Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


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

        the Gridiron >> the Red Zone >>  McCants for Burress
        
(Message started by: Mossaholic on Oct 13^th, 2003, 8:48pm)

Title: McCants for Burress
Post by Mossaholic on Oct 13^th, 2003, 8:48pm

Would I be dum to dump Burress for McCants. Burress just is not producimg right now. I'm not sure if he is going to turn it around.

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by Noey21 on Oct 13^th, 2003, 9:11pm

Depends on your situation...but I would hold on to Burress.

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by StegRock on Oct 13^th, 2003, 9:47pm

Are you guys kidding me? Put down the crack pipe! Based on the (ill-)logic here, considering McCants for Owens would seem reasonable. I know... I have him and gave up a lot to get him. But, please! [smiley=pullleeeeeeeze.gif] I mean Owens hasn't been producing much better, BUT he is still a blue-chip player in the long-run. Burress isn't quite "true blue-"chip, but he's up there. McCants is, at best, Hilliard or Finneran level. Frankly speaking, in my league he's a free-agent, and not someone I, for one, am looking to pick up. Mossaholic, DO NOT DO THIS! You WILL regret it in the end! It's a sucker deal!

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by Philly on Oct 13^th, 2003, 10:13pm

I thought the subject of this thread was a joke when I first read it.

[smiley=ohshit.gif] :o [smiley=ohshit.gif] :o [smiley=ohshit.gif]

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by captainpurple on Oct 14^th, 2003, 10:59am

I'm going with Steg and Philly on this one, and applauding their restraint on not flaming you for posting it.

Burress has 2x the receptions, 2x the yards, simply missing the TDs, but they'll come.

One of the oldest adages in FF, don't bench your studs. I'll deduce that means don't trade them for bantha fodder either!

GO VIKES!

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by Mossaholic on Oct 14^th, 2003, 12:49pm

You guys are right. I deserve to be flamed [smiley=flamewar.gif] for that one. That was just a little frustration [smiley=frustrated.gif] from starting 3-0 and I thought I was going to go 3-3 but thankfully Bulger blew up last night. Lets pretend I never posted this. Steg you want to delete this thread

Vikes 24- Den 17

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by StegRock on Oct 14^th, 2003, 3:13pm

Naaaaaaaaa...

...

And, by the way, we have no "flamers" around here!

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by Chumpzilla on Oct 14^th, 2003, 10:14pm

Mossaholic, when I saw the subject line... [smiley=jawdroppin.gif]

I'm glad to see you changed your mind! [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by Skcus Redef 2 on Oct 15^th, 2003, 2:03am

It has become very clear by reading this board that Mossaholic is, at best, mildly concussed. Ignoring the McCants for Burress comments, I must point out his mistake in posting the upcoming score for the mighty Broncos v. the pretending Vikadins.

Plummer's Broncos 28 • Moss's dropped passes 14

Who the hell wears purple, anyway?

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by captainpurple on Oct 15^th, 2003, 11:44am

OK, Steg, I know we said no flamers, but ...

Moss will [smiley=flamewar.gif] DEN defense!

Are you kidding me?! Plummer gets one look at Hovan, [smiley=scared.gif] , wets himself and WHAMMO, his shoulder hurts again!

ok, really. My 3 big keys to this game:

Moss vs Walls
Vikes O-line vs DEN D-line
Sharpe vs Claiborne

Moss vs Walls
Walker is too small to cover Moss (did you see the 49er game?). Walls did a nice job on Burress last week, but Burress is no Moss. I think DEN has to roll the FS (Brandon@6'2") over top, opening up Campbell and Burleson over the middle. If I'm wrong, and Walls can handle Moss allowing 8 in the box vs the run, DEN could be smiling big.

Vikes O-line vs DEN D-line
Vikes make their hay running with that big 1600+lb line. DEN has held their own allowing < 100/ypg, so this shapes up to be a big battle. If the Vikes run the ball, they win. If Denver stuffs the run well, and forces DC to win it throwing, it gets tougher to call. I don't see a lot of pressure on DC this week. All DEN sacks seem to come from the RDE, and Mt McKinnie is not going to allow much from that position. Gotta give the advantage to MIN here.

Sharpe vs Claiborne
DEN hasn't run the ball very effectively the last couple weeks, and MIN is tough vs the run. I think they'll come out throwing to open things up for Portis. The big matchup in the passing game for DEN is this one. Claiborne is MIN best cover LB, and he's probably rated avg. Sharpe is exceptional. If he's open and LBs are cheating back to cover, look for draws and screens to be very effective to Portis.

I'm still picking the Vikes cuz I think Moss will just be too much for Lenny Walls. I see MIN jumping up early with the long ball, then controlling tempo with the run game. DEN will come out throwing as well IMO to open up for Portis. I see 24-21 by the half. 2nd half, both teams try to control the clock, run D stiffens on both sides and by the 4th, a couple big pass plays will decide this one. When you get down to it, and you think a big pass play will swing it...I pick DC to Moss over Plummer hands down.

That's my take, homerism or not!

GO VIKES!

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by Philly on Oct 15^th, 2003, 12:18pm

I'll be looking forward to your "Vikings - Week 7 Analysis" where you give projected stats for all of the fantasy players for the Vikings. See some of the others (Texans, Eagles, Giants) for ideas.

Title: Re: McCants for Burress
Post by DOLFAN on Oct 15^th, 2003, 2:19pm

I too think you should keep Burress. I agree with Stegey and Philly too. Burress is juist simply too talented. If this is a keeper league no way!

UNLESS the scoring is a TD ONLY league AND a 1 year league, but still even with that you should get an upgrade at DEF, or RB somehow.