bwarbiany

Established Members
  • Content Count

    1,216
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

630 Excellent

About bwarbiany

  • Rank
    Superstar

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm worried about McCaffrey. He appears to be QB-proof and HC-proof, but how sure are we that an incoming new regime won't mess this up?
  2. Kamara in PPR is overall RB11 so far, and RB8 on a per-game average (as he missed two due to injury). And that's in a down year. In PPR, I don't see him dropping past late first round at the worst, barring external events (Brees retiring, Saints drafting or acquiring a stud RB as a backfield mate, etc). I'd still trust him to recover, and he's such a critical part of the offense that he's very rarely going to have a bad week. Some are more stellar than others, but rarely are they <10pts.
  3. Fantasy Football Now on ESPN reporting Mixon active but battling some sort of stomach bug...
  4. Simple. Because the argument for streaming QBs is that there's always someone "decent enough" on the waiver wire. Why waste that second roster spot on a backup QB if you know that there are streamable options if Lamar is hurt. After all, none of the "stud" QBs are on the waiver wire, and unless you drafted one of those early and picked up Lamar as *his* backup [only to realize Lamar was better], you don't have anything better than the streamable QBs on your bench as a backup. I picked up Stafford for Lamar's bye week, and I was planning on just sitting him on my bench in the case of injury because he was expected to have some good matchups to finish the year. But he got injured, and now I'm in streaming territory if Lamar can't go on Thursday.
  5. I don't like to ascribe too much of a team's W/L record, particularly over a small sample size, just to a QB. The Saints are 4-2 this year with Brees as the starter and 6-0 with Bridgewater. Are we calling Teddy B a better QB than Drew now? Of course not. The Ravens were scoring 23.7 points per game with Flacco, en route to a 4-5 record. They were scoring 24.1 for the rest of the season when Jackson took over, at 6-2 counting the playoff game. There may have been more to the picture than just the QB, given that it was only a 0.4 ppg increase. My contention is that the FIRST question for any QB in the NFL has to be whether they can do QB things well. Running ability can somewhat negate limitations in the passing game, but guys like Lamar Jackson are more than merely RBs who can throw the ball a little bit. He's a very good thrower, and the ability to run just opens everything else up.
  6. Heck, someone mentioned Brees as a "statue" QB, but he's quite mobile. I went to Purdue and was there at the same time Brees was our QB, and one of his big assets was the ability to tuck the ball and take off running, to great effect. He was never seen as a "running QB", but he was more than capable of getting out of the pocket and picking things up on the ground. He still is. But I think there's a BIG difference between a QB who has elite RB skills, such as Vick or Lamar, and a QB who is merely mobile. There are a lot of mobile QBs. There are very few who have RB athleticism and QB skills. I don't see this as being a "new wave" of this type of player, since there are so few of these players in the world to begin with.
  7. In the NFL, QB skills will always trump QB mobility. "QB skills" defined as accuracy, good decision making, reading the defense, working through progressions, recognizing the blitz and making appropriate hot reads, feeling/avoiding pocket pressure, etc. IMHO most of the major QB busts may have great arms and wonderful accuracy when they have time to throw to open receivers, but in the NFL receivers aren't open the same way they are in college and they have far less time to process the pass rush, decide where the ball needs to go, and get it there. Just like in NBA shootarounds you see everyone [even big men] draining 3-pointers like crazy but a lot fewer are able to do it consistently in a game situation with a defender's hand in your face. A "statue" QB who has all of those skills listed above will always have value. A "mobile" QB without those skills will fail. A mobile QB with great QB skills is of course better than either, but there aren't many unicorns like that available. Lamar is a unicorn.
  8. The problem is that in non-PPR leagues, the difference between getting one of the [very few] workhorse RBs and not getting them is basically between drafting a championship-level team and not doing so. This is especially true in deeper leagues. If you're in an 8-team league, pretty much everyone can get at least one extremely solid RB, defined as "guy who is the workhorse back for his team". But in 12-team or deeper leagues, essentially you get teams that even if they wanted to go RB in the first/second round(s) end up living in RBBC hell with their top RB picks. What PPR allows is to have more running backs who actually have value. You might have a 3rd-down / COP back that is actually flex-worthy in a 12-team PPR league, who would be useless in standard and that flex position might as well not even exist.
  9. Can't imagine it's a mistake in any format. I'm in an 8-team taco league, and he was dropped after weeks upon weeks of poor production, and I picked him up immediately because--while I don't need to start him--I don't want my opponents starting him against me. And he's great insurance if one or two of my studs get hurt and I need him in the flex. But in any league or any format, I have to imagine that Mixon was a better option than whoever was sitting on the end of your bench, particularly after bye weeks are over and you don't have to worry about juggling players for the odd D/ST or K bye week. In a deeper league, he's a matchup RB2 or Flex level player. If you got him free, thank your lucky stars...
  10. They were credited for the sack separately. ESPN removed the 14-17 point now, so it's all good.
  11. Confused... ESPN should give a defense 1 point for 14-17 points, and 0 points for 18-17 points. The Bears defense has allowed 20. Yet somehow they're still crediting them with that point?
  12. What history do the Titans' ownership/management have in this sort of situation? I.e. are they known for paying their stars, or are they more like the Steelers that they like to cheap out where they can? I'm just hoping they don't pull any BS like the Steelers did with Bell, trying to put the franchise tag on him but not giving him a long-term deal.
  13. Okay, I don't really have a dog in this fight (I have Lamar on my fantasy team and am loving the points, but I haven't watched many of his games as I'm on the west coast where we don't get a lot of Ravens coverage). But defining "elite" accuracy has a lot more to do with ball placement than something like completion percentage. Elite accuracy is putting the ball where only the receiver can get it when he's covered. It's anticipating the defense and properly leading your receiver so he catches the ball in stride without adjustments. It's fitting the ball into tight windows. Elite accuracy is the difference between a completion that ends in an immediate tackle and a completion with YAC because of proper placement. Brees has elite accuracy. He doesn't just complete passes. He puts the ball in the exact place his receiver needs it. There are a lot of QBs that have gaudy stats and completion percentages in college because the system gets receivers open, but then fade in the NFL because the definition of "open" in the NFL is a lot tighter windows than what they see in college and they don't have the accuracy to fit it in there. When someone says that the running game opens up passing lanes and the passing game is designed for easy throws, that's not saying that a QB excelling in that system doesn't have elite accuracy, but it may suggest that the defenses aren't forcing the QB to show his elite accuracy. I haven't seen enough of Lamar on tape to give an opinion, but that's my explanation of what elite accuracy means.
  14. Wait, he's not even a WR1?!?! Droppable in all formats.
  15. Interesting... How does he do running against zone formations though? You'd think they're playing man because they need enough men in run support to stop him on the ground. If it's just a "pick your poison" sort of thing, I don't think we'd have to fear zone that much. It will leave a lot of running lanes open.