Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


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

        the Gridiron >> between the 20's >>  2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comments
        
(Message started by: StegRock on Aug 2^nd, 2005, 11:07pm)

Title: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comments
Post by StegRock on Aug 2^nd, 2005, 11:07pm

Okay, guys, here is the thread to put comments on. This very first post is where I will maintain the cumulative running list of picks! Enjoy, and let's have fun with it!

Second "Huddle" Mock Draft of '05
1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson - Chargers
2. RB Shaun Alexander - Seahawks
3. RB Edgerrin James - Colts
4. RB Deuce McAllister - Saints
5. RB Tiki Barber - Giants
6. RB Priest Holmes - Chiefs
7. RB Willis McGahee - Bills
8. QB Peyton Manning - Colts
9. RB Clinton Portis - Redskins
10. RB Kevin Jones - Lions
11. RB Rudi Johnson - Bengals
12. RB Jamal Lewis - Ravens
13. WR Randy Moss - Raiders
14. QB Daunte Culpepper - Vikings
15. RB Corey Dillon - Patriots
16. QB Marc Bulger - Rams
17. WR Terrell Owens - Eagles
18. RB Domanick Davis - Texans
19. RB Steven Jackson - Rams
20. RB Julius Jones - Cowboys
21. RB Curtis Martin - Jets
22. RB LaMont Jordan - Raiders
23. RB Brian Westbrook - Eagles
24. QB Donovan McNabb - Eagles
25. RB Ahman Green - Packers
26. WR Torry Holt - Rams
27. WR Chad Johnson - Bengals
28. RB Tatum Bell - Broncos
29. WR Marvin Harrison - Colts
30. QB Trent Green - Chiefs
31. RB Carnell Williams - Buccaneers
32. WR Javon Walker - Packers
33. TE Tony Gonzalez - Chiefs
34. WR Joe Horn - Saints
35. WR Andre Johnson - Texans
36. RB Warrick Dunn - Falcons
37. RB Chris Brown - Titans
38. RB Michael Bennett - Vikings
39. RB Travis Henry - Titans
40. RB J.J. Arrington - Cardinals
41. TE Antonio Gates - Chargers
42. WR Darrell Jackson - Seahawks
43. WR Ashley Lelie - Broncos
44. WR Reggie Wayne - Colts
45. RB DeShaun Foster - Panthers
46. RB Cedric Benson - Bears
47. QB Kerry Collins - Raiders
48. WR Michael Clayton - Buccaneers
49. QB Michael Vick - Falcons
50. WR Roy Williams - Lions
51. WR Hines Ward - Steelers
52. QB Jake Plummer - Broncos
53. WR Anquan Boldin - Cardinals
54. WR Nate Burleson - Vikings
55. WR Steve Smith - Panthers
56. RB Ronnie Brown - Dolphins
57. WR Drew Bennett - Titans
58. WR Larry Fitzgerald - Cardinals
59. QB Jake Delhomme - Panthers
60. RB Fred Taylor - Jaguars
61. RB Kevan Barlow - 49ers
62. TE Jason Whitten - Cowboys
63. WR Eddie Kennison - Chiefs
64. RB Duce Staley - Steelers
65. WR Donald Driver - Packers
66. WR Laveranues Coles - Jets
67. QB Tom Brady - Patriots
68. TE Todd Heap - Ravens
69. QB Brett Farve - Packers
70. D/ST Baltimore Ravens
71. TE Jeremy Shockey - Giants
72. WR Isaac Bruce - Rams
73. WR Muhsin Muhammad - Bears
74. WR Chris Chambers - Dolphins
75. WR Derrick Mason - Ravens
76. QB Carson Palmer - Bengals
77. WR Jimmy Smith - Jaguars
78. QB Matt Hasselbeck - Seahawks
79. RB Larry Johnson - Chiefs
80. QB David Carr - Texans
81. D/ST Pittsburgh Steelers
82. RB T.J. Duckett - Falcons
83. RB Thomas Jones - Bears
84. WR Jerry Porter - Raiders
85. TE Alge Crumpler - Falcons
86. D/ST Buffalo Bills
87. RB Lee Suggs - Browns
88. WR Rod Smith - Broncos
89. D/ST New England Patriots
90. RB Jerome Bettis - Steelers
91. TE Dallas Clark - Colts
92. QB Chad Pennington - Jets
93. WR Plaxico Burress - Giants
94. RB Marshall Faulk - Rams
95. WR Keyshawn Johnson - Cowboys
96. QB Aaron Brooks - Saints
97. WR Deion Branch - Patriots
98. WR Keenan McCardell - Chargers
99. WR Santana Moss - Redskins
100. WR Eric Moulds - Bills
101. QB Kurt Warner - Cardinals
102. WR Charles Rogers - Lions
103. QB Drew Brees - Chargers
104. RB Ricky Williams - Dolphins
105. WR Lee Evans - Bills
106. WR Braylon Edwards - Browns
107. QB Byron Leftwich - Jaguars
108. QB Brian Griese - Buccaneers
109. WR Antwaan Randle El - Steelers
110. WR Mike Williams - Lions
111. TE L.J. Smith - Eagles
112. WR Travis Taylor - Vikings
113. WR David Givens - Patriots
114. WR David Patten - Redskins
115. TE Eric Johnson - 49ers
116. WR Troy Williamson - Vikings
117. PK David Akers - Eagles
118. WR Mark Clayton - Ravens
119. D/ST Philadelphia Eagles
120. WR Reggie Brown - Eagles
121. QB Steve McNair - Titans
122. RB Mike Anderson - Broncos
123. WR Keary Colbert - Panthers
124. RB Frank Gore - 49ers
125. RB Eric Shelton - Panthers
126. WR T.J. Houshmandzadeh - Bengals
127. TE Randy McMichael - Dolphins
128. WR Brandon Stokely - Colts
129. D/ST Carolina Panthers
130. PK Adam Vinateri - Patriots
131. PK Mike Vanderjagt - Colts
132. WR Amani Toomer - Giants
133. WR Justin McCareins - Jets
134. QB Ben Roethlisberger - Steelers
135. WR Doug Gabriel - Raiders
136. WR Antonio Bryant - Browns -> Patriots
137. RB Derrick Blaylock - Jets
138. WR Jerry Rice - Broncos
139. WR Reggie Williams - Jaguars
140. RB Ron Dayne - Broncos
141. RB Mewelde Moore - Vikings
142. WR Matt Jones - Jaguars
143. D/ST Dallas Cowboys
144. WR Michael Jenkins - Falcons
145. PK Jason Elam - Broncos
146. WR Terry Glenn - Cowboys
147. TE Jermaine Wiggins - Vikings
148. D/ST New York Jets
149. RB Ciatrick Fason - Vikings
150. QB Joey Harrington - Lions

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 2^nd, 2005, 11:45pm

I took McAllister over McGahee at position 4 for one reason - receptions.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Tony_O on Aug 2^nd, 2005, 11:55pm

I was tempted to select Manning with the 6th slot, but it is hard to pass up Priest at this position. Many of us counted him off 2 years ago and he might prove us wrong again.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 3^rd, 2005, 12:05am

We busted out the Top 10 at MAC 10! Awesome! I'm hittin' it for tonight. [smiley=tired.gif] The list above is updated through the Top 10! [smiley=bow.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Philly on Aug 3^rd, 2005, 9:07am

Wow. The draft started after I went to bed and I wake up and half of the first round is complete.

And now we have our first [smiley=shrug.gif] pick of the draft... Marc Bulger at #16? Really? Even with Jake Plummer still available? :-X ;)

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by DirkDiggler on Aug 3^rd, 2005, 10:08am

on 08/03/05 at 09:07:24, Philly wrote:

LOL!!

I too went to bed to find that we are on pick number 18 already. I guess I will have to take a RB like almost everyone else. Dominic Davis falls to #18. I am kind of surprised because I see him taken over a lot of the players selected already.

The second thing I see in mock drafts that surprises me is that Culpepper is still being taken in the top tier of players. In my opinion, with the loss of Moss, his value and numbers should drop.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 3^rd, 2005, 4:55pm

Ahman Green at 25 is a bit low. Should have gone before Jordan, Westbrook (especially in light of his quasi-holdout) and McNabb. Anyway, the cheatsheet above is updated through the Top 25. [smiley=bow.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 3^rd, 2005, 5:39pm

Green is probably dropping for a lot of reasons. The D will force the Packers to pass more, and Green hasn't been as active in that area. The Packers O-line is depleted. Davenport and Fisher could get more carries. D's in the NFC North are improving.

I actually like Westbrook better than Green this year.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Philly on Aug 4^th, 2005, 9:03am

I was surprised to see Marvin go as late as he did. I see him as a mid-second round guy.

I don't like taking a TE so early, but 33 is a tough spot to pick. There was a WR I considered (and would have taken had I been drafting for my team) and a couple RBs that were borderline at this point, so I went with the clear #1 TE (in light of Gates' contract issues).

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 4^th, 2005, 11:30am

Cheatsheet above updated through the current pick. [smiley=bow.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 4^th, 2005, 8:30pm

My pick of Travis Henry really is in response to the pick of Chris Brown two prior, a pick, with all due respect to Tony_O, I really do not like. Brown runs too straight-up, moreover, for a somewhat tall guy. Henry is back home in a way, having played for the Volunteers, and it is just a matter of time before the job is pretty much all his. I think at best for Brown it'll be 60 Henry 40 Brown in short order. 37 is WAY too high for Brown.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 5^th, 2005, 5:27am

Brown did amazingly well when I watched him and he played. I believe he is the better back of the 2 if healthy. Travis Henry may end up getting more work - but only due to injury, IMO. Both picked too early also IMO.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 5^th, 2005, 1:23pm

on 08/05/05 at 05:27:37, bgsgfan wrote:

... he (Brown) is the better back of the 2 if healthy.

(This is just a visceral reaction...) NO WAY, bro!!!

I've seen them both play... Henry's the better (more prototypical, at least) tailback.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Tony_O on Aug 5^th, 2005, 1:52pm

Let's see......

Last year Chris Brown rushed for 1067 yards in 11 games, of which in 5 games he had less than 16 carries. He scored 6 tds and averaged 4.9 yrds per carry. This was his first year as a starter and is bound to get better with experience. I would not debate his upright running style and his potential for injury, but he is young and has plenty of tread on his tires. Henry has battled injuries(fumbles too) as well, this I know of because I have had him since he was a rookie in my keeper league.

In my opinion and many others(I will use xpertsports ADP, to support this) Barber and Bulger, two of your picks were far bigger reaches. Barber which you drafted at #5 has a ADP of 15, Bulger which you drafted at #16 has a ADP of 53, while Brown which I selected at #37 has a ADP of 30. So, Barber was 10 under his ADP, Bulger 37 under his ADP, and Brown was 7 over his ADP. I realize that you have a "gut feeling" on these two particular players, which I agree on with Bulger, but I would never draft him in the second round. I do think Henry might bite into Brown's numbers and a handcuff would be a great stradegy.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 5^th, 2005, 2:13pm

on 08/05/05 at 13:52:29, Tony_O wrote:

Look... Your appeal to (a particular) "authority" falls on deaf ears, man. I like to see more independent thinking among (intelligent, experienced) fantasy footballers (such as yourself). I don't give a rat's ass what some other site's rankings "system" "claims". Some other dudes on the net might be using my rankings in "the Red Zone" for support of their early picks of Barber, Bulger, Delhomme, Plummer, Warner or Kennison, just to name a few maverick "thoughts" of mine, in some random fantasy (mock) drafts. My take on Chris Brown is not an attack on you or Jeremy. I'm absolutely certain there are a number of picks here that could be criticized in light of another resources' rankings list. But, you chose to rake me over the coals... solely, as evidenced by the timing of your doing so, to strike back at my stating my thoughts on the Chris Brown pick,... which just so happened to have been made by you. Again,... I don't mind your giving your critical take on my or anyone's picks. It's just that the timing of your criticism (Barber was taken almost 40 picks ago) is evidence of the mindset/motive behind your criticism,... which isn't altogether "pure". Anyway, [smiley=letsmakeup.gif] from the east coast, where the tsunami-like heat wave continues to roll in.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Tony_O on Aug 5^th, 2005, 2:38pm

I wasn't trying to question you or your picks, I thought they were questionable at the time they were made, but I didn't feel the need to pull the rug out. Even when Jeff questioned your Bulger selection, I didn't add on. However, once you reffered to my Brown pick as "WAY OFF", I decided to look at the numbers and use statistics to support my pick. I'm not hyping xpertsports either, they have had many mock drafts and the ADP- average draft position gives you a feel of what others have been selecting. Now, the Brown pick might be a reach and thats why I suggested the handcuff and Barber and Bulger might explode this year, however I was just trying to defend the pick, not rake you over the coals. My appoligies! :)

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 5^th, 2005, 6:53pm

T.O., you're still not gettin' it, man. :-/ I'm just sayin' don't wait, get on my ass about my "whack" picks "on time", so we can go at it [smiley=boxer.gif] ... and I can give my take. ;) As long as you are fair (and not mean-spirited), and to say that Tiki at #5 is a stretch is more than fair, don't pull punches. On the other hand, keep in mind that I usually have my mind on daring to be different and "original". I want us, within reason of course, to be maverick and go out on a limb with our takes on "the Gridiron", calling primarily upon our own experience and fantasy football savvy, not what the (self-proclaimed) "experts" "have to" say (not that I am saying you, Tony, or anyone specifically is guilty of this). "Original" content is what gives off an air of confidence and what makes "the Gridiron" more valuable to our members and guests. We've all played fantasy football long enough. Strut your stuff, my fellow Gridironers! [smiley=strollin.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Tony_O on Aug 6^th, 2005, 12:30pm

[smiley=clap.gif]Got it! [smiley=assinface.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 6^th, 2005, 12:57pm

on 08/06/05 at 12:30:57, Tony_O wrote:

[smiley=assinface.gif]

[smiley=lickinmychops.gif] [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] [smiley=lickinmychops.gif]

...

[smiley=bendover.gif] [smiley=bendover.gif] [smiley=bendover.gif] [smiley=bendover.gif] [smiley=bendover.gif]

;D

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 6^th, 2005, 2:08pm

The Cheatsheet above in the initial post of the thread has been updated through the Top 50!!!

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 6^th, 2005, 3:30pm

Boldin at 53 is terrific value. It's only a broken nose!

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 7^th, 2005, 11:45pm

Cheatsheet above updated through the current pick #59.

...

[smiley=impatient.gif] Guys and gals, this is movin' really slow... Let's ditch the "wait for two people to pick" rule and just go with leap-frogging, i.e. "wait for just one person to pick", from here on out.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 8^th, 2005, 12:49am

Steg said to leap frog...so I did.

Did I miss some news, or did we just forget Fred Taylor?

(Edit: They do expect him to be there for the season opener, and at 60 it's a good speculation pick at least.)

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 8^th, 2005, 1:33am

Fred Taylor was definitely a good pick at that point. I was going to pick him, but went to read some Jaguars news (via the Newsstand) just to make sure. The latest I could get on him had him in camp and ready. Then I go to pick and you beat me to it! :)

I wanted to take Staley before Barlow, but with him just getting an MRI I shied away.

Steggie, I think you put too much weight on the QB position. I have seen this before through the years with you doing mock drafts and also the CBFL. I believe it is because you play in a league which places more emphasis on QBs than most leagues do. I don't neccessarily question the order in which you select QBs, but the amount of QBs being selected in comparison to the other positions. (I could defend your selections, but its much more fun if I make you do it).

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 8^th, 2005, 1:56am

Yea, bg, there surely "might be" a "part of" me that is "making a statement" about how I view the "state of fantasy football" (if such inflated terminology is even appropriate). I think the way the position of QB manifests in your run-of-the-mill fantasy system these days stinks. For arguable Top-10 quarterbacks to be being drafted roughly behind 20-to-30 WR's, 25-to-35 RB's and even 3-to-5 TE's is, as far as I can tell, indicative of an ill set-up. Yet, that's the precise set-up the mainstream FF world has adopted. ... I guess I consider my rankings for the "ideal" system, which should be being strived for (but isn't, granted). In any event, fantasy footballers can go and break the cheatsheet generated by all this down position-by-position and still have something VERY useful even if they don't like where the QB's went, and I would have succeeded in making some inroads with what I believe should be the great concern here among hardcore fantasy footballers who see the "aesthetic" side of the hobby (vis-a-vis, let's say, the gambling side) and want to see it done right, or at least see it with an eye on/toward improvement.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by KillerKingSting on Aug 8^th, 2005, 9:02am

on 08/08/05 at 01:56:21, StegRock wrote:

I think the way the position of QB manifests in your run-of-the-mill fantasy system these days stinks. For arguable Top-10 quarterbacks to be being drafted roughly behind 20-to-30 WR's, 25-to-35 RB's and even 3-to-5 TE's is, as far as I can tell, indicative of an ill set-up.

I apologize if I am out of line here posting on this thread. But what StegBack has said here regarding the worth of the QB position in mainstream FF leagues - I couldn't have said it any better and feel strongly in this area of particular concern.

We play fantasy football to emulate it in some way or another. This is a fantasy crime IMO. The highest drafted position in football itself.
One of the most exciting positions.
The highest paid position.

Its just a crime.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by sexydexy on Aug 8^th, 2005, 10:45am

I think the reason QBs get drafted later isn't because of a general disrespect in terms of fantasy numbers but the fact that QBs are going to score vastly different in proportion to the RBs.

The QB position has more depth as far as numbers go in a 6 pt/TD system than the RB position does.

QBs like Manning, Culpepper, and McNabb go early in the draft with the RBs and top flight WRs.

Other than mainstays in the top 10 like, say, your Trent Greens or Brett Favres, the other QBs as far as top 10 could be a complete crapshoot.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 8^th, 2005, 2:09pm

on 08/08/05 at 10:45:25, sexydexy wrote:

The QB position has more depth as far as numbers go in a 6 pt/TD system than the RB position does.

...

Other than mainstays in the top 10 like, say, your Trent Greens or Brett Favres, the other QBs as far as top 10 could be a complete crapshoot.

Yea, BUT, come on!!! That is primarily a function of the fact that your run-of-the-mill fantasy league only requires the starting of ONE quarterback, BUT TWO running backs (TAILBACKS to be exact) and THREE wide receivers and ONE MORE flex RB or WR. THAT is why quarterbacks go as you say, not really anything else.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 8^th, 2005, 2:22pm

With all respect s.d., I think you are missing the point.

A standard FF lineup of 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 K, and 1 D/ST forces the value of QBs down. Even when the QB position is emphasized (say 6 pts per passing TD) the position is too abundant with players who will produce #s to cause much of an effect.

Using the CBFL as an example since it has relatively normal scoring and lineups... of the top 99 players selected:

39 were RBs
29 were WRs
8 were TEs
8 were D/STs
1 was K
14 were QBs

Should the 29th best WR be more valuable than the 15th best QB? Or the 39th best RB? 8th best TE?

Obviously, Steggie and KKS think that is ridiculous and the system is flawed because it causes us to value them that way.

I understand what they are saying, but my understanding of the purpose of this was to create a list based on standard scoring.

edit - I didn't do this post to "pile on" - I was writing this before I saw Steggie's post.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 8^th, 2005, 2:23pm

on 08/08/05 at 14:09:43, StegRock wrote:

That lineup makes it even worse :D.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 8^th, 2005, 5:00pm

Isaac Bruce has apparently been fine in camp, so I guess he's a go.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by sexydexy on Aug 9^th, 2005, 1:51am

on 08/08/05 at 14:22:17, bgsgfan wrote:

I understand what you're saying but follow the points differential for the position and see how far apart they are.

Another reason I'd think that you would start 1 QB is that when your leagues get big...say, 16 or more teams, you're cutting it thin as to getting any points from a QB2 position. There will be more RBs (of different flavors...your starting back, fullbacks, third down backs, change of pace, etc) that score a decent amount of fantasy points than QBs because, in general, a team will only use 1 QB but could use more options in the running game.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 9^th, 2005, 2:19am

on 08/09/05 at 01:51:14, sexydexy wrote:

I understand what you're saying... but follow the points differential for the position and see how far apart they are.

?.?.? ... You are...???

Quote:

Another reason I'd think that you would start 1 QB is that when your leagues get big...say, 16 or more teams...

Right... That's another problem! The natural, ideal size for a fantasy league is probably 10 or 12 teams.

Quote:

There will be more RBs (of different flavors...your starting back, fullbacks, third down backs, change of pace, etc) that score a decent amount of fantasy points than QBs because, in general, a team will only use 1 QB but could use more options in the running game.

Not to a degree justifying the current disparity we are addressing, bro.

Yes, there are more RB's that produce stats (over a season) than QB's (that goes to show you the heightened intrinsic value of a QB). But, this rationale is deceiving. The value of the (oh, so important) Top 32 QB's (at any given time), which are in fact, at least arguably, more important than the Top 32 RB's (ALL tailbacks, mind you) should not be forsaken for the sake of RB's 32 through whatever and WR's 32 through whatever (and this is where league-size considerations come in).

You gotta watch out, bro, arguing from your own set of "accepted" (or even "acceptable") premises. Either we have to agree to meet each other somewhere outside the box (any boxes) or at least go back and forth from each other's boxes (with the former being preferable as I see it). We just can't shout at each other from inside each of our respective boxes. A lot of us are seasoned veterans here. I know the box you are in, bro,... all too well. [smiley=inthebox.gif] Progress is made and change is effected by thinking outside the box.

...

NOW... HOW ABOUT A PICK???

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 9^th, 2005, 2:27am

on 08/09/05 at 01:51:14, sexydexy wrote:

I understand what you're saying but follow the points differential for the position and see how far apart they are.

Hmmm I still think you don't get where I am coming from. First off this started from me complaining that Steggie was overvaluing the QB position and I asked him to defend himself. I am very aware of the point differentials between different players as I use VBD as a tool.

[offtopic]Interestingly, one of the most recent developments in VBD is the use of an X-value to determine baselines. The sloppy way to do this is to determine how many players of each position will be drafted at each position within the first 100 players picked. This does an excellent job of anticipating the flow of the draft, but I feel it is actually a step back from the standpoint of valuing positions against each other - by using the x-value, you are basically saying screw how I think the players compare to one another, lets just use how others think they compare. This continues a general laziness that first began with the use of AVT instead of stat projections.[/offtopic]

Anyhow, I feel that (generally) Steve was drafting QBs much too high according to his guidelines on what this was about. I knew he has taken grief over this in the past, and could have just searched for his reasoning... but I wanted him to explain himself again (I am evil that way).

on 08/09/05 at 01:51:14, sexydexy wrote:

Another reason I'd think that you would start 1 QB is that when your leagues get big...say, 16 or more teams, you're cutting it thin as to getting any points from a QB2 position. There will be more RBs (of different flavors...your starting back, fullbacks, third down backs, change of pace, etc) that score a decent amount of fantasy points than QBs because, in general, a team will only use 1 QB but could use more options in the running game.

First off, I'd guess that around 80% of the FF leagues are between 10-14 teams.

Next, ok maybe 2 QBs would be out of the question for large leagues, but is that a reason to totally dismiss the fact that QBs are undervalued in FF compared to their real-life worth? Of course not, it just means you have to start thinking creatively. Maybe allow QBs to be used as a flex player. Or only start 1 RB and 2 receivers. Or divide the league into 2 divisions with 2 seperate drafts. Or...??? BTW I realize each one of the mini-proposals has its own problems, but the idea is not to just let a flaw exist because thats the way its done.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 9^th, 2005, 2:36am

Once again, I am not piling on. Steggie must just think and type faster than me.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 9^th, 2005, 2:51am

on 08/09/05 at 02:27:10, bgsgfan wrote:

Next, ok maybe 2 QBs would be out of the question for large leagues, but is that a reason to totally dismiss the fact that QBs are undervalued in FF compared to their real-life worth? Of course not, it just means you have to start thinking creatively. Maybe allow QBs to be used as a flex player. Or only start 1 RB and 2 receivers. Or divide the league into 2 divisions with 2 seperate drafts. Or...??? BTW I realize each one of the mini-proposals has its own problems, but the idea is not to just let a flaw exist because thats the way its done.

Yummmmm... [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] Magnifique! Couldn't have put it better! ... Helmets are worn in football not because wearing helmets is a rule (quite the contrary),... BUT it is a rule, mind you.

Oh,... and just to be clear... I am piling it on. ;)

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 9^th, 2005, 3:12am

Okay,... the Cheatsheet in the initial post of this thread has been updated through the current pick. [smiley=bow.gif] ... [smiley=tired.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by steelkings on Aug 9^th, 2005, 8:57am

This is fun. Good work people!

I found a few things interesting.

1. 10 running backs and 1 QB in the first 11 picks?

2. 26 RB's taken in the top 40 picks?
That leaves 14 other position players taken in the top 40. WOW! With this in mind, Someone with a mid level pick and a draft strategy of going away from RB's could easily draft the best QB. Come back and get the Best WR in round 2, Then pick up a solid back in the 3rd round. (Bell)(Williams)(Bennent)(Brown)
First 3 picks Manning, T.O, Tatum Bell, then slide in and pick up the best TE in Gates in R4.

Manning
T.Bell
T.Owens
A.Gates
That would suck!

3. McGahee and Barber in front of Manning is almost funny. In case nobody noticed, Manning threw 49 TD's last year. This brings up the question, How does Harrison become an early 3rd round pick (29) and Wayne (44) a late 4th rounder.

4. Possible best value pick in this MD is C. Palmer at 76. With Johnson at (27) and the 8th non RB taken you would have to figure a huge year for Palmer.

5. With (34) RB's taken in 82 picks,(Roughly 1 back for each NFL team) I find it interesting that the Bus is still availible. He's the starter in Pittsburgh.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by sexydexy on Aug 9^th, 2005, 11:40am

I guess the biggest disparity in reasoning here is that I am not in any leagues that are less than 16 teams this year.

I suppose you are all talking about the lack of respect in QB scoring in fantasy football and I'm thinking in a more stock market-esque type of way.

It seems that if you can grab a potential top 10 QB in, say, the 6th round of a draft, then why not go for a position that has more of a premium on its points like a RB?

Besides, each NFL team typically has 1-2 RBs, 2-4 WRs, and 1 QB per game that produce numbers (sans the other positions, of course).

Doesn't that seem well reflected in the fantasy football world?

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 9^th, 2005, 3:55pm

Another thought about relative player value in terms of position might lie in the differences between keeper leagues and re-draft leagues. Keeper leaguers, like NFL teams, look for QB value over the long haul. Like in the NFL, this puts a greater premium on the QB position, since in most cases only one QB per team will get the field time, possibly for years to come. RB's and WR's are hopefully chosen for the long haul, too. But these positions are more subject to changes over the course of years.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 9^th, 2005, 4:05pm

on 08/09/05 at 11:40:25, sexydexy wrote:

I guess the biggest disparity in reasoning here is that I am not in any leagues that are less than 16 teams this year.

I wouldn't agree with that, but not a biggie. In your opinion, from concentrating on larger leagues, is this an issue? Are QBs undervalued in FF as compared to real life in larger leagues?

on 08/09/05 at 11:40:25, sexydexy wrote:

I suppose you are all talking about the lack of respect in QB scoring in fantasy football and I'm thinking in a more stock market-esque type of way.

It seems that if you can grab a potential top 10 QB in, say, the 6th round of a draft, then why not go for a position that has more of a premium on its points like a RB?

Yes! and Yes!

on 08/09/05 at 11:40:25, sexydexy wrote:

Besides, each NFL team typically has 1-2 RBs, 2-4 WRs, and 1 QB per game that produce numbers (sans the other positions, of course).

Doesn't that seem well reflected in the fantasy football world?

This is a good point.

Soooooo can we create a system that both reflects the number of players at each position that will score points and their overall value? Which of those two conflicting ideals is more important?

The first thing that pops to mind that would try to accomodate both ideals is the way we (traditionally) score FF. Perhaps a system could be created where each FF teams positional players would square off against one another. Or each team would compete in each stat category (passing yards vs passing yards, rushing TDs vs rushing TDs, etc.).

The second thing that pops into my mind is why do we automatically deflate QB stats in traditional scoring systems? Pass TDs are worth 4pts compared to 6 for receiving and rushing TDs. Pass yards are only worth half as much as rushing and receiving yards. I know it was done to keep QBs from way outscoring the other positions, but we now know that scarcity determines value... and QBs are undervalued. Why keep artificially undervaluing them even more?

As far as which ideal is more important... I don't know. I'd tend to say that since the lineups are reflective of the number of players scoring significant stats per team, the thing that needs to be concentrated on is trying to get the value of those positions correct.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 9^th, 2005, 4:15pm

on 08/09/05 at 08:57:15, steelkings wrote:

5. With (34) RB's taken in 82 picks,(Roughly 1 back for each NFL team) I find it interesting that the Bus is still availible. He's the starter in Pittsburgh.

Only while Staley is out, which is supposed to be for only one month. So we are looking at 1-2 starts at the beginning of the season as Duce gets back in shape.

Then of course, Duce will miss more time to this injury lingering or another injury, and the Bus will steal TDs... but Jerome will probably end up being a close 2nd to the Duce in terms of FF production for the year.

I still think Lee Suggs is a better fantasy option at this point, so I pulled the trigger and picked him at #87.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 9^th, 2005, 4:27pm

on 08/09/05 at 15:55:10, Callie wrote:

Maybe slightly. A QB also has a longer football life span. The closer a league gets to being a dynasty format, the more I see that coming into play. I could actually see a league with a small amount of keepers (2-4) having the reverse effect. All of the rookie RBs could go like wildfire because you will have a good chance of getting a viable keeper for the next year(s) that way.

But scarcity still determines value. With a normal league having 12 teams and a standard lineup with standard bench depth there will always be available starting QBs to snatch off free agent list - waiver wire. Not so with RBs (definitely) or reliable scoring WRs (to a lesser extent).

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Tony_O on Aug 9^th, 2005, 6:25pm

on 08/09/05 at 16:05:53, bgsgfan wrote:

The second thing that pops into my mind is why do we automatically deflate QB stats in traditional scoring systems? Pass TDs are worth 4pts compared to 6 for receiving and rushing TDs.

[offtopic] I believe that this is a mistake, TD's should be scored the same, either 4pts per or 6pts per. In today's game there is no certainty that QB's will have more TD's than any other position. This scoring method demishes the performance of QB's. I had Culpepper last year in he CBFL league and in the 3 games he had 5 td's there were many RB's and WR's who STILL had more points.[/offtopic]

Pass yard are only worth half as much as rushing and receiving yards.

[offtopic]This I agree with! [/offtopic]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 9^th, 2005, 8:45pm

Things seem to have ground to a halt again, so I jumped in after only 2 other picks.

I took TE Clark over McMichael for two reasons. McMichael may miss games due to his personal life, and Clark should be better for TD's.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by sexydexy on Aug 10^th, 2005, 5:26am

As far as QBs getting 4 pts per TD and half the points per yardage as RB or WR...

I DEFINITELY think that QBs should get 6 pt/TD. A TD is 6 points, it gets rewarded 6 points. Of course, distance bonuses are also part of the game in some leagues but a TD should be worth at least 6 points and should be scored evenly. I agree with you there. All the leagues I play in use that as a benchmark.

But as far as yardage...I think getting half evens out the point scoring...because a good game for a RB is considered approximately 100 yards and a QB it is about 300 yards.

So, a 2x differential is actually a good indicator of where the points should be.

Just curious, do any of your leagues give bonuses for hitting 100/300 yards? Do they use fractional scoring or do you just round down?

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Tony_O on Aug 10^th, 2005, 1:38pm

on 08/10/05 at 05:26:26, sexydexy wrote:

As far as QBs getting 4 pts per TD and half the points per yardage as RB or WR...

I DEFINITELY think that QBs should get 6 pt/TD. A TD is 6 points, it gets rewarded 6 points. Of course, distance bonuses are also part of the game in some leagues but a TD should be worth at least 6 points and should be scored evenly. I agree with you there. All the leagues I play in use that as a benchmark.

But as far as yardage...I think getting half evens out the point scoring...because a good game for a RB is considered approximately 100 yards and a QB it is about 300 yards.

So, a 2x differential is actually a good indicator of where the points should be.

[offtopic] I agree 100% on both points.[/offtopic]

Just curious, do any of your leagues give bonuses for hitting 100/300 yards? Do they use fractional scoring or do you just round down?

[offtopic] I have played in leagues that awarded bonuses but then we eliminated them because there is no equivilent in the real game to justify giving bonus points. In addition, so many times a rusher will have 99 yards and another back has 100, then you have a big point difference for one yard. As far as fractional scoring, in my "big" money league we have it and I love it! The first year in our league I won the championship by less than a point. If we did not have fractional scoring we would have tied.[/offtopic]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by KillerKingSting on Aug 11^th, 2005, 3:16am

really there are a few ways to bump QBs values up.

One is to only start 1 RB. 1 QB & 1 RB puts the value of a QB right exactly where a RB would BEE.

Another way is contradictorial (HEE HEE a word I made up!) to my latter example.
Add more RBs and Receivers to your lineups and therefore, the relative difference between the total scores of all teams RBs, WRs & TEs (if there are at LEAST 8 of them combined) would be watered down - making the ONE QB you choose - a more important difference.

Another way which is popular is to start 2 QBs.

I use a mix in the Insane league - we start 2 QBs PLUS we have the passing yardage approximately worth 2/3rds that of rushing-receiving yardage in conjunction with 6 point TDs and 6 point turnovers!

This will definitely put some KICK into your QB position AND the value is approximately equal to that of the NFL IMO.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by bgsgfan on Aug 12^th, 2005, 3:23am

From The Bleachers:

Quote:

Aloha, everybody!!! I'm just checking in quickly (unfortunately)... Gino and I are KNEE-DEEP in dealing with finding a place to live. But, everything is going well on that front, ultimately. However, as far as my getting over here..., well,... it's going to be somewhere between VERY spotty and NOT AT ALL for the next week or so. Our hotel isn't "wi-fied"; I don't have time in the immediacy to set up my U.H. account and the library is only open until 9 p.m. until the semester commences. There is one last-ditch thing I am going to try at the hotel tonight, but I am not hopeful. So, anything I am needed for is either going to have to be put on the back-burner for about a week or dealt with independently (but, whatever it is, please do it in the high-quality manner in which we expect it to be done on "the Gridiron"). Lastly, if someone(s) could link to this message in other areas of the site where it is particularly needed (maybe like on the GBRFL2 board and on the "Huddle" thread "between the 20's"), I'd REALLY appreciate it. I gotta run (but I'll get a quick pick up)... Mahalo!

- Steg

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 14^th, 2005, 11:23pm

Helloooooooooo, are you guys going to finish this ? Is this what happens when Steg isn't around to yell at you guys ?

(I'm going to tattle) :)

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 14^th, 2005, 11:50pm

I think the GBRFL2-ers are playing things close to the vest until after their draft and wisely want to keep their personal rankings to themselves. They have been conspicuously absent. ;)

(Actually, I thought we were going to 100 until Steg picked at 101. Anyway, I just went back in and made a pick for ya. [smiley=wave.gif])

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 16^th, 2005, 2:57am

I have updated the cheatsheet in the original post.

I will be able to make a couple picks a day now again. I'd like to get this thing at least to 125, preferably 150. :-/

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 16^th, 2005, 4:01am

Hey Steg, hows Hawaii ?

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 16^th, 2005, 4:25am

Right at present... [smiley=gonecrazy.gif] ... Gino and I are a bit [smiley=zombie.gif] right now looking for an appropriate place to live (CRAZY housing market here). BUT,... [smiley=palmtree.gif] All will be smooooooth in short order. It felt SO GOOD registering for my "Taoism" class this evening. [smiley=zenmaster.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 17^th, 2005, 6:40am

oops, sorry Philly, I'll change my pick to 111 unless you do.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 17^th, 2005, 6:44am

Quote:

CRAZY housing market here

Is there a more expensive housing market on the planet ? Not to mention we are probably in the middle of the most ridiculous housing bubble ever.

In any event, I'm sure you will find something nice, best of luck to you and Gino.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by sexydexy on Aug 17^th, 2005, 6:52am

Just to chime in here...

According to what I read today...I believe it was from the Economist...Honolulu is 50th in the housing market according to inflation only.

So, the prices aren't THAT inflated yet...although I've seen them, in some cases, double. But as far as prices go, Hawaii was ahead in pricing anyway. The inflation, however, has gone pretty steady.

It's a REAL tough market. Steg, if you are making at least $1200/month income (with proof of income) you can rent a place in Kalihi for $400/month. It's equivalent to the Projects of Hawaii but it's really not ALL that bad.

You might want to look into that or a pay by the week flop in Waikiki or University area until you can get your feet under you.

Sameold also lives in a pretty cheap area in Wahiawa but that's a long bus ride to Manoa.

If you need any help with things, let me know.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 17^th, 2005, 7:03am

Quote:

Honolulu is 50th in the housing market

50th in terms of least affordable I would assume ? I believe the only places more expensive would be areas of the Northeast like Mass and Conn, as well as the prime areas of California, like SF.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 17^th, 2005, 7:19am

The specific numbers (I don't know about all that general economics yakety-yak) you laid out there, sd, regarding what we ought to expect don't seem to be what Gino and I are finding to the be the case (and, though new to the digs, we've been through a crash course in "renting Oahu"). ... In any event, thank you all for your thoughts [smiley=pray.gif] and offers of help. It has been rough. BUT, at this point, Gino and I are rounding third and pretty much home (double-entendre intended). Balls are now starting to bounce over to our court (this is sounding like that "what would we do without sports" ESPN commerial where the guy is trying to propose or whatever to that chick, huh?) and the ones that are are the really good balls. ;) I'll give you guys final word when final word is given... [smiley=zenmaster.gif] probably on the morrow (actually, later today).

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by gridiron_legends on Aug 19^th, 2005, 1:28pm

I've been following the mock draft and commentary ex post facto, and I am quite surprised by a number of things. First, as has been pointed out, the fact that qbs have been drafted SO low. In particular, though, I find it head-scratchingly odd that David Carr and Carson Palmer and Matt Hasselbeck and Aaron Brooks and Chad Pennington were drafted before Drew Brees (who came in at #103). ?.?.? Based on my fantasy league scoring system, Brees was the #5 quarterback last year as far as total points, and almost every starter is back for the Chargers (every significant starter IS back). Plus, with the beefing up of AFC West offenses, the Bolts may have to air it out more than last year.

To reintroduce a previous topic, I like taking Bulger as early as #16. The Biggest Show on Turf is back, I believe: Stephen Jackson will reinvigorate the offense, Holt and Bruce are studs, and Kevin Curtis is coming into his own. Yes, I can see taking Bulger before McNabb: McNabb may not have TO, and with Pinkston gone, Philadelphia is scrambling just to get some decent receivers (remember the Todd Pinkston/James Thrash years? Brutal).

On that note, I think Westbrook is an underrated player. Look at the attention he'll get now, and I think you have to take him before LaMont Jordan, Corey Dillon, and probably before Stephen Jackson and Julius Jones, of course assuming that Westbrook's contract "issues" are resolved quickly.

I think Burleson and Bennett are steals at #54 and #57, respectively. Bennett was awesome the last half of 2004, and Burleson is top dawg in Minnesota's receiving corps. I don't think Plummer is worth #52: before Tom Brady and before Brett Favre? Maybe I'm missing something . . .

One more thing: Hines Ward at #51? Behind Roy Williams (who will share attention with two other young receiving studs), Andre Johnson, Michael Clayton, and Darrell Jackson? Wow.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 20^th, 2005, 2:18am

on 08/19/05 at 13:28:11, gridiron_legends wrote:

One more thing: Hines Ward at #51? Behind Roy Williams (who will share attention with two other young receiving studs), Andre Johnson, Michael Clayton, and Darrell Jackson? Wow.

I think that was part and parcel of this having begun during the thick of Ward's holdout.

...

[offtopic]Regarding the more mundane stuff of Gino's and my getting settled in HI, I am putting up a post in "the Bleachers":
http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=58;action=display;num=1099666483;start=75.

Also, regarding the housing I was seeking, you gotta factor in the "wife"... This means a couple of things, namely, 1) there is a different "minimum" standard; I would live anywhere, but anything even remotely connected to the word "projects" ain't gonna fly, and 2) we are a "formal" two-income household: marriage legally binds you and indicates increased stability; roommates and significant others come and go, but a spouse cannot, not easily and without financial remunerations way over and above that which a roomy is expected to be held to (that's why you see those kinds of cases all the time on any given TV court show).[/offtopic]

...

Oh, and by the way, the cheatsheet in the initial post of the thread has been updated through pick 114. Come on, folks! [smiley=commander.gif] [smiley=onit.gif] We have got to append at least another 11 picks and preferably 36.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 20^th, 2005, 6:26pm

We made it to 125 in fairly short order once we got goin' here again. Great job! Let's get it to 150, though. Someone, please, throw up (he-he :D) a pick like NOW so as to keep this sucker goin'!!!

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Callie on Aug 20^th, 2005, 6:41pm

on 08/20/05 at 18:26:55, StegRock wrote:

We made it to 125 in fairly short order once we got goin' here again. Great job! Let's get it to 150, though. Someone, please, throw up (he-he :D) a pick like NOW so as to keep this sucker goin'!!!

[smiley=wave.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 21^st, 2005, 3:44pm

Quote:

144. WR Michael Jenkins - Falcons

Good pick.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 22^nd, 2005, 4:11am

Okay! Someone make the last pick, #150, and we'll call it a day with this. Great job, everyone! [smiley=twothumbsup.gif] Thanks for participating! [smiley=bow.gif] It's coming together and participating in these kinds of (group) activities that makes for the life-blood of "the Gridiron". [smiley=yes.gif]

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 22^nd, 2005, 10:01am

The final Gridiron Poll results, along with comparisons of each pick to consensus rankings can be found here:

http://www.junkyardjake.com/ManOnTheStreet/grid150.htm

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by StegRock on Aug 23^rd, 2005, 1:24am

I went ahead and made the final update to the cheatsheet on the initial post of this thread. It now includes all 150 picks.

BUT, whatever, you GOT TO check out [smiley=checkin.gif] JunkyardJake.com's page for our "huddle" here linked to in his post right above. GOOD SHOW, JYJ!!! [smiley=bow.gif] The layout and comparisons ARE AWESOME!!! [smiley=twothumbsup.gif]

And, again, as always, thanks to all of you who participated. [smiley=bow.gif] Without the team effort none of this happens.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by junkyardjake on Aug 23^rd, 2005, 7:51am

Thanks Steg [smiley=bow.gif]

Hey btw, I finally finished my fantasy roster scoring formula, and hopefully I will be able post the CBFL results later today.

Title: Re: 2nd "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '05 - Comm
Post by Philly on Aug 23^rd, 2005, 11:18am

on 08/23/05 at 07:51:45, junkyardjake wrote:

Thanks Steg [smiley=bow.gif]

Hey btw, I finally finished my fantasy roster scoring formula, and hopefully I will be able post the CBFL results later today.

Looking forward to it! [smiley=booya.gif]