player, I figure a 4th from you could bridge the value gap..."

Amidst all the chaos that was my work week this past week, a rare Ironman 3 trade offer showed up in my Inbox. Matt has been trying to pry Ben Watson from me for a while, and with good reason. I've got Antonio Gates, Randy McMichael and Watson, so I can afford to part with one of McMichael or Watson. Matt on the hand has the dynamic duo of Ernie Conwell and Garrett Mills at TE. Quite the difference.

The reason I've passed on all his prior trade offers have basically come down to the fact I've held Watson for two years to see what he will develop into, so I don't want to trade him now before he reaches his potential and his value truly spikes. Ah, the old word all dynasty players cling to, "potential". While Matt's current offer is better than the prior ones, I just don't know if I can pull the trigger for the same reason - Watson's "potential".

Am I being too stubborn here? Have I now inflated expectations of Watson beyond all that is reasonable? Mike Krueger does have Watson projected #6 amongst TEs with a line of 53-657-6 as of writing this. Matt is a division rival that, despite his objections, is building a team on the rise. As for the compensation in the trade, maybe it is fair in terms of value today, but where is my upside in return? Ian Gold I like but is interchangeable with about 20 or more similar scoring LBs. The 3rd rounder will be a hit or miss prospect who, even if he pans, will likely be another 2 year waiting process. Bobby Engram... makes some sense to acquire, but his upside I think it is fair to say is nada, niltch, nothing.

I guess when it comes down to it, if I'm going to trade a guy who has high potential to finish top 6 at his position (even if it is a TE) and is only entering his 3rd season, shouldn't I get a similar player back who could finish near the top of his position? My team is already talented and deep. If I was in a different position of just needing a piece here or there to compete, then trading Watson's potential for those pieces makes more sense. I really think I need to stick with my buy-and-hold investing strategy with Watson. If he hits that magical potential, then I did the right thing. If he washes out, then I didn't really lose that much (that is, until Matt turns his 3rd rounder next year into the next Ryan Moats).

Sorry Matt. I realize I must be frustrating to deal with in this league, especially with you, but I just can't help myself ;)

Now to go work up a counter offer trading away McMichael instead...

2006-06-13T09:09:00.000-07:00

I'm going to try to be more bloggy.

First off, my apologies to the... um... one or two(?) of you out there reading our fantasy football dynasty blog, as I've been unable to post anything in over a month. Other priorities as Matt noted hit the fan which kept me from keeping up with this.

During this time though, I have thought about why I'm finding it tough to keep the blog current. Upon surfing around and reviewing some other blogs, like Doug Drinen's at pro-football-reference.com and some about Microsoft Excel and other good ones that unfortunately escape my memory, I noted that each entry is typically shorter than what I've done here up until now. My prior posts have more of an article feel: long and formal, which are not easy to write and as a result new stuff is posted sporadically.

What I think will work better is short, succinct, and posted more often. In a word, which I'm not sure if anyone else has coined or not, I'm going to try to be more bloggy. This is probably not the best time for this, being I'm currently fighting through my 28th consecutive hour of no sleep, and a much needed 4 day vacation is fast approaching. You know what they say though, there is no time like the present. Plus I don't want to fall any further behind...

Championship Caliber Defense?

Looking back a month ago I ran through all the ups and downs with my offense and intended to hit the defense next. Even though we've completed the Ironman 3 rookie draft and had our first round of off-season free acquisitions, I'd like to keep on schedule and discuss my defense coming out of last season and heading into this year's draft, first. Here is the squad:

DT John Henderson, Tommie Harris
DE (good) Dwight Freeney, Osi Umenyiora, Bert Berry
DE (ok) Justin Smith, Shaun Ellis
LB (good) Cato June, Andra Davis, Derrick Brooks
LB (ok) Marcus Washington, Danny Clark, David Pollack
LB (wtf?) E.J. Henderson, Monty Beisel, Darryl Blackstock
CB Terrence McGee, Darrent Williams, Shauntee Spencer
S Michael Lewis, Gibril Wilson, Bob Sanders

It is unfortunate the DL is not weighted more heavily in a league such as this, because I love my D-Line. When people are overpaying for guys like Julius Peppers, wait and pick up Bert Berry who is a classic Rodney Dangerfield character getting little respect but produces the same or better than Peppers, discounting the unfortunate injury a year ago. Both Freeney and Umenyiora were both acquired through the draft and have worked out better than expected, with Osi picking up nicely for the loss of Berry.

When you're in an IDP league which splits out DT from DE, do what you can to acquire one of the few fantasy stars at that position. I actually acquired Henderson from Matt after he joined the league. Although DT don't score a lot of points, never ignore a position on your roster. Every little bit helps.

As usual LB is the most important defense position for fantasy because of the tackle stats. It shoud be obvious that is my weakest position with no true stud LB to carry this squad. Cato June is pretty good in that role but relies on the big play, as does Derrick Brooks acquired late last season for the playoff run. Andra Davis has been solid but talentwise appears to be more of a plugger until someone better comes along. Uh oh, the Browns just drafted 3 LB in '06. David Pollack looks like a weak draft pick last year given his likely fantasy impact as a Peter Boulware type outside rusher. The rest of these guys have various degrees of job security issues.

Just so we're clear, I'm not panicked about the LB position because certainly my strength elsewhere can make up some shortfall here (and then some), but if there is an area to address for my squad this is it.

Defensive backs I've always downgraded considerably in importance and its worked out fine as a result. New top scoring CB come off waivers every year so stick with the guys you've got, and if they aren't performing, cut bait and try again. I call this process churning the roster.

The S position is somewhat the same. Who had Ed Reed ranked as the #1 DB last year? I did. I'd do it again. There is little doubt in my mind Reed is the #1 safety talent in the NFL today. But for fantasy there is no value to be won putting your chips on the consensus #1 guy to finish #1. There is a high likelihood he is going to disappoint, and Reed certainly did.

That said I believe I've got 3 guys who I can rely on. Lewis was acquired through trade, swapping Brian Dawkins as part of a bigger deal, Sanders was drafted and Wilson I believe came off waivers. Not just quality corners come off waivers but you never know when anyone from a seasoned vet to an unsung rookie can get thrust into the S spot behind a weak front 7 and start racking up the tackles. Throw in the occassional big play here and there, and all of a sudden you've got a star in your backfield.

To answer the question, is this a championship caliber defense? It doesn't look that flashy, does it? Not too many top, top tier defenders that IDP addicted FFers fawn over? This was the top scoring defense in Ironman 3 a year ago, and scored 4th highest the year before. I know we keep hammering this point home everytime we talk about defense, but don't overpay on the defensive side of the ball. A solid - and sometimes #1 - defense can be constructed without selling the farm for the Brian Urlachers, Julius Peppers and Troy Polamalus of the NFL.

This is probably still too long...

2006-06-04T19:15:00.000-07:00

Dynasty Draft Under the Microscopt Part II

Our draft is finally over. Since I traded away my first 3 rounds worth a picks during last year's affair, I missed out on most of the first day talent. To make my draft more challenging, my opponents snapped up the tight ends I desired most in this draft (one of them) presumably with the hope I'll offer him a player he likes in return. Then to make matters worse, I raise a free agent bid on TE Wesley Duke the day before the Broncos cut him!

******

I'm not worried, though. Tight end is not the kind of position most people stash once they have to make roster cuts. I'll try to out-wait them. So here's how my draft went--who I hoped to pick, who I got, and why I picked them.

******

Pick 4.07, WR Mike Hass, Saints: I was hoping either TE Leonard Pope or Joe Klopfenstein would fall to me, but they were taken at 4.05 and 4.06. Coincidence? The new owner of Klopfenstein owns Tony Gonzalez and the the new owner of Pope already has Vernon Davis, Daniel Graham, Jermaine Wiggins, and Tony Scheffler. I understand getting depth for Gonzalez, but the second pick is either a desire to make a trade or a homer pick from an owner that is a University of Georgia fan.

So I went with Mike Hass. Demetrius Williams, Willie Reid, and Jason Avant were all available but I have Hass rated as the 4th-best WR in this class. It seems high to most people, but that's because the comparisons to Ricky Proehl drop his value. Proehl is known as an overachieving receiver with great hands that isn't fast enough to likely cut it as an NFL starter. What I saw on film was a faster than credited player that runs excellent routes, has flypaper hands, and wins the battle for the ball in tight matchups in single and double coverage. Hass was truly one of the more enjoyable players I watched on film--and I studied well over 130 prospects this year--he made plays despite the fact he was the player defenses were focused on stopping first. I expect Hass to become a fine #2 WR for the Saints within the next two seasons.

******

Pick 4.08, QB Bruce Gradkowski, Buccaneers: I had more available players I wanted but not enough picks, so I traded my 4th and 7th 2007 choices for the opportunity to pick Gradkowski. I know he's a 6th round choice and fighting just to make Tampa's active Roster, but when you listen to Jon Gruden talk about the rookie out of Toledo, there is more to Gradkowski than meets the eye. Gruden said the rookie got lost in the hype of the stars of this class. He said Gradkowski reminded him of considering the possible teams that might select him. Furthermore, the Bucs coach predicted Gradkowski would come right in and make the competition very interesting--in fact, the coach implied Tim Rattay might have difficulty holding onto the #2 QB spot. Based on what I saw of Gradkowski, I think he's a vastly underrated quarterback that could be the steal of this draft in a few years. He has the command of the huddle, poise in the pocket, and toughness to grow into a fine starter. I'm sure my pick was considered a reach, but I just don't care. He has that intangible quality.

******

Pick 5.07, RB P.J. Daniels, Ravens: Jamal Lewis needs a big year. The Ravens acquisition of Mike Anderson from Denver signifies both Lewis' poor 2005, and the fact Musa Smith has failed to do anything to make Balitmore feel comfortable about the loss of Chester Taylor. The selection of P.J. Daniels solidifies this second point even more so. Daniels is a quick, powerful back with vision. Injuries dropped his stock, as did his slow 40 time. But the former Georgia Tech walk on is one of the better pass blocking running backs in the this class. Joseph Addai was the best, but Daniels doesn't rank too far behind the Colts replacement for Edgerrin James. The Ravens already expect Daniels to make his mark as a 3rd down back in his rookie season. Two years from now, Daniels has the ability to surprise a lot of people. I thought about taking Dominique Byrd here, but Joel Klopfenstein is the likely favorite for the starting TE job in St. Louis and Daniels is more of a high upside gamble I liked at this point.

******

Pick 5.14, QB Omar Jacobs, Steelers: Jacobs was a victim of putting up such good sophomore stats that he really had no place else to go as a junior but down. The Bowling Green quarterback wasn't bad, but his inability to maintain the same awesome stats opened him up to questions about other aspects of his game such as his mobility, delivery, gimmick offense, etc. Forget all that, Jacobs is a fine passer. He has a pro-quality arm and throws with accuracy and anticipation. I was targeting Jacobs once I knew I wouldn't be picking any time in the first few rounds. Ben Roethlisberger has already missed time in his first two seasons and Pittsburgh lacks a really good backup. In time, I believe Jacobs gets a shot at a job for another team or the Steelers will need him as a long term sub. Either way, I believe he'll eventually play well enough to make it difficult for a team to keep him off the field. I need more QBs anyhow. McNair and Leftwich are punishment-friendly QBs that are tough, but miss time. Between Jacobs and Gradkowski, I hope one blossoms into a starter.

******

Pick 6.07, LB Stephen Tulloch, Titans: Peter Sirmon is coming off an injury and his cap number is pretty high, which indicates he might not be around much longer. The drafting of N.C. State LB Tulloch hints at his possibility as well. Tulloch is undersized and scouts were down on him because he played behind three top prospects on the Wildcats defensive unit. Apparently the NC State coaching staff raved about this guy. The Titans plan to stick him at MLB. With Bulluck on the outside and a promising defensive front ahead of Tulloch, I believe he's worth this late of a pick to see if he surprises. My linebacking corps is promising, but I've learned it's an oft-injured position, and depth is key. I'm hoping Tulloch might present that kind of value down the line.

******

Pick 7.07, TE/FB/H-Back Garrett Mills, Patriots: After Vernon Davis, Mills might have been the best receiving weapon at the TE spot in this class. The problem is Mills' size--he's not a protypical TE and might need to switch to a FB or H-Back position. I'm hoping he shows enough to at least become a Larry Centers type of option and at best an H-Back I can techinically use as a TE. Mills reminds me a bit of Todd Christenson, the Raiders TE out of BYU that was undersized, but a terrific receiver for Oakland in the 80's.

******

Pick 8.07, RB Andre Hall, Buccaneers: With Cadillac Williams and Michael Pittman in the fold, why not take a chance on Hall making it as the #3 RB on the roster? Pittman might not be around for another year or two, so Hall could very well have a shot at being the backup down the road. There were several rumors that New England really liked Hall and felt he had potential to surprise. Tom Casale of Patriots Football Weekly, said Hall was "The steal of the draft at the running back position....Reminded me of Emmitt Smith when I watched him on tape." Casale rated Hall as the 6th-best RB in this class. I had him as the 10th-ranked RB, but was still a little surprised he went undrafted. Hall is an excellent receiver and possesses strong, inside running skills for a player his size. I don't mind holding onto this potential bargain for a year, or so.

******

Next week, I'll profile some free agent picks, discuss my ongoing search for a TE, and look for a logical way of determining value between veterans, rookies, and future draft picks. Now that Mike is finished with his 2006 version of the Cheatsheet Compiler and Draft Buddy--the first, and best, draft preparation tool on the market--maybe he'll have some time to educate us on what a champion does in a dynasty draft...

2006-05-22T21:14:00.001-07:00

Dynasty Draft Under The Microscope-Part I

......

I like how dynasty drafts mimic the NFL in the way teams have to decide whether to draft according to talent or need. Yet, there's a third strategy--understanding the marketplace--which I'll discuss later. I gave up my first three picks this year in deals made last year, so my strategy was already decided for me. Although it may not look this way on the surface, I drafted according to talent and with a long view approach.

......

Before I analyze my choices, one thing an owner discovers in leagues that allow draft day trades is which players of yours other teams value. Even more so, you see which players have ascending value based on their previous season's performance and others' perceptions that a breakout year is imminent. There were a few players of mine that had ascending value for several teams. I'll mention them ranked by the amount of inquiries different owners made to acquire them.

......

LB Channing Crowder, Miami: I picked Crowder at 4.03 (4th round, 3rd pick) last year and he averaged 5 points per contest, good enough for 65th among his peers. Not overly impressive season totals, but he had 4-5 game stretch where he started and averaged enough points to project him in the top 35 linebackers over the course of a season. Since he came out of school early and there's a good chance he'll be the future MLB with a defensive-minded coach, his stock is on the rise. Crowder's stock dipped in last year's NFL draft due to his injury history, but based on talent alone, the former UF star was viewed as good (if not better) a prospect as Cincinnati's Odell Thurman. I received 6 inquiries involving Crowder. While I have a good enough LB rotation to part with Crowder, the offers were of the "Buy Low" variety where the owners attempted to give me players I would wind up cutting in return.

......

WR Matt Jones, Jacksonville: My selection of Jones was considered a reach because he never played the position. Now that Jones has demonstrated in front of national audiences that he's adapting quickly and making plays with jaw-dropping athleticism, a few offers were made early.

......

WR Samie Parker, Kansas City: This one is a head scratcher. I like Parker's talent, but Herm Edwards arrival and Al Saunders departure doesn't give me confidence that Parker suddenly becomes the next Santana Moss or Steve Smith. Parker was a throw-in player in a few proposals this month. Unfortunately the offers weren't too great on the main portion of the deal to pull the trigger.

......

QB Byron Leftwich, Jacksonville: I received a couple of offers for Leftwich due to the potential of the offensive skill players, but I think others pursuit leveled off when Jimmy Smith called it quits.

......

S Sean Jones, Cleveland: I receive two offers that potentially involved Jones, a safety that may not even earn the starting job in Cleveland. Talent-wise Jones was only second to the Redskins Sean Taylor, but his ACL tear as a rookie put him on a longer timeline. I'm guessing the presence of Crennell and Jones now two years removed from the injury has some yard sale junkies sniffing around for a deal.

......

On the opposite end of the spectrum, the excitement has dimmed for LB Julian Peterson of the Seahawks. Peterson was one of the players owners most often included when proposing a deal, but the inquiries disappeared the moment the ascending star tore his Achilles in 2004. Peterson's return to the field resulted in an underwhelming total for a former pro bowl performer. The 49ers prompt trade to Seattle makes the situation appear as if they don't believe Peterson will ever regain his dominating athleticism. Odds aren't in Peterson's favor, but Seattle seemed willing to take the chance. I attempted to package Peterson in offers that owners would have pounced on two years ago, but now they wouldn't consider him. Personally, I think Peterson is in for a much better year and the offers will come back in 2007.

......

The one deal I did make this month was with Mike. I picked up Bernard Berrian (once I knew he spelled it "Berriam," and read his comments in his entry, I figured he wasn't too attached) for my 12th pick in the 4th round. The Bears receiver was a player I really liked when he was at Fresno State where he helped make David Carr look like a future, 1st overall pick. In fact, Mike was picking one spot ahead of me in that rookie draft and nabbed Berrian at the end of the third round--just where I hoped to acquire him. Granted, Berrian is nothing special right now, but he's demonstrated a knack to get deep and I was impressed with his play versus the Panthers in the playoffs. I know Mark Bradley is the favorite receiver of the future, but the guy is recovering from an ACL tear. I think Berrian gets a nice opportunity in Chicago opposite Muhammad and for my squad, acquiring Berrian was like having a 3rd round pick.

.....

As you can see, I'm just as guilty of trying to "Buy Low." I attempted to get Kellen Winslow II, Michael Clayton, and Reggie Brown this way. It's always worth a shot that the owner(s) of these players lets his emotions get the best of him and sours on a player's prospects. I would have been ecstatic to acquire any of these three players relatively cheap. Mike asked me the other day why he never received any offers from me for Clayton when he had the Buc as a rookie. My response of course was Clayton's value was sky high and I didn't have anyone of commensurate value that I could afford to give in return! Mike by the way, traded Clayton for Reggie Wayne which turned out to be an extremely wise move.

......

My Draft Style

For Ironman 3, I have learned there is no reason to draft certain positions. It's useless to pick a defensive back, defensive tackle, or in some cases a defensive end. The top players are frequently available in free agency and defensive scoring (as I mentioned before) is less predictable so the turnover in the top production spots is pretty high. Safeties Sammy Knight and Nick Ferguson weren't players I drafted, but they were the 4th and 20th overall fantasy producers at their position. I'd rather stockpile offensive talent or a potential tackling machine at linebacker that can give me additional bargaining power. This was something I had to learn the hard way, but until our league's rules change the way this works, I'm never going back to picking defensive players. The point potential for a great safety won't match that of a great offensive skill player.

......

I also tend to reach a bit for players I like. Since I don't have the time, money, and resources to figure out what my competition will be targeting on a consistent basis (no excuses, Buffalo...I like Whitner and I came out in support of you for getting the guy you wanted, but the more I think about it, the less I can justify my argument). So I pick guys that might go a round or two later. I don't want to get cute with trading down and missing the only guy I thought was worth picking. Admittedly, I have reached more than a couple of rounds for some players. In fact, I've had some embarrassing reaches for undrafted free agents that made a team...well, at least for a little while. I'm learning to temper my enthusiasm on late-round or undrafted players.

2006-05-02T19:09:00.000-07:00

Now that the NFL draft has finally come and gone, I3's draft is about to go down and it's amusing to observe the subtle (and not so subtle) changes in player value. Wheeling and dealing in dynasty drafts is a microcosm of the silliness we witness leading up to the real thing. Football is a game. Pro football is the uncomfortable marriage between a business and a game--one messes up the other. It's what happens when you adulterate something that's supposed to be play rather than work.

Trades used to be backroom deals reminiscient of two kids negotiating a swap of baseball cards. Thanks to the anal retentive Jimmy Johnson, the NFL has charts with numerical values for every pick. Some teams won't budge an inch unless the values add up within an "acceptable" range of points. I'm not sure where I stand on the concept of value charts, but my initial feeling is that I'd rather stay at the kiddie table, and let the adult table lose their perspective while quibbling over the minutae of points per pick.

But maybe I need to give this value concept a fair chance. Maybe it's someting I can apply to the I3 league. A month prior to the NFL draft our league had a trade involving picks 1.01 and 1.04:

Team A gave up picks 1.04, 1.07, 3.01, and 4.04 and Team B gave up 1.01, 3.11, 4.01, and 5.01 in return.

Was this a good trade? The best answer will come 3-5 years from now. This week let's attempt to measure its worth using this seeminlgy complicated approach of a draft pick value chart. What is this value chart and how does it work? To put it simply, each pick is assigned a corresponding value so teams have a common currency to weigh their options. In other words, it's a grand way of covering one's ass when making a draft day trade.

How do the teams come up with the values? I view myself as one of the least likely people to give a math lesson, especially when you consider I opted out of calculus for music theory at another high school (which gave me the chance to occassionally skip class and make out at the park with Kristen my classmate, carpool partner, and eventual prom date), but it's pretty simple. The values assigned to each pick create a direct relationship between the higher picks and the corresponding point value. If you plot the numbers on a graph it's a classic relationship that you'd see in a math class.

I never really considered this for a dynasty league until I tried to finagle some players/picks away from Mike and was met with a rather lengthy explanation about picks and their corresponding values. In other words, he turned me down flat. But I gathered he had a system for making trades. Only this weekend did I realize it wasn't a formal thing at all, and he was likely in accountant mode when I made my offer (Note to self: Next time call Mike after he just put the kids to bed and is ready for a beer).

Nevertheless, this got me interested in the idea of formatting a draft chart for a 14-team dynasty league. So I created the same type of value chart for an 8-round, rookie dynasty draft.

Let's give it a test drive with the trade I mentioned earlier:

Team A: 1.04, 1.07, 3.01, and 4.04 = 1174 points

Team B: 1.01, 3.11, 4.01, and 5.01 = 1000 points

According to the value chart, Team B gets nearly 175 points in value on this trade. Too bad these aren't fantasy points!

And there lies the rub...how can anyone reasonably predict their draft pick will play to this value? Look at the historical rate of failure for draft picks to live up to their billing, especially those in the first two rounds. Look at the 2000 rookie class. Tom Brady the 199th pick (worth a paltry 12 points on the NFL draft value chart) and Marc Bulger (a slightly better 25 points) are worth a lot more to their respective teams than first overall pick Courtney Brown (3000 points) and 4th overall pick Peter Warrick (1800 points). So what would you rather have the 4800 points combined "draft value" from two players with disappointing careers or the 37 points from a three-time Super Bowl winner and a pro bowl passer on a high-octane offense?

Maybe you'd rather have the combined 2550 points from Travis Taylor and Ron Dayne (the 10th and 11th picks, respectively) instead? Or we could just go for broke and give you: Brown, Warrick, Taylor, Dayne, Stockar McDougle, Sylvester Morris, Ahmed Plummer, Rashard Anderson, Erik Flowers, Anthony Becht, R.J. Soward, Sebastian Janikowski, Chris McIntosh, and Trung Canidate? That's nearly half the first round in exchange for two sixth round picks! Personally, I'd rather have more of the sixth round picks in this draft: Brady, Bulger, Mike Anderson, Adalius Thomas, Paul Edinger, Dhani Jones, and Neil Rackers. Just imagine what a dynasty draft in 2000 must have looked like?

Yet the Draft Value Chart still has its usefulness. When you look at the 2000 draft overall, the number of successful picks per round has a direct relationship to the round in question.

Round 1: 16

Round 2: 14

Round 3: 10

Round 4: 5

Round 5: 4

Round 6: 6

Round 7: 4

Guess what? If you plotted this on a graph, the results would look eerily similar to a draft value chart. So from a play it safe angle, an NFL team may do better year after year with this approach. Despite my pitting Brady versus nearly half the first round, I'm sure most reasonable people would still take the other half of that round (the good players I didn't mention) over the Patriots QB. Then again, good managers in any realm of business know the difference between using information like this as a guideline instead of gospel.

How does this play out in fantasy drafts--specifically dynasty league rookie drafts? It's not like every dynasty owner sits around with their draft value chart to mull over trades. Does having a chart even work if the rest of the league is operating on a completely different set of standards? I believe it should work, because for every Mike Anderson in round 6 there was Shaun Alexander, Jamal Lewis, and (recently) Thomas Jones in the first round. In fact, I think draft value charts can be created to incorporate the value of veteran players relative to the rookie picks. That's what I'll examine next time.

2006-05-02T07:29:00.000-07:00

Time for another blog entry, and as promised, time to get into some actual team analysis of the Ironman 3 2005 Champion Toronto Toucans. There has been a lot of off-season news impacting this squad, so without further adieu, lets get to the offense:

QB Carson Palmer, Trent Green, Jon Kitna, Joey Harrington

Palmer's off-season news wasn't really "off" season, but it was for fantasy purposes. Hooray! Just took home the trophy, time to sit back, relax, and enjoy the NFL playoffs with no fantasy implications. Doh! Get up Palmer! Get up! Argh! One Kimo Von Oelhoffen hit to the knee later, I'm down the top scoring QB from '05. Most all reports on Palmer's recovery are speculation at this point, but they sound less optimistic than I would like.

Still, there is no reason to panic. Even if Palmer does not start the season, I've got an adequate backup to start, so if anyone comes looking for a deal (read: steal) to acquire Palmer they might as well not waste their time. With today's medical advancements, I pretty much expect most players to recover near 100% back to the point they were at previously. And in Palmer's case that still equates to the 2nd most talented QB in the league behind Peyton Manning, except younger. I would rank Palmer the #2 QB in dynasty rankings even with the injury. I'll just sit and hope for a strong recovery.

Trent Green, who started for me in previous years while Palmer got up to speed, moves back into the expected starter role for the start of this season. Green I found frustrating a year ago (or would have if Palmer wasn't on the roster as an automatic start every week). I really was not impressed with his performances I watched, even factoring in the incredibly effective Chiefs running game, but he did pick things up down the stretch. For now I'm going to chalk up Green's 2005 season as a down year due to the running game and other distractions, such as the loss of his father in October. Basically, I don't see a need to upgrade this position on the depth chart as Green should be a fine backup to Palmer and starter when needed for the short-term. As Green gets further up in age this year and next, a reliable backup to Palmer will become a team need.

As for prospects, there isn't much since I traded Charlie Frye a year ago. Kitna was on the roster as insurance on Palmer, but now lands in Detroit. I do give him the edge to win the job this season over Josh McCown, Dan Orlovsky and Shaun King. He could be an okay surprise but not much is expected, particularly beyond this year. Although Mike Martz has a way with QBs, his offense is complex and there are sure to be growing pains. Plus, I believe he is on a one-year tour of duty as an OC and if Martz gets a chance to be a head coach again next season, he'll jump at it.

Joey Harrington I couldn't give away the last couple years if I wanted to. Do I expect him to turn things around and start living up to his high draft status once the Lions send him packing? Not really. But his value is so low Harrington just sits in a holding pattern on the roster until either he does start showing some promise or roster space becomes an issue.

RB LaDainian Tomlinson, Edgerrin James, Willis McGahee, Thomas Jones, Dominic Rhodes, Shaud Williams

This is an impressive group for a 14 team league. I wish we could start 3 RB and then I’d really be laughing.

There seems to be some overtones in the fantasy community that people are concerned (or starting to get concerned) about the mileage on LT's legs. I'm more concerned at this point about the change at QB with Philip Rivers taking over and what impact that will have. LT is a great talent and a guy I'm certainly willing to stick with for a long time yet. Note back to my long vs. short view diatribe, that long in dynasty for me is 3 years. I'll definitely put LT on the hold list for 3 more years. This team is built to win now and he is the centerpiece to making that happen.

Edge didn't just lose his QB like LT did, he lost his whole team moving from Indy to the Arizona desert. Did I say a lot of news this off-season has impacted my squad? Did I mention most of it is, negative? Now, I certainly like the skill position players around Edge so he doesn't have to be a one-man show. The offensive line woes of the Cardinals is a worry, but Edge is so far and away superior to anything the Cards had in their backfield last year that I'm not predicting a catastrophic drop in his production. Even the most optimistic has to expect some drop-off here, but I don't believe Denny Green goes out and pays for a RB of Edge's caliber without plans to allow him to succeed. Denny knows offense, so I still like Edge as a good #1 RB and excellent #2 RB as he sits on my squad.

McGahee is the guy here whose talent I think is top notch, but I'm hating his situation more by the day. Best case: McGahee becomes a highly motivated one-man wrecking crew to showcase his talent so he can help punch his ticket out of town when the opportunity arises. He signed a 5-year deal with Buffalo back in 2003. Expected case: Spot starter and wait on him for another year to see whether the Bills organization progresses, or continues to regress (if possible). At this point, depending how the Bears use their RBs, I'd likely give the nod to Thomas Jones as a more reliable #3 RB to cover byes than McGahee. Speaking of which...

Surprisingly, no one wanted to trade for Thomas Jones a year ago. He didn't do me a whole lot of good often sitting behind LT and Edge, but at the same time I wasn't going to give him away for nothing. The Cedric Benson owner was competing in the Reggie Bush sweepstakes from week 1, so he was not a suitable trade partner. While I won't blindly write-off the threat of Benson taking carries (potentially a lot of carries) from Jones, at this point I'll hold Jones until Benson does actually prove he is going to become "the man" for the Bears, unless a good offer comes along. Perhaps I will shop Jones once the rookie draft starts, just to see what someone might be willing to pay and with the rookie picks being somewhat downgraded currently post- NFL draft.

Dominic Rhodes was of course held as insurance on Edge. I've heard extreme opinions on both sides of the Joseph Addai debate, so Rhodes becomes a moderate sleeper candidate. He performed extremely well when Edge was injured, but he is still a long shot to do anything for me. Shaud Williams will be dropped from the roster in the near future.

WR Torry Holt, Reggie Wayne, Darrell Jackson, Santana Moss, Michael Jenkins, Reche Caldwell, Bernard Berriam, Ronald Curry

I can't decide whether RB or WR is this team's #1 strength. I think WR really, especially since trading for Reggie Wayne a year ago which cost me Michael Clayton and Charlie Frye. In an effort to try to keep this relatively short, I expect Holt to be Holt, again, even without Mike Martz. Holt is a top talent and should continue to excel as the primary receiver under new coach Scott Linehan. Linehan’s (or the Rams’) apparent lack of enthusiasm for Marc Bulger is a mild concern though.

From Wayne I expect an upswing as his TDs were low last year, effective goal-line runner Edge is gone and Marvin Harrison is a year older. When I made the deal last season it was on a hunch the Colts would keep Wayne, and part ways with Edge, knowing they couldn't afford them both. Had it gone the other way, then Wayne's value certainly would have fallen with comparisons to "Peerless Price" thrust upon him early and often in the fantasy football pre-season. Fortunately, the hunch came through.

Santana Moss should drop off from the career year he had. He might be a solid sell candidate depending where he lands once some redraft rankings start hitting the streets, but I suspect everyone is going to discount him accordingly off from last year. Hey, the Redskins did add Chiefs OC Al Saunders, plus better complimentary receivers Brandon Lloyd and Antwaan Randle-El. I’m not sure if all of this is a positive or negative for little Moss.

Jackson's never ending recovery (and Clayton being completely useless) last year finally prompted the Reggie Wayne acquisition to shore up the WRs for the playoffs. It was pretty much a write-off year for Jackson from my perspective, because by the time he did come back I couldn't trust to put him in the starting lineup. I expect him to be right around Reggie Wayne level of production, which is not the top of the heap but a very good, solid every week starter... assuming his recovery is going well.

Beyond the top 4 it is a lot more bleak in terms of prospects. Hey, better this than the other way around, right? Michael Jenkins was a late draft pick who hasn't panned out to date. Time for the third year WR theory to kick in (please), although I like Roddy White better amongst the Falcons receivers and really don't like any of them with Michael Vick under center. Caldwell has shown some flashes and lands in New England, which is okay if he replaces David Givens as the starter, but nothing to get too excited about. Between Berriam sitting deep on the depth chart of a poor passing offense, and Curry who can't stay on the field, these guys are just deep, deep, maybe they will pan out some day prospects, but it isn't likely. Curry I really liked because of his great athleticism but a third(!) career Achilles' injury early last season completely deflated my hopes for him.

TE Antonio Gates, Randy McMichael, Ben Watson

Acquiring Gates as a free agent in a big off-season bidding war prior to his breakout was one of my best moves to date with this franchise. What seemed like a reach for the dollars spent at the time, now looks like an outright steal. Unfortunately, going into this year Gates loses his QB the same as LT, and I expect this change will more negatively impact Gates than LT. Still, talent will win out in the end, and no doubt Gates is a fantasy TE dream at the moment. Even if they start slow, eventually Rivers, if he knows what is good for him, will get up to speed making Gates his primary target from everywhere on the field.

McMichael is a very good fantasy TE. On my squad he doesn't play though because of Gates, but beyond that, I just don't like the guy. Since fantasy football is meant to be for fun first and foremost, I don't see any reason why I can't let personal feelings about a player partially cloud my otherwise completely objective judgment which is strictly out to maximize fantasy points. My main problem with McMichael is that he has had legal issues stemming from beating his wife. As of July of last year, he was arrested a second time for domestic abuse in the span of 13 months. I'm not trying to sound holier than thou as I completely understand not all players are saints, and there may in fact be other players I own who are just not nice people. In McMichael's case though, I find his actions inexcusable, and it would not surprise me in the least if it happens again. I kind of expect it to, actually. Not much fantasy analysis here other than to say if I ever have to make a decision between McMichael and another somewhat equal quality TE, the other guy will get the nod every time.

Time for Ben Watson to do something... something other than running down a speedy DB from over a 100 yards away in a playoff game. (Wow! That was damn impressive!) He has been on my practice squad for a couple years because I haven't needed him even as a bye week filler over the top 2, but he doesn't qualify for the practice squad anymore so it is time for him to show us something on a consistent basis fantasy wise. I've received numerous trade offers for Watson as a lot of people like his talent and have been trying to get him as a buy-low candidate. I like his talent too, which is why I passed on the trades waiting for him to move himself out of the buy-low category. Ideally, Watson steps up to become a reliable #2 TE on my depth chart, and McMichael is the one who gets jettisoned. That is my plan anyway.

K Lawrence Tynes

A kicker is a kicker is a kicker. Okay, not entirely, but Tynes is a holdover who I'm neither ecstatic about or down on. If he starts well he stays. If he flounders, he gets the axe. I said my judgment could be partially clouded for certain players. Kickers never qualify.

Okay, that wraps up my offense. Although I see more negatives than positives comparing this team to the prior year, I still don't see a lot of reason to tinker with what has worked well to date. Hopefully this last comment doesn't come back to haunt me in mid-October.

I still need to do my defensive writeup, and our rookie draft is coming up very soon since the NFL draft just finished this past weekend. Fantasy football season is starting to pick up steam. Are the Toronto Toucans poised to capture back-to-back titles? That is the plan. Anything less will be a disappointment.

2006-04-11T20:43:00.000-07:00

Assembling a solid, if not spectacular, defensive unit from the draft and free agency isn't too hard to do. You draft wisely and diligently watch the waiver wire. If there were any great strategies to develop a defensive unit in dynasty leagues, you'd see fantasy football information sites touting them like a pharmaceutical company with a new cholesterol-reducing medication. I have a few basic rules about defensive players. None are hard and fast, but the guidelines tend to work:

Don't overvalue the defense. Even the best defensive players rarely score on the level of the best offensive skill positions. It should be unusual for an owner to consider selecting a defensive player in the early rounds of a dynasty draft. Just how much more dominant is a Julius Peppers or a Dwight Freeney going to be over a guy like Kyle Vanden Bosch? Neither of these guys outscored the Titans free agent in 2005--not exactly a great value pick in the top rounds when you can find a guy off the waiver wire with equal, if not better production. So before you get excited about Mario Williams, there's likely a half dozen guys on your waiver wire that will outperform him in the next 2-3 years.

Be careful about trading offensive players straight up for defensive players. You aren't likely to get the return on investment if you give up a starter (or even potential starter) on offense for a defensive stud. Last year the best defensive player (LB Jonathan Vilma) was the 65th-ranked player overall. There were 23 QB, 19 RBs, and 21 WRs better than Vilma. The best DE was 110th overall and 27 QBs, 26 RBs, 33 WRs, and 6 TEs were better producers. Until I can do some consistency research on defensive players I don't see a lot of opportunity to benefit from these kinds of deals.

Scour the waiver wire throughout the season. You are liable to find quality players on the defensive side of the ball well into the fantasy season. Nathan Vasher, Mike Vrabel, and Nick Ferguson were all quality starters I picked up after the first month of the season.

Defensive Tackles--Rod Coleman and Darnell Dockett: Coleman was a waiver wire pick up during my first season in I3 when he was a Raider. Now a Falcon, Coleman has become one of the best pass rushing DTs in fantasy football. Dockett had a promising rookie year, but didn't perform as expected in his sophomore campaign. He's still a decent prospect, and not a bad bye week fill-in for Coleman. The common element among these two guys is their ability to rush the passer. You don't want a huge run-stuffing DT in fantasy leagues. Gilbert Brown and Ted Washington are great in real football, but they are practically useless in fantasy leagues unless you get points by the pound.

Defensive Ends--Kyle Vanden Bosch, Reggie Hayward, and Justin Tuck: Vanden Bosch far exceeded my expectations as a free agent pick up. I did list him as an all-preseason fantasy sleeper after I saw him destroy Michael Vick in the preseason. So I ditched my 2004 draft pick, DE Antwaan Odom and grabbed the pro bowl defensive end. Hayward was a cheap gamble that didn't pay off in his first stint with Jacksonville, but this year could be different. Tuck made some nice plays as a rookie out of Notre Dame. But Tuck was a linebacker at South Bend, so he may need a bit more time to adjust. I still think he can be Michael Strahan's successor in a couple of years, and be a solid fantasy contributor.

Linebackers--Derrick Johnson, Karlos Dansby, Mike Vrabel, Julian Peterson, Ian Gold, Channing Crowder, and Michael Boley: Peterson and Gold have been with my team since the beginning. Dansby, Johnson, Crowder, and Boley were all draft picks I think are panning out nicely. Vrabel was a waiver wire addition and he produced well enough to be the 8th-ranked LB by season's end. This is a solid unit that I hope continues to get better. I have every reason to believe this will be the case for 2006.

Cornerbacks--Travis Fisher, Nick Harper, Ike Taylor, Nathan Vasher, and Justin Miller: Fisher hasn't been able to stay healthy. When he's on the field, he makes enough plays to be a solid starter. Harper, Taylor, and Vasher were all waiver wire additions this year and they were as good (Taylor) if not better (Vasher) than most in the league. This made drafting Justin Miller look foolish. In fact, I'm not sure I'll be drafting a cornerback ever again unless he has Champ Bailey's skills. Tye Hill, are you listening?

Safeties--Sammy Knight, Nick Ferguson, Dwight Smith, Sean Jones, and Sean Considine: Knight and Ferguson were waiver wire picks in consecutive seasons. Smith came to me via trade with MacGregor--a deal I wouldn't have made if I weren't hard up from my rookie free agent dollar binge that cost me dearly. Sean Jones was a pretty high pick that hasn't panned out due to injury. It looks like Jones may get a chance now that he's fully recovered from the ACL tear. Jones was considered a peer of Sean Taylor when both were drafted two years ago. Maybe Romeo Crennel and his staff can get that level of play out of the third year safety. Considine was a best player available selection that I'm going to let hang around for a bit, maybe he'll get a shot at Brian Dawkins' job in the near future (at least I can afford to wait and see for another year).

Not a bad unit. More depth would be nice, but that's really the theme of my entire team. Building depth is key to long term success because it's your trade collateral and safety net.

2006-04-04T07:10:00.000-07:00

I want to be like Hef, too. Damn you Waldman. Damn you and your well-articulated, fantasy-inspiring arguments. Of course everyone wants to be like Hef. What could be more obvious than that? Nice job selling the dream.

Yes, calculated risks are the name of the game, but I do admit that sometimes a person needs to take on a little more risk than they otherwise would to get something done that they think could really pay off. A risk that is more "Hef-like", shall we say?

Recently in Ironman 3 I decided to make an attempt at one of these moves, most definitely inspired by my counterparts blog entry. I offered Willis McGahee for the 1.01 draft pick, which of course is the right to draft Reggie Bush.

I don't believe this goes against my long vs. short view diatribe, because it is essentially swapping a young RB for a young RB (i.e. similar windows of opportunity). However, it does go against my philosophy of trading a somewhat proven commodity, McGahee, for a prospect who has yet to prove a thing in the NFL, and they arguably have the same long-term upside. The big question: Would I be paying too much so that I couldn’t earn positive value on the transaction? Quite possibly and no one really knows, which is where the risk arises. As for making it a calculated risk, here is my thought process:

On Bush, one thing about taking a chance on rookie prospects, particularly extremely highly touted rookie prospects, is if you don’t try to acquire them now, then you will probably never be able to acquire them later. When Reggie Bush turns into the Reggie Bush.

As for McGahee, this offer would not have happened a year earlier when people expected McGahee to shine as he did in 2004, wrestling the starting job from Travis Henry and logging over 1,200 yards and 13 TDs in only 11 starts. After a disappointing 2005 however, I think people realize McGahee is a talented RB, but in a terrible situation with no short-term signs of correcting itself. As a Bills fan, I’m sorry to say that’s exactly how I see it (sigh).

Things are not looking up
for Bills fans

And this is where I’m going to fall back on the long vs. short view to justify this offer. Thinking just 2 years away (i.e. short view), the 2006 and 2007 seasons, if Reggie Bush can outscore Willis McGahee in this time, then he will be more valuable heading into 2008. And do I think Bush can do that? Absolutely. And the reason is not so much because I think Bush can and will step in and be the next LaDainian Tomlinson right out of the gate, but I do feel strongly that McGahee’s situation is in fact terrible (double sigh). Even worse than a year ago with a continued unsettled QB situation, a new - and questionable - coaching staff plus other net talent losses on the roster, most notably Eric Moulds to Houston.

The important thing to note is that even with these young guys I’m not trying to acquire Bush with the thinking, “I’ll be set at RB for 5+ years.” No, it is still a short-term game whereas if Bush can even partly live up to his billing, and McGahee continues to perform worse than his talent otherwise warrants as I expect he will, Bush is a better value play. Even at a noticeably higher risk level given he hasn’t taken an NFL hit, and we don’t know for sure what team he will end up on yet.

All that said, this offer was rejected, pretty quickly. A counter was promised, but none arrived. I’m not surprised it was rejected because as noted above, it is essentially a young RB for a young RB. Unless the 1.01 owner Lukie really likes McGahee (which would have been a much easier sell last year at this time) and really dislikes Bush, then he doesn’t really stand anything to gain from my trade proposal.

However, I am surprised at no counter offer. I did avoid having to make a tough decision though. If he had come back with McGahee + Darrell Jackson or McGahee + Santana Moss for the 1.01, that would have been a lot tougher to swallow. It is unlikely I would pull the trigger on that no matter how much I want to be like Hef. Its not like I’m head over heels in love with Bush right now, as he can be nothing but overhyped at this point. In another dynasty league of mine, the 1.01 owner said the only player he would take straight up for the 1.01 right now is Larry Johnson, arguably the #1 overall dynasty player. I guess from that we can infer he’s not trading the pick!

What did surprise me about the i3 league though is the 1.01 did subsequently get traded. Lukie accepted draft picks 1.04, 1.07, 3.01 and 4.04 while giving the 1.01, 3.11, 4.01 and 5.01. I think he would have been better off with McGahee... ;)

Seriously though, I can see the thinking that his team has a few holes to fill so he is parlaying Bush into a RB at the 1.04 and perhaps Vernon Davis or another potential star at the 1.07. My only issue with the trade from his perspective is, did he drop down too far to get a quality RB? I think, yes. Taking the chance of 4 quality RB going to good situations, or hoping one of the 1.01-1.03 picks takes another position (unlikely), is pretty risky. J.J. Arrington anyone? Put it this way... I wouldn’t trade McGahee for the 1.04 and 1.07. If it was the 1.02 and the 1.07 or a later 1st, and I had multiple holes to fill, then that might be a different story.

I’ve been looking forward to going over my roster similar to what Matt did a couple weeks ago with his offense. There has been a lot of news impacting my players this off-season, mostly in the negative, which could trigger some more active management leading up to our rookie draft in an attempt to bring home back-to-back championships. I got sidetracked again, but next time I’ll dive into some player commentary. Everyone say a little prayer to the fantasy football Gods that Carson Palmer will return to full health sooner than later. I’ve been praying, but it doesn’t seem to be helping so far...

2006-03-27T22:08:00.000-08:00

Long view vs. Short view.

MacGregor is dead-on about the choice. I don't know about you, but Mike's entry sounded like forced diplomacy. I can't say I blame him, really. After reading his take on choices of strategy, the question is whether there really is a choice at all.

In my other dynasty league, I primarily take the short view--not as conservative as Mike in Ironman3--and I have benefitted from acquiring Brett Favre, Corey Dillon, Stephen Davis, and hanging on to Jimmy Smith rather than waiting for Drew Brees, Lamont Jordan, or Santana Moss over the past 4-5 years. I probably have one of the two-highest winning percentages in this league's 5-year, history. The short view is efficient, effective, and sometimes, boring.

Granted, winning is never boring. But winning can fuel the greed to win more and win on a bigger scale. The short view is the wiser method to stay on top. Mike's approach is like the 49ers under DeBartolo after all those years mortgaging the future, and at worst, paying the piper for a year before returning to contender status.

The long view--after thinking about what Mike wrote--is what I've been chasing in this Ironman3 league: My goal hasn't been to win one year at a time, but to hope I can build a team like Art Rooney and Chuck Noll did with the Steelers if the 70's. I want to achieve the kind of status where my competition looks at my team and is in awe of the juggernaut I assembled with draft picks and free agency. I want to wow them with my record of astute draft picks ranging from high profile prospects that lived up to their promise all the way down to the unknown guys off the scrap heap that made good.

In other words, I'm out of my mind.

But I think the long view is appealing for the same reasons people go to Vegas and bet on the long shot to win the Super Bowl. Life is too short to play the best percentages all the time. Embracing risk is an intoxicating rush, and addictive when it pays off. It was inherently more exciting several years ago to have taken the risk on Tomlinson before he became LT2 and some GMs thought he wouldn't be special than to give away the pick for Emmitt Smith.

Same thing now. In some ways it's more appealing for people to take a chance on Reggie Bush before he becomes the Reggie Bush than give away the chance to get him in exchange for a player of currently high value. I tested Mike's theory about this infatuation and the resulting unwise, inflation of rookie values just alst week.

I offered Randy Moss, my second round pick, and Chris Brown for the rights to Reggie Bush. I even presented an option to choose another starting back on my squad. The owner didn't even budge--even at the thought of negotiating a shot at Cadillac Williams or Brian Westbrook. Crazy? Maybe. Maybe not. That's the great part of dynasty leagues. The game isn't just about winning weekly matchups, but winning the art of making good long term choices. Dynasty leagues offer a game within the game.

Those of us that take the long view want to live out the dreamer in our personalities. We want to take wild risks. We want to be Hugh Hefner. That's right, Hugh Hefner! We want to leave behind the success of playing by the numbers and do our own thing. We want to risk all our chips and win so big that we're dating three gorgeous, and brainy, pin-up models half our age by the time we hit 50--and all at the same time!

Okay, maybe the wife or girlfriend put a governor on that dream, but you know what I mean. The long view owners want to be the Hugh Heftner of fantasy football. He wants multiple, big-time talents that causes others to drool over his roster. He wants to be the guy that discovered the Marilyn Monroe of fantasy football.

Like I said, I'm out of my mind.

Then again, so was the guy that quit his job at Esquire to produce a magazine at his kitchen table back in 1953 that would eventually earn him enough success from this publication to have a dormstyle bedroom in a swank, Chicago mansion filled with pin-up models, and a swimming pool for them to join him for late night skinny-dips...

The problem with where I'm going here is Hef took calculated risks. He also worked his tail off to do the job right. So the answer about the Short View vs. Long View may be the question isn't the right one. Maybe it's really about having a broad perspective rather than a narrow perspective.

Mike has a broad perspective about what happens in dynasty leagues. People clamor for the hot, young thing. So Mike, like Hef, gives them the dream, but pockets what they pay in exchange. While these owners are excited about their fantasy draft pick that has yet to produce in reality, Mike is building his roster with riches. I guess it pays to look behind the curtain...

2006-03-20T08:21:00.000-08:00

When Krueger, Waldman and I all got together recently in Kansas City to discuss what makes a fantasy football information website, great, there was a bit of a dissenting opinion on the need for specially tailored keeper and dynasty league information.

Fantasy Football: "It ain't brain surgery."

My immediate response was, "What's the big deal? Take everything we already do for redraft leagues, and bump up the younger players with upside, and bump down the older players whose upside is in the rearviewmirror of their careers." I may have even used the phrase, "It ain't brain surgery." While I expected to see some head nods and perhaps an, "uh huh", indicating a shared level of acceptance of my view, it didn't happen. Instead I got, "well, I think it is important" (Waldman) and, "I get a lot of emails asking for dynasty rankings" (Krueger).

Okay, well, its not like I haven't been wrong before. Since that day though, I've been thinking about why we did have a difference of opinion, and I think I may have pinpointed it. Philosophy. People who play in dynasty leagues have a different philosophy as to how to manage their teams.

Some people take a short view with their teams, playing to win sooner than later, not afraid to pick up seasoned veterans or trade valuable draft picks. Most people take a long view (too many, and too long in my humble opinion - more on this later). These people jettison all players off their roster who are even remotely close to 30 years old, horde draft picks and are preparing to setup their team to become a true dynasty of 3 or more dominating seasons winning consecutive championship titles a la the historical '70s Steelers, '80s 49ers and '90s Cowboys.

My philosophy, as you probably guessed, is very short. That isn't to say I completely ignore the future, but I rarely sacrifice the current very much for a wishful big windfall in the future. With a short view, redraft information is not that different to me when applied to dynasty leagues, which goes back to the original point. "We have redraft info., there is no need for separate keeper / dynasty info., waste of time, yada, yada, yada."

Now, why do I think there are too many long viewers? I guess I've seen so many examples where an owner makes large short term sacrifices but doesn't get the expected payoff 2 to 3 years down the line (i.e. the perpetual rebuild), that I can only reason if some of those guys took a short view instead, they would have enjoyed much more fantasy success. Here's a great quote I stumbled on from David Yudkin of Footballguys: "You can only win the year you are playing in." Amen.

Keep in mind though, I'm not advocating cashing in your entire account of future draft picks so you can have the pleasure of holding retirement parties for Brett Favre, Curtis Martin and Rod Smith, as they fade off into the sun wearing your fantasy team's jersery. What we need, is balance. However, I am pressing the balance to align more with my short view because too often the long view is what is at the forefront of a dynasty player's mind, which ends up clouding their decision making.

Some of the keywords I've thrown out so far in this discussion are philosophy, short vs. long view, balance and perpetual rebuild. Okay, the last one wasn't really key, but I like the ring to it. Feel free to use it in some trash talk to put down your league's consistent basement dwellers. "Waldman, just trade me Larry Fitzgerald because you're now entering Year 4 of your 2 year (perpetual) rebuilding plan, and we both want Larry to feel what its like to play for a winner, right?." ;)

Anyway... now it is time for the most important word in fantasy football: Value. In the long-run, you win at fantasy football because you get good value from your players. You lose because you get poor value. That's pretty simple to grasp. Value in fantasy football is measured by the player's stat production, which translates directly to fantasy points, relative to the cost, and cost can be draft picks, players given up in trade or auction dollars. Whatever you had to give up to acquire the stat production received is the cost.

The reason a long view, in my opinion, has less success than a short view, is because long viewers are not getting good value managing their team. It isn't that they are any less smart than the rest of us. In fact, there are a lot of long viewers who probably have more pure football savvy than short viewers, being they watch a lot of college football, scout the draft like madmen, and have a good knack for finding future fantasy gems while the masses are still pan mining the ore.

It isn't that these long viewers aren't good at finding decent stat production, keeping in mind that no one is perfect projecting future performances of millionaire or soon-to-be millionaire athletes, but the problem is these players end up costing too much. Remember value is a two variable equation (maybe three if we factor in risk). It doesn't matter if you think Reggie Bush is capable of performing at a level equal to LaDainian Tomlinson. If you pay LaDainian Tomlinson to get him, then you screwed up. There is little room to earn positive value on that transaction, but the downside is very much a reality.

In dynasty leagues, young players and rookie draft picks are almost universally overvalued. Veteran players are almost universally undervalued. I think most fantasy players know this, but what we know and what action we take with this knowledge doesn't always jive. Here are some interesting points, theories, etc. which I've thought about to support why I think a short view is a more successful proposition than a long view in a dynasty league:

1. There are more long viewers. Simple economic supply and demand indicates if there are more long viewers, then there is more demand for the hot rookie prospects, draft picks and young players, even if they haven't proven much of anything yet, which drives up the price to acquire them. The inverse is true of veteran players. The magic number seems to be the age of 30 where people get scared of having these guys on their team waiting for the dreaded and inevitable drop-off. Much less demand allows these guys to be had pretty cheap a lot of the time. I think since I've matured to the ripe old age of 33, I now give the 30 year olds more benefits of the doubt, which has worked out nicely. See: Muhsin Muhammad ('04), Joey Galloway ('05) and Rod Smith ('04 and '05)

2. Properly accounting for risk. Another important concept, everyone wants to hit the jackpot in the lottery. A dynasty rookie draft can be akin to playing the lottery. Everyone wants to turn their draft pick into the next LaDainian Tomlinson, and you can't win the jackpot unless you buy a ticket (i.e. own the draft picks). Certainly at this stage a Joey Galloway is never going to become as valuable as a LaDainian Tomlinson level of player, but how likely is it that your draft pick(s) are going to turn into an LT? Not very. You could just as easily end up with Cedric Benson or J.J. Arrington from last year, who didn't help a lick with your team's '05 win total.

People are overly optimistic about their own draft picks, much like fantasy owners overvalue their own players. Trading those picks looks like a much more positive expected value proposition when you realize your own personal rookie draft pick accuracy % hovers around 50%, instead of a perceived 80-90%.

3. Expecting the unexpected. One of my favorite things that gives me a great laugh from people discussing fantasy football is when they say something to the effect, "I have Player X in my dynasty league. I've got that position sewn up with a stud for the next 10 years!" HA HA HA HA! Why am I laughing? If you've played fantasy football long enough you know to expect the unexpected. Any person who makes such a statement is unwisely not expecting the unexpected, and rather thinks Player X is going to carry on with back-to-back-to-back-to-back..., etc. top of the league fantasy seasons. Obviously they've never had players who blew out a knee, got suspended, got thrown in jail, got in trouble with drugs, drinking, guns or women, had a serious attitude problem, reneged on their contract for more money, were lazy, or just quit.

Does anything surprise me anymore? Sometimes I get a mild surprise, but in most cases I already expect an incredible range of crazy stuff to happen which can often negatively impact the fantasy prospects of my players. The players are people, and life happens. Reeling this in to get back to my point, people acquiring players with a 10-year forward looking plan are unrealistically thinking way too far ahead. Consider using a 2 to 3 year outlook for over 90% of players, and anything beyond that is an "unexpected" (wink) bonus. I can see looking a little further for a very restrictive group of players like Eli Manning or Larry Fitzgerald, but remember, anything can happen at anytime. Just ask Carson Palmer on his first career playoff pass last January.

4. Manage from a position of power. Something I've noticed in recent years is that it becomes decidedly easier to talk trade with other teams when you are winning, than when you are losing. Obviously, when winning, it means your roster is probably in decent shape, and likely better shape than when you're losing. This means you likely have more options with which to work with. You can take trades that help you more now and the future, rather than strictly the future. You can also accept trades that bring in quality vets at the trade deadline for the final playoff push, without too much concern this will hurt you long-term because your team is strong otherwise. Heck, if your team is doing well you are protected from the often irrational idea to, "shake things up", as you might if the team is performing poorly. And overall, you can just be more selective about the trades you accept, because other owners will have a tougher time selling you that their trade proposal improves your team, when you already have a full trophy case and sit atop the standings.

Okay, I'm sure I'm past my time to wrap things up. A little less on the entertainment and a little less commentary specific to the Ironman 3 league this time than was intended with this project, but hopefully this submission qualifies nicely on the helpful side of the ledger. Plus it should give a good basis to understand my thought patterns going forward as I do discuss the i3 league in more detail. Cheers.

2006-03-15T00:50:00.000-08:00

Just like the NFL, a typical dynasty squad owner approaches his offseason with plenty of optimism. I'm no exception. The offseason is time to take stock of your roster, keep an eye on free agency, and evaluate rookie talent. So begins an inventory of my team Out To Lunch, beginning with the offense:

.....

QBs: Byron Leftwich, Steve McNair, David Garrard, Stefan LeFors, and Adrian McPherson. I'd like to think my quarterback situation looks pretty good, but I bet ESPN's John Clayton feels the same way with his hair situation. He sports one of those comb overs of the worse kind--one strand wrapped around the entire circumference of his noggin with that disturbing tail hanging under his left earlobe. The only thing I can imagine is he thinks viewers will mistake it for the wire on his earpiece. The problem is Clayton doesn't wear one of those while on the set.

Watch Clayton this summer. I'm sure I won't be the only one wondering how ESPN can trash all these wannabe analysts and anchors but they let a pro like Clayton get away with this grooming oddity (Not like I'm ready for TV--heck, I'm barely ready for radio). John Clayton is like my starting QBs: Individuals with good track records making a worrisome situation a little worse by his own doing, but in denial of what's happening around them.

.....

Leftwich has been my QB of the future. The way I acquired him nearly caused a riot among my fellow owners, which is a topic all on its own. He's had fantasy performances in stretches that over the course the season, would put him among the elite passers. But his receivers continue to soak their hands in Mazola, and his offensive line leaves Leftwich splayed in positions reminiscient of Johnny Knoxville after a big stunt...

.....

Or better yet, left for dead like Steve McNair. The Titans' warrior nearly had the plug pulled on his career in 2004, after years of abuse catching up to him. It looks like the Titans will be drafting a QB of the future (whether it will truly be a round 1 prospect like Cutler, Young, or Leinart, I'm not sold yet) in rounds 1-3, but McNair gets another shot at least for 2006. With Kevin Mawae and David Givens added to the fold, I'm more optimistic that McNair will improve upon his mediocre fantasy totals from last year. Still a good back up, but again Leftwich may turn out to be at best, a good back up--leaving me without a future starter.

.....

David Garrard? Geeze, he gets a lot of love in the media. Funny how the same media laughed him off when he boldly proclaimed as a rookie that he should get a shot to start over Mark Brunell. All I know is that I like having him behind Leftwich, but I'd love having him traded to a team that will give him a chance to start. I just don't think Garrard is that good to start for anyone long term--and no team wants to give up what Jax is asking to take that risk, either.

.....

Stefan Lefors is a late-round pick of the Panthers last year. He has Drew Bree's skill set but is also a better runner. I think he has a shot to succeed Delhomme one day, but it won't be any time soon unless there's an injury. He'll likely be on my practice squad.

.....

Adrian McPherson was my reach of 2005. Len Pasquerelli, the ESPN senior football writer, profiled McPherson's story leading up to the draft. The key part of the piece most fantasy owners looking for something to hold onto was McPherson's stellar play in the Arena League. MacGregor and I went to an Arena League game a few weeks ago, and the best athlete on the field that day was arguably the third grade champion baton twirler performing at the half time show. I picked McPherson way too early--the end of the 2nd round--this was a classic case of hype run amok. It also inspired me to stick with the players I actually watched play in college. McPherson may still get a shot, but he's definitely not a guy that will be ready any time soon.

.....

RBs: Cadillac Williams, Brian Westbrook, Ryan Moats, Michael Pittman, Antowain Smith, Brandon Jacobs, Jarrett Payton, and Quentin Griffin.

When Cadillac Williams and Brian Westbrook were healthy, my team was scoring at clip that rivaled Mike's squad. Of course that didn't last more than a few games before the bottom dropped out. Hence, the importance of depth. When you look at MacGregror's RB depth chart you can understand why he's at the pinnacle of our league. I'm riding with a lot of also-rans. My greatest obstacle to reaching contender status has been poor RB choices that cost me big. It almost always comes down to the runners, doesn't it? I swung for the fenses in my first season and blew my entire free agent funds on Georgia Tech RB Tony Hollings. The hope was I'd acquire a 1st round RB right away for a team that had Tony Boselli on the line. At the time I was trying to accomplish what Mike got with Willis McGahee. It didn't happen, and one thing I definitely learned was that as important it is to acquire a good RB, if you don't have money to spend on waiver wire picks during the season, you are in trouble.

.....

My next fatal flaw was a one-time penchant for big-time talents with big-time issues. When I first began playing fantasy football I invariably wound up with a player whose physical talent I couldn't resist and sold myself on the fact they would grow up. This started with Michael Westbrook and rapidly deteriorated from there....Jeff George (the incredible self-sacking QB)...Cecil Collins (took Peeping Tom to a whole new level)...and ending finally with my second ill-fated RB of the future in this league, Onterrio Smith. I don't feel so bad about drafting Smith. When he was on the field, he looked terrific. Of course, he was too busy figuring out ways to circumvent the NFL drug policy. The whole Original Whizzinator incident was the turning point for me. I have reformed my ways (I think)...

....

I did make some decent decisions. I acquired Westbrook three years ago in a trade where I shipped Tom Brady for McNair and Westbrook. I still like the deal, though McNair is much closer to the end of his career. Mainly because Westbrook has top 10 potential with his multi-dimensional skill sets. Williams was acquired in a deal where I shipped off my #3 overall pick and Onterrio Smith for the #2 pick overall and something else small. The guy at #3 picked Cedric Benson and I got the Cadillac. Still too early to tell, but I have been a big proponent of the Tampa Bay Escalade since I saw him run roughshod over quality SEC defenses. So far, so good.

.....

WRs: Larry Fitzgerald, Brandon Lloyd, Jerry Porter, Matt Jones, Bobby Engram, Doug Gabriel, Sammie Parker, and Quincy Morgan.

Fitzgerald was my first round pick in 2004. I knew when MacGregor went slumming for a possible deal on Late-Night Larry that I was onto something good. Actually, the only receiver I believe that showed better concentration on tough catches in college than Fitzgerald may have been Brandon Lloyd. Fortunately for me Lloyd just got released from the passing game purgatory known as the 49ers organization. We'll see how he performs as a Redskin--I'm expecting a 1000-yard season if the QB remains healthy. I acquired Jerry Porter and Sammie Parker in a deal for Laveranues Coles. Although Porter was hurt for half the season, I like this deal. Parker, Jones, and Gabriel are all guys with talent but need the right opportunity. Morgan was a cheap waiver wire longshot last year.

TE: Ernie Conwell--Obviously this is an offseason priority via the draft or free agency.

K: Adam Viniatieri--based on a local radio report, it's possible he'll be a Colt...I can live with that!

.....

So my offense has some intriguing players, promising players, and occassionally amazing players, but no true studs--with the possible exception of Larry Fitzgerald. If 3-4 of these offensive players fulfill their potential for the season, I'm money. If not, I'm no better than last season. This means I need quality depth in the short term. I'll profile my defense in my next entry and discuss the state of my overall strategy past and present...

2006-03-14T09:10:00.000-08:00

My first blog. By the time I first really understood what blogging is, it was already huge. So while I felt the concept was kind of cool, I never gave it a try. I guess I didn't want to be a bandwagon jumper, especially trying to get on when it seemed the train (er, bandwagon) already left the station, long ago, and was already on the far side of the mountain.

So what happened? Well, Waldman* pitches an idea that we should do a blog about our fantasy football teams in a particular dynasty league to help others learn a thing or two about building a dynasty. Or at least be entertaining, or maybe a bit of both.

* Given the perceived high percentage of Mike's populating the fantasy football industry, I'm very much in the habit of calling Mike Krueger of FF Today fame, "Krueger". Matt will in most cases be given an equal amount of disrespect** and henceforth be called "Waldman".

** I understand sarcasm doesn't always work well over the Internet, but I can't help myself. Consider all things I type to quite possibly have a sarcastic undertone. You'll get the hang of it soon enough.

I have to wonder if this is the best way for me to go about writing my first blog. The thing with Waldman is he writes about a mile a minute, and by my estimation, only sleeps between the hours of 3:00 am and 6:00 am each night. I'm a fairly slow writer to the point I've strongly considered retiring my regular FF Today in-season column, FF In The Groin. In fact I said as much at our annual FF Today think tank meeting recently. I'd hate to abandon it after 5 years and plenty of nice emails received. We'll see. At any rate hopefully blogging is easier (read: quicker) but I suspect no matter what, this will be a challenge to keep up with him.

Plus a secondary, but minor concern, is my Toronto Toucans team has no where to go but down as reigning champ, top scoring regular season team for 3 straight seasons and a nice group of top tier players on my roster. Waldman's aptly named Out to Lunch squad on the other hand, has relatively low expectations attached to it. I like what he is doing with his team and while he has yet to earn a playoff spot in his 3 seasons, he was in the hunt until the final weeks last year. All in all though, given the law of averages, no matter what I say and do the Toucans might be due for a down season and OTL is a nice Cinderella candidate to rise up the charts. I can't help but wonder if this is a bit of a setup move on his part. Is he smelling blood in the water perhaps?

Fortunately I'm willing to throw caution to the wind. Lets get blogging...

2006-03-14T00:01:00.000-08:00

"You can love your pet, but you can't love your pet."

--Althea Bullard

.....

You know what I mean. I'm not talking about things you don't want to see at a stag party. I'm talking about people that the idea of just having a pet around the house isn't enough for them. They have to take it to the next level. You know, dress them in outfits that if on a child, you would probably contact your local Department of Family and Children Services. Then again, they probably are social workers, how else can you explain publications such as this one.

.....

Somebody contact Jimmy Kimmel and get these folks booked on his show. Although I have my share of cats--when you have a little girl with a big heart for animals you accept the fact you'll have more pets than you planned--I think if my sleep deprivation finally got to me, and I tried this with one of my pets, I pray it would perform a mercy killing. Maybe then the NRA could recruit in Cat Fancy...

.....

While I don't love my pets. I love fantasy football. I realized this problem when August through December leagues were no longer enough for me. I had to find a way to make my obsession a year-long ordeal. Which much to the chagrin of my family, I have succeeded well past the point of reason, and I have entered the fantasy football equivalent of Ralph and Petipa doing their Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers act (first pic on the left).

.....

Like old Ralphie, I had to go all out. A traditional, 12-18 player roster of offensive skill players and team defenses wasn't going to cut it, either. I had to join a league with a 40-man roster, 4-man taxi-squad, and 2-man injured reserve. Better yet, half our 20-player, starting lineup requires individual defensive players. It's call Ironman3, and it is definitely the Monpa of dynasty leagues.

.....

I joined this league three years ago. Actually, I was voted into the league after I had to write a term paper-length post on their message board explaining why I was one of the best two candidates for their league. This is a free league, mind you! At that time I probably would have learned the two-step with one of my cats to the Houston Oilers 1970's theme song if I thought it would grant me an expansion team. Now that I know these guys, I probably would have just promised I'd blow my entire $100 annual free agency wad on a college CB impersonating an over-hyped tailback. More on this Monpa-moment in future blogs.

.....

In the coming weeks, Mike and I will be blogging the NFL season as it relates to our Ironman 3 experience. Hopefully, you'll absorb some strategy about what to do (Mike) and what not to do (yep, you guessed it), worthwhile player insights (nope, me this time) and how to negotiate trades as if you were the IRS going after Willie Nelson (Mike). Most of all, we hope you'll find it entertaining in the process.