Author |
Topic: Burress OR Chambers (Read 501 times) |
|
Gridiron Great
CBFL Champ - '04
# 24
Hey Rock!Watch me pull the Gridiron out of my hat!
  
 
Posts: 3373
Back to top
|
 |
Re: Burress OR Chambers
« Reply #4 on: Oct 1st, 2003, 10:25am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Well, let's see. The Browns so far faced Peyton Manning in week one (the offense looked rusty in week 1), Kyle Boller, who never threw due to Jamal Lewis running all over them, Garcia, who has been shaky this year, and Kitna, who threw 3 touchdowns.
The Giants have faced Warner, Carter(don't know what happen there) and Ramsey. All threw for over 300 yards. I don't see Fiedler continuing that trend, especially after the Giants had a chance to fix it after their bye week.
|
|
 Logged |
New York Giants...WORLD CHAMPS!!!!
|
|
|
Tony_O
Guest
Back to top
|
I would go with Burress also! I think NY's Cornerbacks are much better than Clevelands and last year Pittsburgh and Cleveland had some offensive shotouts. Plaxico has a big size advantage and they will be looking to get back on a winning streak.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19699
Back to top
|
 |
Re: Burress OR Chambers
« Reply #7 on: Oct 1st, 2003, 1:12pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I ABSOLUTELY despise the Giants. Don't like any of the teams involved here actually, AND I have Chambers and like him A LOT... did all I could to trade for him during the offseason. Now, with ALL that said, go with Burress. Don't "over-numbers" it like so many tend to do! Evaluating matchups like that can be very deceiving and misses the "human element" of it all. Guys often "play down" and "play up" based on their competition. Here is a not-at-all uncommon scenario... You think so-and-so is a lock against, let's say, Detroit. You see the final score, a rout. Then, you look at the box score and, jaw agape, proclaim aloud, "How can you beat a team 30 to 14 and have your #1 wideout only catch for 65 yards and NO touchdowns?" Don't tell me you've never done it! I sure have... We ALL have. Point being, stick with your stud who you probably spent one of your top 5 or so picks on. Don't overthink it!
|
| « Last Edit: Oct 4th, 2003, 12:41am by Stegfucius » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Gridiron Great
CBFL Champ - '04
# 24
Hey Rock!Watch me pull the Gridiron out of my hat!
Posts: 3373
Back to top
|
|
Re: Burress OR Chambers
« Reply #8 on: Oct 1st, 2003, 1:36pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 1st, 2003, 11:50am, bakes781 wrote:| Well thanks for the advice, but perhaps you'd admit it's a bit biased? |
|
No, not al all. I just looked at the game stats. Yes, the Giants gave up yardage, but not many touchdowns via the air. The Browns on the other hand, have.
Burress is better than Chambers, Miami is playing on the road, in the Meadowlands,a tough place to play. Pittsburgh is coming of a tough home loss,and should be ready to beat up on the Browns.
If the Giants continue to be a pourous defense, I will be the first to admit they suck. 
|
|
Logged |
New York Giants...WORLD CHAMPS!!!!
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19699
Back to top
|
 |
Re: Burress OR Chambers
« Reply #14 on: Oct 1st, 2003, 5:24pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 1st, 2003, 3:10pm, Philly wrote:| Cleveland is 4th best against the pass because no one has had to throw on them. They are so easy to run on. Last week Kitna tried to throw on them and wound up with almost a 75% completion rate and three TDs. |
|
That's exactly the kind of stuff that gets lost in the "statistical" shuffle, especially this early in the season... rankings, overall, have very little merit. Good point, Philster! 
It's funny... Unless it's like Tampa's defense (of late years), I consider VERY little of this kind of stuff when making lineup determinations and have been a fairly successful fantasy footballer down through the years.  I say a little more  and a little less  puts you on a path of success, with fantasy football's being a "microcosmic" example of this. 
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Fantasy Field General
# 97
Posts: 810
Back to top
|
|
Re: Burress OR Chambers
« Reply #17 on: Oct 1st, 2003, 6:29pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 1st, 2003, 1:12pm, StegRock wrote:| I ABSOLUTELY despise the Giants. Don't like any of the teams involved here actually, AND I have Chambers and like him A LOT... did all I could to trade for him during the offseason. |
|
Steg, if I do recall correctly, when I was hyping up Chambers during the pre-season, and labeled him as a possible Top 10-15 WR, you were one of the ones who laughed and said that was ridiculous. I dunno... 
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19699
Back to top
|
|
Re: Burress OR Chambers
« Reply #18 on: Oct 1st, 2003, 8:51pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Oct 1st, 2003, 6:29pm, Keyshawn Johnson 76yards wrote:Steg, if I do recall correctly, when I was hyping up Chambers during the pre-season, and labeled him as a possible Top 10-15 WR, you were one of the ones who laughed and said that was ridiculous. I dunno...
|
|
Yea, I rememberish what you're talking about. But, it's more like I was trying to say that he should not be drafted as a Top 10-15 wide receiver (at that time), not that he won't be one (come the season). Follow the distinction? I think you could have gotten him later than you drafted him in whatever that context was and, thus, have gotten a better bargain!
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
steelkings
Guest
Back to top
|
As a Steeler fan I can tell you that Burress has a hip pointer, Plus the Steelers turn the ball over alot.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Games
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print
Remove
