ZoomSlowik

He's a good fantasy player because he hits homers and steals bases, those two things are hard to find together and steals have a lot more value in fantasy baseball than in real baseball. Batting average and OBP are two important things in real baseball. A comparison of those two numbers the last 4 years(I'm counting Magg's shortened 04) year BA OBP Maggs 2001 .305 .382 2002 .320 .381 2003 .317 .380 2004 .292 .351 Beltran 2001 .306 .352 2002 .273 .346 2003 .307 .389 2004 .267 .371 As you can see, there is a significant inconsistency in Beltran's numbers and is in general(obviously not every case so don't bother pointing that out) a dropoff in BA and OBP from a healthy Maggs, which was my point. This is also the first year that Beltran has hit over 30 homers. It's just something to consider when you want to give someone over $14 mil. He may be a good defender and have great speed, but he is not the dependable offensive machine like Bonds, Pujols, Ramirez, or Vlad(I'd like to throw a healthy Maggs in this group, but he isn't quite that good) that generally commands the type of salary he is expecting.

I'm really sick of hearing the whole "we traded the farm, no we're going to suck forever" line. Has anyone we've dealt really done anything? Francisco has had an okay year and now has possible criminal proceedings, and Reed is still a big prospect. There isn't a whole lot outside of that, it's not like we let Brian Giles and Richie Sexon go like the Indians did. We had a highly ranked system in 2000 but none of those guys developed. s*** happens. Drafting and signing young players is such a crap shoot, and it's not like we're the only team that doesn't have top level prospects. No one really knows what is going to happen with the Sox in the next few years, so can we cut some of this doom and gloom for at least a while?

I agree that Beltran is a longshot to end up here, but I also agree that he will probably be a good fit in center. He has the speed we want and is also an excellent defender. Here's one thing to consider though, he's hitting about .267 this year. While most of that is due to the .257 in the NL, it is still something to be worried about if you are going to give him that much money. That's quite a dropoff from what Maggs was providing(somewhere between .300 and .310 when healthy). He's somewhat inconsistent, meaning he'll hit absolutely nothing and then go on a tear for a couple of weeks, much like C Lee. We need to find a consistent hitter of a decent talent level, although I know it is hard to do. However, depending on what kind of contract is actually offered(I'll be interested to see how much is Boras BS and how much is actual interest) I'd certainly take a shot.

I can't believe I left out Oklahoma State on my Big 12 comments, how the hell do I leave out a Final Four team?! I'm not so sure they'll be a great team, losing Tony Allen is going to hurt a lot. I personally think they need another player to step up to contend with Kansas, Lucas, Graham, and McFarlin can't do everything(before someone says Bobik, he is way to one-dimensional to be counted on right now). They should be solid though, my guess is they'll get a 3 or 4 seed in the tourney. My personal top 10: 1) UNC 2) Kansas 3) Arizona (I know this is awfully high, but I'm picking just on talent. Adams is spectacular, Stoudamire and Frye are solid, Shakur should be better, and they actually have a bench this year. Actually I think they are be better than Kansas on pure talent, but the top 4 guys on KU impressed me late last year) 4) Wake Forest 5) Illinois (drop considerably if Brown is out for a while) 6) Georgia Tech 7) Duke (depth will hurt, but still have talent) 8) Syracuse (will kick ass if Edelin is back) 9) MSU (still don't have a PG, but I like Hill, Torbert, and Davis a lot) 10) Florida (This is more that I don't trust Alabama, and I can't really have 5 ACC teams in the top 10. Roberson, Walsh, and Lee is a nice starting point, Brewer should make a nice impact, and I think they have enough bodies to get by at center) Just missing(no particular order)- UConn, ND, Alabama, Maryland, Ok State

They are definitely going to be weaker than the ACC. SEC looks stronger too, with Florida, Miss State, Kentucky, Alabama, and possibly LSU competing for the title. I'm not sure that the Big East is going to have a super team, but they should have a ton of solid teams, meaning they'll probably be stronger than the Big Ten. The Big 12 looks like Kansas and everyone else. Texas is the only other team I really see with a chance to do anything, so I have trouble saying they will be stronger than the Big Ten. Pac 10 looks pretty dredful, Stanford lost a bunch of guys, Arizona has pretty much the same group of underachievers as last year(pretty talented though).

Don't get me started on that, my Dad is convinced that they will make the NCAA tourney this year, I keep telling him they still have some work to do. Vukusic is pretty good when he is healthy, and Parker and Haccad are decent, but they need more than that. Doyle needs to play huge until Thompson is eligible(if he is anywhere near as good as the hype that'll be a huge boost). At least they'll have a bench this year. I'm hoping for a huge year from them but won't be surprised if they struggle. Illinois, MSU, and Michigan should beat them soundly, but for some reason they always seem to match up well against Wisconsin, and the rest of the conference doesn't really strike fear in my heart. I think that next year is their season unless Vedran can get a pro deal(NBA or abroad).

Things seem to get a little wierd in this game with challenges. Besides the usual catches that are way out of bounds being called in and what look like some questionable fumble/incomplete pass calls, I had a wierd one on the goal line. I ran a drag route with my TE and he caught the ball in the end zone, but his momentum combined with the hit from the defender forced him back out. The other team challenged and apparently determined that it was not a TD(which was BS since he caught the ball in the end zone and the ball clearly broke the plane). They spotted it on the 1 and I ran it in. Afterwards I looked at the stats and saw that they credited both players with a touchdown, but I only got 6 points out of it. It was never fixed. I ended up winning about 42-10 with my RB getting credit for 4 TD's on the ground and my QB getting credit for 3 TD's, which obviously doesn't add up.

My point was that most teams that experience any degree of success don't usually have two freshmen starters unless they are ridiculously good recruits(ie Duke starting 3 McDonald's All Americans, Syracuse with Anthony and McNamara). White should be solid, but they really need someone else to develop as a consistent scorer rather quickly, because Strickland and Wright can be downright pathetic some nights(both shot well under 40% on the year, yikes). They might develop into a decent team at some point this season, but they have a way to go before I can confidently say they belong in the top 50 or in the NCAA tourney. As for the Big Ten, I fully expect Illinois, MSU, Wisconsin, and Michigan to do well and make the tourney. I am also very confident that Penn State and Minnesota will be god awful. I see the rest of the teams in a jumbled mess somewhere in the middle, with maybe one of them coming out and making the tourney. Iowa has 3 pretty solid players coming back but really needs to fill some holes, Purdue looks like a bit of a mess(some decent players back but no standouts) but always seem to be at least okay, OSU has some guards but god knows what else, NU has a couple of solid players and pick up two decent transfers(I'm biased but I think they will surprise some people), and I already said my piece about Indiana.

First off, 5th is the BEST I see them doing, things could go worse. I expect them to fall somewhere between 5 and 9 in the Big Ten. Second, 5th in the Big Ten doesn't mean you are in the top 50. Remember, only 3 Big Ten teams made the tourney last year. It has been a pretty mediocre league in recent years and that shouldn't change much. I have no problem with them not being in the top 50. Usually when you really need two freshmen to step up you have some problems, and even more if you don't have two Mc Donalds All Americans to do it.

First off, Rothbert isn't even at Indiana, he's playing in Europe. They just aren't that good. They'll beat some teams and might sneek into the tourney, but I wouldn't count on that. Strickland and Wright have some talent but both are inconsistent and shot a horrendous percentage from the floor last year. They are pretty small(White and Kline are there only real post players) and don't have a lot of players that can come in and give them productive minutes. They need White and either Hardy/Vaden to step up big time for them to do anything of significance. I'd be very surprised if they did any better than 5th in the Big Ten. P.S.- Kansas would destroy them.

Maybe so, but ND fans are even worse. Luckily they haven't had a whole lot to cheer about the last 10 years(one good season and a couple of wins against Michigan).

God, this isn't my week for picks(would be doing better without the spread but still not good). ND is winning, Southern Miss won, Wisconsin didn't cover(should have changed it when Davis went out but didn't), OSU isn't going to cover and might not win, Georgia is already down 19, and for some reason I took UNC to cover. Probably going to get smoked in Soxtalk pickem. Just glad I'm not betting anything.

Hey Irish, if it makes you feel any better I ended up taking your route in the Soxtalk league(12 teams). RB's were flying off the board. I got Ahman Green at #5 and the best RB's there on my wraparound pick were Dillon(I like his ability but I am not personally a fan of his), Westbrook, S. Davis and Travis Henry. I decided to take Harrison and see what happened. The best available guys when I picked in the 3rd were Chris Brown and Thomas Jones, which didn't thrill me. Luckily two of the guys in front of me decided to take Hines Ward and Joe Horn, so I managed to get Chad Johnson, so my team looks like this- QB- Brady, Carr RB- Green, Martin, Bennett, Minor WR- Harrison, Johnson, Lelie(waited to long), McCardell, T. Taylor TE- McMichael D- Carolina, Minnesota K- Edinger, M.Gramatica I know you're not a fan of Bennett and I doubt you like Martin(Considering what I did it could have been worse, the guy had over 1500 yards last year, and I would expect more than two TD's this season) but when those are my two backs behind Green when I also have Harrison and Johnson, I think they'll do. I think that kind of proves my point about flexibility if you get a RB in the first, but I really don't want to get started again.

That was a bit of a rough draft, the RB's were flying off the board. I managed to get Harrison and C. Johnson though, so I'll live.

Ooo, fanball.com, I'm shaking in my boots. One site of supposed "experts" doesn't mean that much, I've seen places recommend taking Warner number 2 overall going into 2002, and other so called expert drafts have Brett Favre go in the 1st round. I'm done. I'm just waiting for the season to start.

For anyone still interested in fantasy football, someone dropped out of Soxtalk League #2, so we have an open spot. The draft is Wed Sept 8th at 7:00 CST. League ID # is 374605, Password is soxtalk(if that doesn't work try changing capitalization around). For those in the league, it will still draft whether or not we have 12 players since it is roto style scoring.

First off, I've made it clear that I disagree with your statement that there were no decent backs available in the 2nd round, and that I don't believe that there is a big enough gap between Culpepper and guys like McNair, Hasselback, and McNabb to warrant taking him when there is somone like Barlow or Dillon there. Westbrook didn't get as many carries, but that is at least as much because of who else was there as whatever injury concerns they had. Staley had proven that he was a solid back, even if he is on the downside of his career, and Buckhalter had at least as much potential if not more than Westbrook at this point last year. Considering what he did with limited touches last year, I would consider him a smaller risk than taking Thomas Jones this year. Comparing Jones to Holmes is a bit asanine, until last season he had never averaged more than 3.7 yards per carry, and that's with basically being handed the feature back job in Arizona to start the year. He always either got hurt or sucked enough to get benched. The Bears O isn't going to be any better than that one. Even assuming he had accomplished more, guys with several years of experience typically don't come out of nowhere to become All-pros(only ones that come to mind are Holmes and Ahman Green), so mentioning one guy that has done it doesn't really add to your argument. There are at least twice as many guys that haven't done anything in a similar situation, probably a ton more. I could as easily compare him to someone like Stacy Mack or James Allen and the comparison would be just as apt(player moving to another team and getting a better chance). Even someone like James Stewart isn't all that flattering a comparison. An offense only means so much. There have been QB's that have thrived in a west coast style offense like Montana and Warner and guys that absolutely sucked like Rick Mirer and Kordell Stewart(and those are both just Bears examples). Like the Rams and Chiefs offenses aren't built around the pass? Take a look at the numbers for Kurt Warner and Trent Green the last few years in those offenses, and then try to tell me with a straight face that those are running teams. One of the big criticisms of the Rams' O the last couple years is that they were too enamored with throwing the ball and didn't run it with Faulk enough. In his time with the Rams his high in carries is 260, and he had at least 700 receiving yards in each of his great years. Jones is simply not THAT good a receiver, although he'll catch some balls. Holmes has gotten a good number of carries, but he has been an All-pro the last few years and still had fewer carries than Curtis Martin last year. Staley and Buckhalter combined for about 220 carries last year, Wesbrook had another 117. That's an awful lot of carries from the HB position, and he's their only real option this year. As I said in a previous post, I don't end up with Coles or Rogers as my #1 receiver, I only have one team that doesn't have Moss, Holt, Harrison, Owens, Chad Johnson, or Boldin as my number 1(drafted before he got hurt). I'd much rather have Duece and Holt/Harrison/Owens/Johnson than Moss and Jones. No, I'm not worried.

I'm not so sure his stock is that good, Kiper only had Howard on his top prospects lists, and he's usually right about draft position. I like him, but I'm not sold on his future pro potential, especially if his elbow eventually keeps him out(I just noticed it during the game, I have no idea how bad it is).

I'm not arguing players anymore, I am just clearing up some things you apparently misread. Suggs did have some nagging injury problems his senior year that seriously hurt his stock, that's why he was available in the 4th round. There's a big difference between combined yards and rushing yards, I was referring to rushing yards only. Most top level backs will get an absolute minimum of 1700 total yards(McAllister had 2100 last year), Jones will fall well short of that. I expect him to get 1000-1100 rushing yards, with 3 or 4 hundred more receiving, which would put him quite a bit lower than guys like the Taylor and Duece. You're nuts if you think he will get 10 TD's, he's not an efficient goal line back and he is playing in what should be a poor scoring offense, I'd expect 8 tops. I never said take Westbrook over Culpepper, I said get him in the 3rd, which is when he is normally available. What leads you to say that he is injury prone? He has not had any major injuries and has stayed on the field. I'll admit that I didn't follow him at Villanova, but he has not fallen victim to the nagging injuries as of yet in the pros. It might be something to watch as his carries increase, but that's why I have backups. You could say the same thing about any of the runningbacks you took, none of them have ever been a full time feature back. I'm not saying anyone will get hurt, I'm just saying that to say Westbrook will get hurt while non of your guys will is a poorly formed logical argument. Yes, I would have taken Rogers in the 5th instead of Suggs, but it appears your league jumped on RB's early and I can't really fault it. I have Dommanick Davis on 1 team as my 3rd back and Stephen Davis on one as my number 2. I don't take those guys unless the draft isn't going my way and I still need a back. On my teams where I picked late in the 1st I have Taylor, James, and Barlow in two as my second backs. When I draft early in the 1st I end up with Harrison, Holt, Johnson or Owens when it comes back around(guys I like at RB are usually gone) and take Westbrook or Rudi in the 3rd(hasn't happened to often, I got lucky on some picks when I was in the top 5). Only time I end up with Coles as #1 is when I take him as a late 4th when I already have have two stud RB's and take a QB in the 3rd, which hasn't happened yet(I actually haven't gotten Coles yet). Culpepper wasn't a bad pick in and of itself, that's a decent mid second round pick, but since you took Moss in the 1st you really should have grabbed one of the RB's that were there. You won't convince me that this is wrong, and I'm obviously not going to convince you that it is right, so I'm done unless you want to start putting words in my mouth again.

One guy I forgot is Willie WIlliams at Miami. I'm sure a lot of people have heard of him because of the press it got due to his 11 arrests before enrolling. However, if he can get on the field he should make a major impact at the linebacker spot for Miami.

I think there is one major difference between Garland and Pavano early in their career. Pavano was on and off due in large part to various injuries. Anytime he started to get something going he was out for the year and it took him a while to get back in the groove. Garland has not had any major injuries and has had several years to prove his worth, he just hasn't made any major strides. It's still a bit risky to deal a young starter, but if you can get something that will help, do it. I still think Soriano is an upgrade over Valentin since he has shown more power and speed, but I would like to see who else we could get for Jon. If he has that much value, he can net us a lot more than I would have thought.

Actually, I do understand the idea of tiering, I just thing you are putting the break point for RB's too high. Lewis is clearly a top level back, although the drug trial problem hurts. Deuce should really be in this group also. No, I wouldn't take the Edge or Taylor over Moss, I normally took him 8th, which changed to 7 when it was known that Lewis' trial would take place during the season. Lewis and Westbrook are far from average backs, guys like Rudi Johnson or Dommanick or Stephen Davis are average backs, clearly the top 5 receivers can outproduce these type of guys, but it is a toss up when you get to that Duece, Lewis, Taylor range, Moss will need to duplicate last year to outscore them this year(still might not beat Deuce or Lewis, I don't think Taylor is sturdy enough or will get enough TD's to be elite). I'm also not a fan of using it for QB's since I only need 1 QB but I need two RB's, that means there aren't enough to go around and the good ones are usually gone pretty early. I greatly prefer taking my QB in rounds 3 or 4, I find I can get a top 5 passer down there which allows me to do more elsewhere. Moss had a great year last year, but I highly doubt that he will outscore every other receiver THAT bad again. This was the first year he had more than 1450 yards, and that's a major jump. Also, his TD numbers for his career are 17, 11, 15, 10, 7, and 17. That is some major change from year to year, which drastically affects his fantasy value. This is the only year that Moss has totally smoked every other WR, in those previous 17 and 15 years he didn't get enough yards to lap the field. I certainly wouldn't expect 17 TD's again, somewhere between 10 and 14 is much more realistic. That ridiculous number of TD's is the only thing seperating him from Holt, who actually outgained him yardswise. I fully expect Holt, Harrison, or Owens to be somewhat close in production. Yes, he is clearly the best receiver, but he is also far from consistent enough to take ahead of a RB that put up 2100 yards last season and 1700 yards and 16 TD's the year before. You also don't HAVE to have two stud receivers to beat Moss, one stud runningback does it, or having a solid all around team can do it. I beat a lot of these points to death in the other thread, so this is all you'll see in this thread.

Thanks for the complement, I like to think I really know my college basketball. It takes up most of my freetime basically from tipoff of the first game until a couple of days after the tournament. I spent a ton of time on my tourney bracket, which worked out well(3 of 4 Final Four, GT and UConn in the final and UConn win). I also try to look at what everyone did that year at that time and try to figure out who will be good the next season and what pro defections will mean what. Now all I need to do is use this information to gamble...

I think their system marks wins or losses first and then figures out spreads after the games are played if the league uses it. I'll be interested to see if it happens again next week. No fun, 4 of my 6 misses were on dogs that didn't cover. I gotta watch that.

Meh! Didn't think of that. I hit on Purdue covering for 9, Tennessee beat the spread to screw me out of 8 points. Didn't think they'd score as many as they did, beat it by 5. Oh well, still in good shape, still only the 1st week.