Ian Allan's Mailbag
Posted Jul. 21 at 05:09 AM
Publisher Ian Allan fields your questions on strategy, how to run your league, player ratings -- and whatever else you think of. Updated every Friday during the season; Tuesdays and Fridays during the last two months of the preseason. You must be registered and signed-in to submit a mailbag question. After you sign in at the top of the page, the link to submit a mailbag question will become visible.
Question 1:
It looks like Favre will be a Viking. Would that make Shiancoe a top 10 tight end? He was top-10 last year thanks to TDs, and you know how Favre likes his tight ends, especially in the red zone.
L DALE GANDER [SUN PRAIRIE, WI]
A:
I think Favre will help Visanthe Shiancoe. As you may have noticed in the magazine, I was concerned about Sage Rosenfels potentially hurting Shiancoe. At Houston last year, Rosenfels was notoriously poor at getting the ball to Owen Daniels. Daniels averaged only 25 receiving yards per game in the five games Rosenfels was at quarterback. With Matt Schaub, he was up at 67 yards per game – on pace for over 1,000 yards. So the Rosenfels subtraction should help Shiancoe. But is there also an addition via Favre? I don’t think so. Last year with the Jets, only 3 of Favre’s 22 TD passes went to tight ends. The NFL average in recent years is 23.2 percent (of TD passes going to tight end). For Favre, in his last five years with the Packers, the team was at 22.8 percent (31 of 136). So I think a fair estimate for the Vikings is that about 23 percent of their touchdown passes will go to the tight end position. If we make the assumption the team finishes with 20-22 TD passes, that should put Shiancoe in line for about 4-5 TDs.
Question 2:
29 quarterbacks ranked in the magazine and no Marc Bulger? Are you telling me that behind what should be a much improved offensive line you don't think Bulger ranks in the same tier as guys like Brady Quinn, Byron Leftwich, Kerry Collins? I know we are only talking about the lowest of the low tiers but I think Bulger is a notable omission.
Gregory Oswell [ESCONDIDO, CA]
A:
Bulger is the No. 30 quarterback on my board. He’s pretty much interchangeable with all of those other garbage-can quarterbacks that I wouldn’t consider drafting in a million years – Quinn, Leftwich and Collins. Among the 31 quarterbacks who’ve started at least half of the time over the last two years, Bulger ranks 25th in passing yards (189 per game) and next-to-last in touchdowns (22 in 27 games).
Question 3:
I was wondering how a person could justify naming Fitzgerald the No. 1 receiver, when both he and Boldin historically have been only very good second-tier prospects ... they kind of cancel each other out of big numbers. Nothing in regular season history tells me one or the other is going to suddenly jump up to 16 TDs. Add to that your analysis (which I believe is accurate) that passing numbers will be down this year due to last year’s run-pass ratio being way out of whack and the likelihood that Whisenhunt will want to run a lot more and I just don’t see the reasoning. I have a hunch everyone just has the Fitzgerald-In-The-Playoffs Fever (in which Boldin didn’t play or played very injured). I say let someone else pick Fitzgerald first, and be happy with Moss, Calvin Johnson or Steve Smith.
JEFF FOSTER [CHICO, CA]
A:
All of those other guys also have flaws. I don’t consider Fitzgerald to be head and shoulders above those other guys (as I pointed out at the website yesterday, I traded down from No. 2 to No. 10 in a points-per-reception league, figuring I’d either take Fitzgerald or be happy with another receiver. But when you look at all the pros and cons for each guy, I think he’s the player you rank No. 1. If you’re going to convince me that Fitzgerald is not the top receiving prospect, part of that must involved explaining which receiver will be more productive than him and why.
Question 4:
I understand you can plug in your leagues scoring system to spit out the cheat sheet. Maybe I'm wrong, but over the years I've been seeing more and more leagues moving to 6 points for TD passes as opposed to 4. Aside from subscribing, I also buy the magazine and the magazine is geared so much more to 4 points per TD passes. Just wondering if that will change.
Bill Petilli [MOUNT VERNON, NY]
A:
It’s possible that we’ll switch at some point. I considered changing it in the 2009 magazine. We’ve posted a few on-line surveys, and we haven’t been able to get definitive results. Sometimes 6 points for TD passes wins, and sometimes it’s 4 points for TD passes. The voting wasn’t overwhelming or clear enough, I thought, to merit making the change in the magazine (which is a pretty big deal). Possibly you’ll see that in 2010. Until then, we’ve got that custom-rankings deal on the website that you can at least fall back on.
Question 5:
I really like the flexibility you added for different pts for different TD lengths. That really helps for my league's crazy rules. There's one more option that would help immensely. In our league, it's double pts for all scoring and yardage out of position (ex. QB running or receiving, RB passing or receiving, WR passing or rushing). Every year, I have to go create me own lists from your spreadsheets, but this would obviously be a big time saver if you could add this to your scoring profile options. Thanks again for your great info. Last year, I had 2 firsts and a third in my three leagues. You guys are the best.
Andy Jury [MESA, AZ]
A:
Good point. I’ll see if we can work that in at some point. But it involves too much programming to be completed for this year’s drafts. You’ll have to finagle it by punching out customized rankings multiple times. Start by saying TD receptions and TD throws are worth 12 points and TD runs are worth 6 points – that gives you the rankings for running backs. Then change rushing touchdowns to 12 and receiving touchdowns to 6; that gives you the rankings for wide receivers and tight ends. And finally roll TD passes down to 6 and set run/rec scores at 12; that will be your quarterbacks.
Question 6:
In your magazine you show a projected schedule of difficulty, Is it possible to show a difficulty schedule based on rushing yardage and another schedule of difficulty on passing? This will help in looking at each position, RB and WR.
JEFF WINE [LAKE FOREST, CA]
A:
I believe I’ve spent more time studying strength of schedule than anybody – not just fantasy guys, but NFL scouts, officials and writers as well. I have a huge database with all of the figures for all of the schedules since 1993 – expected strength of schedule, actual strength of schedule and how the teams fared. And it’s my belief that trying to use schedule difficulty that’s designed around rushing or passing production is a waste of time. It doesn’t work. Makes only slightly more sense than saying that Tennessee projects to have the easiest schedule in terms of penalties. You’re better going off the win-loss records from the previous year. Nevertheless, I do compile those no-value numbers each year anywhere. The top 5 in each category appear below. With the numbers you see below, the yards are per-game figures, which the touchdowns are per season. The third number – the fantasy points per game – is compiled by using 6 points per TDs and 1 point for every 10 yards. Enjoy. Or not.
FIVE EASIEST SCHEDULES, RUSHING
Yds TD Pts
124 16.5 18.5 Baltimore
121 16.9 18.4 Minnesota
123 16.2 18.4 Washington
118 17.1 18.2 Arizona
122 16.1 18.2 San Diego
FIVE HARDEST SCHEDULES, RUSHING
Yds TD Pts
108 12.0 15.3 Carolina
108 12.1 15.3 Atlanta
110 12.8 15.8 Miami
109 14.1 16.2 Detroit
112 13.4 16.2 Tampa Bay
FIVE EASIEST SCHEDULES, PASSING
Yds TD Pts
233 22.1 31.6 St. Louis
233 21.9 31.5 San Francisco
230 21.5 31.0 Indianapolis
233 20.0 30.8 Arizona
226 21.8 30.8 Seattle
FIVE HARDEST SCHEDULES, PASSING
Yds TD Pts
216 18.4 28.5 San Diego
216 19.2 28.8 Denver
218 19.4 29.1 Kansas City
219 19.4 29.2 Baltimore
220 19.5 29.3 Cleveland
Question 7:
I am in a eight-team auction league with 18 rounds and a $125 bankroll. We get to keep up to 2 players (not two from the same position) at the salary we bought them for the year prior. I have seen the Auction values but how do I adjust my cheat sheet now that I know what some players are going to go for?
TYLER HAINES [LOVELAND, CO]
A:
You’re getting into some complex math. One option is to just run the numbers as if everyone is available; that will put a fair price on everyone, and you can just assign the first two players to each franchise as if they bought them at that price. That will give you an idea of how the teams are doing. If you want to get into more exacting numbers – down to the penny – then you need to get all of the data into a sortable, workable spreadsheet like Excel. Then, you could separate out the locked down players and re-run the numbers for everyone else. Unless you have strong math skills, you probably don’t want to go down that road.
Question 8:
I got your magazine recently. Maybe you've been doing this for years and I've just never noticed. I understand you omitting "Redskins" but why are you omitting "Chiefs"? A chief is considered a leader. Robert "The Chief" Parrish was one of the coolest nicknames in sports history. Heck, we even call our president "Commander in CHIEF". I understand you're trying to be respectful, but I think you guys are being way too sensitive on this issue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this Fantasy Football Index where a majority of your readers are middle-aged men who drink beer and yell obscenities at the TV when Braylon Edwards drops a pass. I think we can handle the word "Chiefs".
Cody Hager [ALOHA, OR]
A:
I don’t have strong feelings on the issue. A few years back, we started following the lead of the The Oregonian. That seems to be the way the tide is flowing. Every year you see a handful of high schools, newspapers and colleges move in that direction. Some are documented at this website. I’ll be surprised is “Washington Redskins” can last another 20 years. That town already got rid of the NBA’s “Bullets”. As far as what’s right, what’s wrong, and where exactly to draw the line, those are tricky issues.
Question 9:
I would like your opinion on the following trade please. I would be trading Joseph Addai and Antonio Gates for Dallas Clark, Darren McFadden and Michael Bush. I am in a keeper league which is one point per reception. We also have a cap which is set at 17 total years. My rationale for this trade is that I have had Gates for 5 years now and I think that McFadden has a greater upside then Addai. The other team owner will probably be drafting Donald Brown. So, this trade makes some sense to me.
JOHN SHELBROCK [FRANKENMUTH, MI]
A:
I like the idea of getting out of some years by swapping Gates for Clark. And I’ll agree that McFadden has some long-term potential that is appealing. My concern, however, is for this year. Addai will catch a lot more passes than McFadden, and receptions are golden in your format. Last year in Indianapolis, Rhodes caught 45 and Addai caught 25, but with the Colts now switching to the Addai-Brown tandem at backfield, I expect Addai will be much more heavily used as a pass catcher. Probably a 40-catch guy. Can the Raiders get McFadden dialed in? I can’t promise they will. I see it as just an even-type trade; not a killer deal.
Readers' Comments
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.
Question 3: I was wondering how a...
Posted by JEFF FOSTER | Jul. 21 at 01:09 PM
well, moss is themain td catcher in Ne, and caught only 1 td less than fitzgerald last year, with qb who you basically call a piece of crap..so now that the best qb in the league is back, (who by the way set records the last year they played together), dont you think moss is a lock for a min. of 13-16 tds? whats the knock? galloway? they had a speedster in stallworth that year and moss did just fine..age? havent seen that yet...Cal-John... just as many tds as Fits last year, and thats with boldin being out for a total of what, 4 games?...Johnson scored twelve on one of the worst teams EVER, and has nowhere to go but up...the qb play and offense will be better with linehan there( if nothing else because of culpepper's familairity), plus stafford will only play if he can be effective, and reallly, how much worse could stafford bew than orlaovsky?..caljon is also the only td maker in that offense, ulike fitz....Steve Smith-with all eyes on the running game, should free him up(not that he has ever needed it to produce), plus no way does delhomme play that bad two years in A ROW, wich i assume is one of your knocks on smith- bad qb play...and smith is the main td guy on his team...fitz isnt..