Ian Allan's Mailbag
Posted Jul. 13 at 04:15 PM
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:
Ian, I write in each year to compliment you on your team summaries in the back of the magazine. They are so comprehensive and spot-on, in my opionion they represent the "State of the Union" in fantasy football. Well done. My question is, why is such short shrift given to the ever-more-popular style of the game -- keeper/dynasty? The one-page annual rankings smack of being an afterthought, at best. At the very least you should add an experts poll for the keeper/dynasty version of the game and, in my opinion, much more content.
Steve Moyer [Alameda, CA]
A:
That’s a fair criticism. I agree that we cater far more to leagues based on one season. Allow me to point out, however, that the rookies article we run is built around a keeper format. And while you may consider the keeper league cheat sheet to be an afterthought, I can assure that each of those players and rankings is given every bit as much attention as the ratings on the other draft boards.
The trouble with the whole keeper-league deal is that it includes so many different systems. In a lot of leagues, teams are allowed to protect only 3-4 players, and at a cost of forfeiting draft picks (in which case, that draft board doesn’t really apply). In others, teams protect all of their players. And in many, teams don’t keep the players forever, but for only three-four years. It’s a tough group to service properly.
Side note: Have you ever noticed how guys in leagues that use keepers, individual defensive players or auctions always like to toss in that their system is “ever more popular” or “getting used by more and more people each year”? Does anyone have numbers to back that up? Maybe the percentage of dynasty leagues in 1997, 2002 and 2007? I’d be interested to see if those leagues truly are now capturing a significantly higher market share.
In the upcoming weeks, we’ll run some poll questions to measure how our readers feel on this issue.
Question 2:
How much of your frowning on Vick is related to coaching changes and field related stuff, and how much has to do with the "other"? Or put another way, if the other stuff wasn't there, where would he rank for you? I can start 2 QBs and Vick will come at good value with a ton of upside (just like last year).
DALE GANDER [SUN PRAIRIE, WI]
A:
I’m of the school of thought that some of these dog-fighting charges are going to stick. From what I’ve read, I believe Vick was involved. And even if he can wiggle off the hook, he’s going to have a hard time escaping at least some responsibility. There’s no getting around the fact that he’s the owner of the property where a significant amount of evidence was seized – they dug up 17 dogs last week. I think the NFL will suspend him for at least some games, and Vick probably also will have a hard time dealing with the extra pressure that will come from the media and fans (at both home and away).
On my board, I’ve got Vick as the No. 21 quarterback. On a per-game basis, I’ve got him as the No. 12 quarterback, but that might be too high. In addition to all the off-field stuff, the new coaching staff wants him to pass more and run less – to be more of pocket passer. I don’t think that’s going to work. Vick has been in the league for six years, and has made little progress as a passer. He completed under 53 percent of his throws last year. Fantasy-wise, all of his value has come from his running ability. If that rushing production is significantly reduced, I don’t think Vick can make a fantasy impact. I’d want no part of him.
Question 3:
in a performance based league we start 1QB 2 RB 3 WR 1 TE, you know the rest, how much higher would you value the WR?
chris wagman [lindenwold, NJ]
A:
It definitely makes a difference. According to my stat projections, the shift to that system results in receivers moving up 3-10 spots each. In a two-receiver league, I’ve got 16 wide receivers in my top 50 overall. In a three-receiver league, 22 wide receivers make the cut.
To compare that type of positional shift, you can consult the auction prices (which hopefully will be posted by the end of the day). Because we’ve now got three-wides as scoring system that we track (for performance leagues, as well as TD-only and point-per-reception).
You asked about a performance league with 12 teams. In your league, my top 10 receivers would come in at 13, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 30 and 31. When you add that third starting wide receiver, those guys climb up to 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 22, 23 and 24.
Question 4:
In a 12 team keeper league, I have been offered C. Benson and a first round pick next year (in a rookie draft only) for Javon Walker and the number 3 pick this year (which will probably be Calvin Johnson after AP and Lynch are taken). My only RBs are Rudi Johnson and Ahman Green while my receivers are Fitzgerald, J. Walker, Braylon Edwards, C. Chambers, Plaxico Burress and Vincent Jackson. I know that this trade makes sense when I consider my need but do you think I am giving away a lot by essentially trading J. Walker and Calvin Johnson for C. Benson (who could not beat out Thomas Jones in his first 2 years but has a good opportunity this year). Thanks in advance for your advice. Also, thanks to your articles and weekly projections, I won my championship last year (but Tiki retired--hence the dilemma).
Farhan Hassan [SAINT PAUL, MN]
A:
I’d be inclined to pass. Will Benson be anything special? Maybe, maybe not. You know that Walker is very good. And you should add another weapon at No. 3 (though it might be Marshawn Lynch rather than Calvin Johnson). In my opinion, the price is too high. The 2008 pick, of course, is a significant chunk in the deal. But it’s a year away, so you have to discount it (is 10 percent fair?) and you don’t know what spot it’s going to be in. It’s too early to say with any certainty that the No. 3 pick next year will be as good as this season’s. Darren McFadden is supposed to be the top running back (a probable top-5 pick), but he didn’t impress me in Arkansas’ bowl game against Wisconsin. Steve Slaton of West Virginia should go in the first round, but he’s awfully small – he could be either another Reggie Bush or a bust. And nobody really knows if some other college player is going to step up and be a coveted prospect. The fifth pick of next year’s rookie fantasy draft might be of very little value. I’d be inclined to keep Walker and your current draft pick.
Question 5:
I'm in a 12-team league (that uses standard CBSsportsline scoring) where each team can retain one player from the previous year. I will have the fourth overall pick (round one), then because of keepers - probably 16 (second round),24 (third round), 38 (fourth round), etc. I can retain Willis McGahee as my second round pick, or Maurice Jones-Drew in the sixth (got him on waivers).
Any thoughts on the best way to go? I can still get a quality RB with my first pick - maybe even McGahee, but that is a risk. I'm leaning toward McGahee.
Doug Carraway [Titusville, FL]
A:
Put me down for Jones-Drew. He might be better than McGahee, and he comes at a much lower cost. Jones-Drew is young and explosive, and he should get a much bigger workload this year. He’s also with a Jacksonville team that has a much better offensive line than Baltimore. On my draft boards, I’ve got Jones-Drew only one spot lower than McGahee in performance and TD-only leagues. I’ve actually got him higher than McGahee in leagues that give one point per reception. Based on those kind of projections, obviously I’d prefer to have Jones-Drew and a second-round pick, rather than McGahee and a sixth-rounder.
Question 6:
The commish on one of my leagues goes crazy every offseason changing the scoring.This year he's adding bonus points for 100 yd rushing/receiving and 300 yds passing.5 extra points a piece on top of the already customary 10yds=1 and 25yds=1. Also TDS are 6pts for rush or receive and 5pts for QBs with -2 for picks.
He also is giving another 5 points extra for touchdowns over 50 yds. I think this is ridiculous but what star players do you think would move up and down in this kind of format?
Michael Zendano [NORTH TONAWANDA, NY]
A:
I don’t like the 100/300 rule. It’s tough to plot out in a spreadsheet, and it’s not particularly fair (is a player who finishes with 101 yards really that much more valuable than a guy who winds up at 99?). Same deal with the 50-yard score bonus (which I provided some numbers on in the Lee Evans letter that led off the last mailbag).
I don’t spend a lot of time trying to find ways to get an edge in 100/300 leagues, but I do have some numbers from last year.
Players who finished with the most 100-yard receiving games:
6 (100-yard games): Marvin Harrison, Roy Williams.
5: Andre Johnson, Anquan Boldin, Chad Johnson, Joey Galloway, Mark Clayton, Marques Colston, Mike Furrey, Steve Smith, Torry Holt.
4: Braylon Edwards, Devery Henderson, Donald Driver, Donte Stallworth, Drew Bennett, Eddie Kennison, Javon Walker, Laveranues Coles, Lee Evans, Marty Booker, Muhsin Muhammad, Santana Moss, T.J. Houshmandzadeh, Terrell Owens, Tony Gonzalez.
3: Antonio Bryant, Bernard Berrian, Chris Henry, Darrell Jackson, Greg Jennings, Hank Baskett, Hines Ward, Isaac Bruce, Jerricho Cotchery, Joe Horn, Larry Fitzgerald, Laveranues Coles, Matt Jones, Plaxico Burress, Reche Caldwell, Reggie Brown, Reggie Bush, Steven Jackson, Terry Glenn.
Quarterbacks with the most 300-yard games:
8: Drew Brees, Marc Bulger.
6: Peyton Manning.
4: Donovan McNabb, Jon Kitna.
3: Brett Favre, Chad Pennington, Tom Brady, Tony Romo.
Players with the most 100-yard rushing games:
11: Larry Johnson.
10: LaDainian Tomlinson.
9: Frank Gore.
8: Tiki Barber.
7: Willie Parker.
6: Brian Westbrook, Ladell Betts, Steven Jackson, Travis Henry.
5: Ahman Green, Rudi Johnson, Tatum Bell.
4: Chester Taylor, Deuce McAllister, Fred Taylor, Julius Jones, Ronnie Brown, Thomas Jones.
3: DeShaun Foster, Edgerrin James, Maurice Jones-Drew, Michael Vick, Warrick Dunn.
Question 7:
12 teams, 3 keepers...start 1QB, 2RB, 3WR, TE, K, DST...
Are LJ, Parker, and Wayne still my keepers or does McGahee, Roy, or Brady sneak above any? Standard Scoring with a 4 year limit on keepers (this is the second year)...
Joe Candiello [Pittsburgh, PA]
A:
Looks good. Keep an eye on Larry Johnson’s situation – I think he’s headed for a holdout. And if in the preseason it looks like McGahee is really going to fit in well, he could move up. As of right now, however, I would definitely opt to protect Johnson, Parker and Wayne.
Question 8:
Hey Ian. Thanks for all your help over the years. I am commissioner of a 12 team league where each team gets one vote when deciding on rule or scoring changes or draft or auction etc. Do you think it is reasonable in the event of a tie that the commissioner's vote be used to break the tie?
Billy LEROY [YUMA, AZ]
A:
Yes. The commissioner spends more time than the other owners working on the league, and with no compensation. I think that's worth an extra half vote.
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 1: Ian, I write in each...
Posted by Steve Moyer | Jul. 14 at 09:37 AM
I think a comprehensive multiple-question reader poll is a great idea, Ian. You could ask people what formats they play now, formats they played 10 years ago (if they played at all), how long they're been playing, etc. It would be cool to see a sampling of your readership. As to ranking players for keeper/dynasty, individual league rules really don't matter -- the rankings can just be based on a 3-4 year player purview rather than one, and people can apply the list regardless of how many keepers they are able to retain in their league. I create my own dynasty ranking every year and it's a lot of fun to extrapolate from all sources, but you guys produce "The Bible" and therefore should lead the way, in my humble opinion.
Question 5: I'm in a 12-team league...
Posted by Doug Carraway | Jul. 14 at 02:20 PM
Thanks, that certainly helps. I've been back and forth on this for awhile now. The only thing that concerned me about Jones-Drew was losing too many goal-line and short yardage (that turn into big gain) opportunities to Greg Jones this year - when weighed against the no 'committe' scenario that exists in Baltimore. Any added thoughts are appreciated.
Question 6: The commish on one of...
Posted by BRYAN BERTSCH | Jul. 17 at 07:03 AM
Our league is TD/yardage league, but you need 100 yards rushing or receiving for 6 points (and 2 points per 25 after that) and 300 yards passing for 6 (2 points per 25 after as well). Here is why I like the 100/300 format: 1) Any scrub can throw for 250 yards or run/receive for 80. The benchmark for a great game has always been 100 yards rushing or receiving and 300 yards passing. Those players are always highlighted each Sunday. So why not let that reflect in fantasy football? 2) It makes watching the games that much more exciting. You're runningback is sitting at 96 yards with minutes left, he could get pulled at any time...All of a sudden those 4 yards are just like a TD. It makes for a lot of excitement, believe me...last season we had our biggest play ever: a 26 point play. One team had Marc Bulger and Torry Holt. Bulger was sitting at 290 some odd yards and Holt around 90. They connected on a 55 yard TD late in the game and BOOM! It was worth 26 as both went over 100/300 plus 8 extra in yards, a TD pass worth 3 and catch worth 6. I'd never seen anything like it. I was on live scoring and that team was doing nothing and a moment later they were on top or everyone. I thought the system screwed up! 3) I don't like the tendency that every damn play has to result in some sort of fantasy score. People keep wanting to get points for nonsense. Points per reception? Come on. Sacks, fumbles, INTs...give me a break. Pretty soon people will be calling for punter points and special teams tackles. There is beauty in simplicity...trust me on that. That's my take. 100/300 is the only way to go!