Ian Allan's Mailbag
Posted Sep. 01 at 07:13 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:
Could you run the numbers on a top-12 list for kickers if they get a 1-point bonus for field goals from 40-plus yards and a 2-point bonus for 50-plus? PATs are worth 1 point, and players lose a point every time they miss a field goal or extra point.
GREGORY BLAKE [DALLAS, TX]
A:
That’s an interesting question. How much should a fantasy league care if his league starts offering various incentives for different lengths of kicks? I don’t think it makes a lot of difference. If you look at last year’s numbers, you’ll see that the average team finished with 6 additional kicking points in your format. All but 6 teams in the league finished within 6 points of that number. Tampa Bay and Kansas City lost 2 and 3 points. The four teams that increased their scoring by 13-20 points all had kickers who were good at hitting from long range – Detroit, St. Louis, Minnesota and Tennessee. But are any of those kickers worth targeting? Jason Hanson might not be ready for the opener because of knee surgery, and both he and Josh Brown play for two of the worst teams in the league. Ryan Longwell went 6 for 6 from 50-plus last year, but he historically hasn’t been a great performer from long range. Some of the better options – Jeff Reed, Mason Crosby, David Akers, Robbie Gould, Lawrence Tynes – could be hurt in this format because of weather limiting their longer kicks and accuracy. For my top 12 in your league, I’ll go with: 1 Gostkowski, 2 Longwell, 3 Kaeding, 4 Crosby, 5 Bironas, 6 Reed, 7 Gould, 8 Elam, 9 Akers, 10 Tynes, 11 Rackers, 12 Kasay.
Question 2:
I love the e-mail cheat sheets and updates, but it's hard to figure out what changed from the previous edition. Have you ever considered offering a "red-line" version on the website?
CHRIS PIERCE [ALBUQUERQUE, NM]
A:
We get observations like this once in a while. Maybe what we’ll try is adding a graph at the front, where we outline the half-dozen or so biggest movers – the guys who haven’t taken the biggest shifts up or down.
Question 3:
I once had Kurt Warner as the 5th QB on my board, but he seems to be slipping quite a bit lately. I know you don't want to put too much stock in their lack of offensive prowess in the preseason (plus Leinart's improved play), but it is alarming to say the least. Your thoughts?
WAYNE WILLIAMS [MECHANICSVLLE, VA]
A:
He could be just fine, but with his age, I see him as clearly behind Aaron Rodgers and Philip Rivers. I’ve got Warner in that next class, with Tony Romo and Matt Ryan.
Question 4:
The 8/31 rankings show a significant drop in value for Pierre Thomas (from 19 in a PPR to 32 in a PPR.) Can you elaborate on the reasons for that? Is it Mike Bell? The sprained MCL? What do you think the chances are that he'll be a worthy #2 back in a 12-team PPR league?
ALAN CHITLIK [SEATTLE, WA]
A:
Thomas has the bad wheel. That could contribute to the Saints going to more of a three-man rotation. Maybe they use Mike Bell on a lot of their goal-line plays, saving Thomas some wear and tear. The Saints also could be without left tackle Jammal Brown for a good chunk of the season. And did you notice that without Thomas or Reggie Bush, the Saints still ran for 232 yards on 46 carries at Oakland? It seems to be scheme rather than personnel that’s creating the success down there. Factor in all that stuff, and it drops Thomas a little on my board – enough that he moves down from 19th to 32nd among running backs on my board. The key factor for Thomas is health. If he stays healthy and Bush gets hurt, Thomas will be very good in your league, because he’ll be heavily utilized as a pass catcher.
Question 5:
In a PPR League with the number one pick would you still take an Adrian Peterson?
JAY MILLER [MERRICK, NY]
A:
He’s in the mix, but I’d probably go another direction. That scoring system tends to favor wide receivers, and I don’t see much difference between the top running backs. Peterson doesn’t catch many passes, which hurts him in that type of format.
Question 6:
If you were to only bid on players that were going for less than their value on your rankings, what about if you've filled a position? For instance, say I've already got two starting WRs in a league where we start only 2. Also assume I have no starting RBs. Then say there's only 1 or 2 RBs left who I would think of as a starter. Shouldn't I shift my focus to RBs and possibly pay more than the suggested values at this point?
Teddy Gaskell [JACKSONVILLE, FL]
A:
As you purchase players there will be some shifting of priorities and adjustments that will have to be made. Because of positional restraints, you often times will be locked out of cashing in on a good deal. If you’ve already purchased Drew Brees, for example, you won’t be buying Peyton Manning, Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers – you’ll need that money for other positions. Auctions can go a variety of different directions, and you have to be ready to adjust your strategy as you go along. If everybody is overpaying early, then you hang back and get deals later. If the money isn’t flowing early, then you better buy at the front end of the auction, because there won’t be those great deals later. But it’s all easier said than done. I did poorly in an auction last night. The 12 guys were cautious early – nobody ran out and foolishly overspent for anybody. Most of the players were going for close to what I thought they were worth. I got a solid deal on Randy Moss but got caught as the high bidder at close to market value on Greg Jennings, Ben Roethlisberger and Devin Hester. I spent $82 on that four-pack of players, leaving me picking through scrubs the rest of the way. I ended up with a team worth only $120. Considering I was working with my own dollar values, that’s not very good. Probably the worst auction I've done in that league.
Question 7:
I hate using Peter King as a guide for fantasy purposes because he can be SO wrong when it comes to preseason coverage. However, I was as surprised as he was by Anthony Gonzalez's drop against the Lions and its apparent fallout. King says, "I think the most significant single play of the weekend could well have been the right-in-his-hands drop by Colts wide receiver Anthony Gonzalez late in the first half at Detroit. The Colts are trying to give Gonzalez one of two jobs -- Marvin Harrison's right wide-receiver spot, or the slot receiver job. But Peyton Manning and offensive coordinator Tom Moore are waiting for Gonzalez to raise his game and grab one of the jobs. After the Gonzalez drop, Manning threw six more passes, none to Gonzalez, and Dallas Clark was back in the slot, his comfort zone with Manning. Manning's going to throw to players he trusts, and with Gonzalez dropping a ball like that one -- and not making enough plays otherwise in the preseason -- he could well make Manning lean on Clark and rookie Austin Collie more inside, and Pierre Garcon outside. That really solves all your fantasy problems with the Colts, doesn't it?" I'd like to hear your thoughts – any real concern here? Personally, I don't think it's fair to ding Gonzo too much for that, but it was a terrible drop. He just hasn't looked that good.
Jered Ottenwess [NEWBERRY, FL]
A:
That’s it? Gonzalez drops one pass against the Lions, and now he’s just going to be written out of the offense? The Colts are going to bench him? I don’t see it. None of his final six pass attempts were thrown to Reggie Wayne, either. Is Wayne also being phased out of the offense? Go back and watch the tape of the first preseason game. You’ll see on the first play of the preseason, Peyton Manning quickly stood up and threw a ball to Pierre Garcon – a flanker screen, I think. Garcon dropped it; as bad a drop as you’ll see. So by King’s logic, Garcon would have already been eliminated from the team’s plan. I will gladly wager you that Gonzalez will catch 70-plus balls. I think he has a good chance to be a top-10 receiver.
Question 8:
How do you factor in health and reliability to your projections and rankings? Eddie Royal has one year under his belt, yet he is ranked ahead guys like Santana Moss and Hines Ward who may not be fun picks but have proven they will put up solid numbers year in and year out. Injuries are tough, but you can factor health into your rankings based on the % of games missed over a pro and college career. I have used health and reliability factors fantasy baseball projections with much success over the years. Football is a much smaller sample size with only 16 games, but at some point they still apply.
Brian Pedersen [PARK RIDGE, IL]
A:
I thought Santana Moss looked very good on Friday against the Patriots. Jason Campbell kept going to him, and Moss kept making plays. When he’s healthy and on his game, he’s a top-level receiver. Almost every year, however, he seems to get banged up with some kind of hamstring or quad injuries. He missed two games in both 2006 and 2007, so I don’t understand why you could classify him as a durable player. Same deal with Hines Ward. He’s 33, and he takes a beating every year because of his physical style of play. Ward hasn’t started 16 games in a season since 2004. I see Royal as more likely to stay healthy than either of those two veterans.
Question 9:
I have a trade offer of Donnie Avery and Darren Sproles for Ahmad Bradshaw. Yardage league were we start 2 RBs, 2 WRs, plus 1 flex player. My WRs are Roddy White, Vincent Jackson, Earl Bennett, and Troy Williamson. I know you're not a big Avery fan, due to his injury, but what do you think? I like Bradshaw a lot, but noticed he dropped a few spots in Monday's rankings.
JOHN RUPPE [FORT MYERS, FL]
A:
This one boils down to whether you want Sproles or Bradshaw. Avery is a nice backup receiver (could be better than both Bennett and Williamson), but it should be the running backs who drive your decision. Which guy – Sproles or Bradshaw – do you like more in a change-of-pace role, and which guy do you feel is more likely to get into the starting lineup? I think they’re both pretty good. Sproles should catch more passes. I mind myself being more comfortable with Bradshaw’s role in the offense – he’ll definitely get more carries. And my hunch is Brandon Jacobs will get hurt before LaDainian Tomlinson. In regards to Bradshaw slipping in the rankings, that’s tied to him averaging only 3.5 yards as a receiver in the preseason. Previously, I thought he would take over Derrick Ward’s duties as their third-down back. Now, I think Bradshaw will catch fewer passes than both Jacobs and Danny Ware.
Question 10:
Is there any one liner info on how you got to Michael Turner and DeAngelo Williams 1-2? Most have Adrian Peterson and Maurice Jones-Drew.
RAFFAELE PIEMONTE [WYCKOFF, NJ]
A:
I see little difference between those backs. I would prefer to trade down, pick up a little extra value, and just take whichever one falls. Peterson had the 75-yard touchdown run against the Texans; that may help him go No. 1 in a lot of drafts this weekend. Jones-Drew will catch a lot more passes than those other guys; that helps him in some scoring format – but he plays for team that could finish in last in its division. Of the other three, I’m sure that Williams will be the most productive pass catcher. Peterson is the most likely to get hurt. Peterson has by far the easiest schedule. All three guys will lose some work to capable No. 2 backs behind them – Jerious Norwood, Jonathan Stewart, Chester Taylor.
Question 11:
Annual kick returner question for you. My league counts kick/punt return yardage for individual players, which heavily adds to the value of many players, especially those who return kicks while also playing significantly on offense. Last year, Leon Washington, Darren Sproles, Pierre Thomas, Jerious Norwood, Johnnie Lee Higgins, Eddie Royal and Steve Breaston were the significant players who had big boosts from kick return stats--any word on whether any of them won't be returning this year? I suspect Thomas and Royal won't be ... will Reggie Bush be returning again, if healthy? Any other guys to keep an eye on?
Craig Rinne [GAINESVILLE, FL]
A:
I think you’re right on Thomas. I don’t think the Saints will risk using him on kickoffs. And the same could be true for Bush; he’s coming off microfracture knee surgery. But I saw Royal returning punts with the first team in the third exhibition game. Sproles will return both kickoffs and punts for San Diego. Washington and Norwood should return only kickoffs – not punts. Arizona has Breaston listed as its first-string guy for kickoffs and punts, but I think he’ll lose at least one of those jobs; LaRod Stephens-Howling has looked good in the exhibitions. Other NFL regulars you’ll see returning kicks: DeSean Jackson (punts), Devin Hester (punts), Ted Ginn (kickoffs), Joshua Cribbs (kickoffs and punts), Percy Harvin (kickoffs) and maybe Felix Jones (kickoffs). Just punt returns for Higgins, and I don’t think he’s going to play that much at wide receiver.
Question 12:
I know this is not the first time this issue has been raised, but here goes anyway: Is there any chance you will consider moving up by 24 hours or so the release of the Sept. 7 update? All of the Week 4 preseason games will be played Thursday and Friday, and it'd be awfully nice to have your latest analysis and rankings heading into my draft on Sunday afternoon.
Paul Owers [RIVIERA BEACH, FL]
A:
I imagine that final update will go out earlier than usual – it will be in the hands of every doing drafts on Labor Day. I don’t, however, envision it being completed prior to Sunday afternoon in Florida. But I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Keep in mind that I will carefully check over all of the projections on Thursday as part of our weekly routine. And most of the teams essentially mail it in for that final preseason game. I’m not anticipating any big changes between Thursday afternoon and Sunday.
Question 13:
Here's a tricky one. I'm in a 12 PPR team keeper league. The starting roster is: 1 QB, 1 RB, 2 WR, 1TE, 1D, 1K, 2 flex (any position). Each team gets 150 pts to draft 11 players aside from the keepers. My keepers are Brees and Fitzgerald. I'm trying to mess around with the default values for the auction profiles, but given this league, should these be different? I'm assuming since you can start QBs as flex there will be more drafted and since you only have to start 1 RB there will be less drafted and since it's PPR more WR will be drafted.
Bill Petilli [MOUNT VERNON, NY]
A:
Assuming that kickers and defenses won’t be a factor in those flex spots, you’ve got 84 players starting each week. I’ll call it 96, since the top sub on each team also will play a lot. I just checked the numbers, those 96 players (according to my projections) should include 33 wide receivers, 27 quarterbacks, 24 running backs and 12 tight ends.
Question 14:
Long-time subscriber, first time entering league's approximate scoring system, and auction values as best as I could estimate considering we do a regular draft. Ten-team league, PPR, 3 points for passing and receiving TDs, and 6 points for rushing TDs. All TDs get 1 bonus point for every 10 yards of the TD play. Rosters of 16. Even after tweaking the number of QBs that I think would go for more than the league minimum, I'm surprised that the top 5 RBs would only come in at Nos. 3, 8, 11, 15 and 16. Sound odd? I figure 40 RBs will be drafted, with two-thirds going for over the minimum, based on an earlier similar percentage you cited in a previous Mailbag involving 12-team league with 20-man rosters.
Norb Franz [Macomb, MI]
A:
Only 40 running backs are going to be drafted? That seems low. Wouldn’t a lot of teams carry only one kicker, one tight end and one defense, allowing them to carry more players at running back and wide receiver? How many running backs were selected in your draft last year? My guess is you might have more like 48 running backs drafted, with about 35 or 36 going for more than the $1 minimum. Plug that in and see what you get. I also think you’ll be up around 48 for wide receivers. And try dialing it down to only 11 quarterbacks going for more than minimum. Try those numbers and see what you get.
Question 15:
For the past two years we have been a keeper league (keep any 2 players not selected in the first 2 rounds). We are now discussing transitioning into a format where we keep our entire team and only draft from the free-agents and rookies. What do you think is the best/fairest method to do so? Keep our 2009 end of year rosters? Or, start over fresh and select an entire roster? Obviously, we're split as the teams with better rosters want to keep and move forward, the guys that suck want to start fresh. What do you think?
Maxwell Cameron [Windsor, ON]
A:
They’re different animals. Starting from scratch each year gives each team more hope – everyone comes into the draft on equal footing. With the dynasty format, it take longer to turn around a lesser franchise, and you could see the same team win year after year. The team that selected Jerry Rice in 1985, for example, would have been positioned for a long run of success.
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 4: The 8/31 rankings show a...
Posted by justin howe | Sep. 01 at 10:23 AM
Pierre Thomas #32 AMONG RUNNING BACKS? Is that.. did.. what?
Question 6: If you were to only...
Posted by Teddy Gaskell | Sep. 04 at 12:44 AM
It's great to get good deals, but if you were to end an auction with $25 of a $200 total, wouldn't you feel like you blew that $25? You get nothing for saving it at the end.