Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


    
      
        Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
        (https://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi)
      

        the Gridiron >> the Red Zone >>  Burress OR Chambers
        
(Message started by: bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 9:01am)

Title: Burress OR Chambers
Post by bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 9:01am

I start 2 WRs as some of you already know. Receptions are not included in the scoring of this league. Randy Moss is one of my starters. Torry Holt is off this week, so I have to choose between:

Plaxico Burress (351 yds & 1 td in 3 games)
vs.
Cleveland

OR

Chris Chambers (260 yds & 3 tds in 2 games)
at
NYG

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 9:02am

Slight correction Burress has played 4 games & Chambers has played 3 games.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by BarnabyWilde on Oct 1^st, 2003, 9:33am

I'd go with Burress vs. that weak Cleveland defense

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 9:52am

Did you know that CLeveland is 4th best in avg. passing yds allowed? Or that the NYG are LAST in that same category? Check it out 314 yds per game. The next to last is Philly at 257.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by BarnabyWilde on Oct 1^st, 2003, 10:25am

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.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 11:50am

Well thanks for the advice, but perhaps you'd admit it's a bit biased?

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Tony_O on Oct 1^st, 2003, 12:37pm

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.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by StegRock on Oct 1^st, 2003, 1:12pm

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!

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by BarnabyWilde on Oct 1^st, 2003, 1:36pm

on 10/01/03 at 11:50:27, 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. ;)

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 1:54pm

You're right. The Browns gave up 6(2 run, 3 air & 1 int) & the Giants gave up 5(1 run, 3 air & 1 int). BTW, I'm not JUST looking at the opponent's stats here. The last 2 weeks Burress's fantasy #s have been down dramatically. Whether it's due to sum injury or the play calling I don't know. Although, the majority has said Burress, so I will certainly take that into consideration. However, Burress has already cost me 1 game & almost 2 games(thanx 2 LT).

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Philly on Oct 1^st, 2003, 3:10pm

on 10/01/03 at 09:52:43, bakes781 wrote:

Did you know that CLeveland is 4th best in avg. passing yds allowed? Or that the NYG are LAST in that same category? Check it out 314 yds per game. The next to last is Philly at 257.

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.

I think I'd go with Burress this week.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Noey21 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 4:15pm

I agree to use Buress in this situation. Not because Buress is better because given a different situation (a qb that could passor not having a top 3 rb) Chambers would be way better. Chambers is so gifted it is he has always played on run dominated teams (Wisconsin Badgers and the Miami Dolphins).

Just look at his receptions he goes and gets them.

I tend to beleive NYG and Miami will be more of a ball control and defense oriented game. Plus knowing the history of the run defense for the Browns they will key on that which in turn will open the field for Ward and Burress.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Tony_O on Oct 1^st, 2003, 4:35pm

It seems as if you have already decided you don't want to start Burress because of his performances the last two weeks..........So why are asking for our opinions and then defending the starting of Chambers........Stop wasting our time and pull the Trigger! [smiley=firinback.gif]

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by bakes781 on Oct 1^st, 2003, 5:11pm

Well no infact I'm trying to be convinced NOT to start Chambers. You have given me something to really think about.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by StegRock on Oct 1^st, 2003, 5:24pm

on 10/01/03 at 15:10:35, Philly wrote:

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! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

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. [smiley=whistle.gif] I say a little more [smiley=zenmaster.gif] and a little less [smiley=thinking.gif] puts you on a path of success, with fantasy football's being a "microcosmic" example of this. [smiley=shrug.gif]

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Callie on Oct 1^st, 2003, 6:22pm

Another intangible is the rivalry. Steelers and Browns have a very deep one that doesn't always show up as big as it is on the national level. I come from that part of the country. Believe me, I know this. These two teams are laying for each other. They hate each other's guts. The Steelers will rack up the points if they can. They can.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by DirkDiggler on Oct 1^st, 2003, 6:29pm

You have to go with Burress.

As the former owner of Chambers(who traded him to Steg)(the trade has turned out quite poorly for me), all I can say is he is inconsistant. He drove me crazy last year. He is off to a good start so far, but the Dolphins are gonna run with every runner they have.

Burress is gonna kill Cleveland....

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Keyshawn Johnson 76yards on Oct 1^st, 2003, 6:29pm

on 10/01/03 at 13:12:22, 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... :-/

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by StegRock on Oct 1^st, 2003, 8:51pm

on 10/01/03 at 18:29:56, Keyshawn Johnson 76yards wrote:

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!

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by steelkings on Oct 2^nd, 2003, 7:48am

As a Steeler fan I can tell you that Burress has a hip pointer, Plus the Steelers turn the ball over alot.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Walker Boh on Oct 2^nd, 2003, 8:35am

If it were my team, I'd start (a healthy?) Burress... I keep having flashbacks of that playoff game last year and I got dizzy just thinking about it! Plus, this will be the night game and both teams will want to light it up for the national audience. Good luck. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by Coachnorm on Oct 3^rd, 2003, 11:29pm

Wow, Some really nice insight on how to evaluate fantasy output by looking much deeper than just stats. There are some good leesons to be learned just by reading this thread.

That said, I believe that both Chambers and Plaxico will score a td and their yardage will be very very close. So, toss a coin.

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by FatJake on Oct 4^th, 2003, 12:30am

what caochnorm said

Title: Re: Burress OR Chambers
Post by geojon on Oct 5^th, 2003, 12:38pm

First a disclaimer: I am a huge Eagles fan.

That said, I would not got up against a Jim Johnson defense. I know, I know, their pass defense has been awful, but Wash has a mediocre running game and the Eags eat RBs for breakfast. Washington must throw the ball to win the game. Jim Johnson will be laying in wait for this. The Eags are running an inexperienced secondary out there, but they are hitters and they are talented. It won't be easy for Ramsey, Coles and Gardner.

Upshot: go with Burress.