|
On October 28 2010 05:22 tonight wrote: I'm going to try and put in a trade for Mendenhall by trying to give up Keller and Collie. Probably won't work, but those are the only two I would want to give away. Collie is hurt you wont get shit... sorry.
|
They haven't said anything about Collies injury, just that he could be out between like 2 weeks or the entire season... Really annoying. I'm holding on to him right now just in case anyway, but i really don't expect much if anything from him.
|
On October 28 2010 05:17 Souma wrote: So, back to the fantasy football... *cough*
So with the bye weeks raping people, I must choose between Donald Brown (if he plays) and Michael Bush. Donald Brown will be against Houston, while Bush will be against the Seahawks (both at home). Obviously Michael Bush plays behind McFadden so that's a big con, and Seahawks run defense has been playing well. Donald Brown will be sharing carries with Mike Hart, and Hart will more likely get goal line duties as well. Plus, the Texans run defense is good, compared to their pass defense. What do you guys think? Brown or Bush?
Bush is so obviously the right choice to make. This post is just you overthinking things. Brown has gotten a max of like 3 points, Bush is a legit option at HB. I'm probably going to start him from here on out unless I get LT.
|
On October 28 2010 05:39 us.insurgency wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 05:22 tonight wrote: I'm going to try and put in a trade for Mendenhall by trying to give up Keller and Collie. Probably won't work, but those are the only two I would want to give away. Collie is hurt you wont get shit... sorry. Collie being hurt doesn't really take away from his huge numbers and the fact that all signs point to him being back before the post-season. I'm trying more for someone wants to take a gamble on him. I should of put this offer in before he got hurt like I originally planned, but I needed Keller this week while Tony G was on bye. I could of just scraped up some TE because usually TEs aren't going to get your more than 5-6 if even.
edit: huge numbers in part to Garcon being out and everyone else being double covered, but even so those numbers do look nice. I'm thinking about throwing Fitzgerald into that mix as well or maybe subbing out Collie for Fitz
|
51531 Posts
I'm not sure how to judge which WR's to start besides match-up alone. I don't know when a team is going to double-cover a player, which secondaries are generally weak etc etc.
Currently I'm starting Wayne vs HOU and Ochocinco vs MIA. I have Holmes vs GB, Lance Moore vs PIT and Woodhead vs MIN on my Bench. I'm currently going for the obvious safe choices in Wayne and Ochocinco, but Ochocinco has been so damn inconsistent.
Anyway, back to 'real' Football news.
Troy Smith to start for the 49ers in London
lol
|
I'll laugh if Troy Smith has an amazing game and just blows up. Actually, I wouldn't laugh I would very much enjoy it.
|
Poor poeple in London always get stuck with such crappy teams / games.
|
So I should start Mendenhall (vs Saints) and Gore (vs Broncos), but for some reason, I'm very tempted to start Beanie Wells (vs Bucs) over Mendenhall. The last 4 teams that played Tampa each had a RB that rushed for over 100 yards. Saints run D isn't good either as Gore and Turner ran all over them, but with Mendenhall's workload being reduced I don't know... thought?
|
On October 28 2010 09:38 DannyJ wrote: Poor poeple in London always get stuck with such crappy teams / games.
I know right? I can't think of a better way to promote the NFL than having a showmatch between the 1-6 49ers and 2-5 Broncos -_-
|
On October 28 2010 11:10 don_kyuhote wrote: So I should start Mendenhall (vs Saints) and Gore (vs Broncos), but for some reason, I'm very tempted to start Beanie Wells (vs Bucs) over Mendenhall. The last 4 teams that played Tampa each had a RB that rushed for over 100 yards. Saints run D isn't good either as Gore and Turner ran all over them, but with Mendenhall's workload being reduced I don't know... thought?
Everybody runs all over NO defense. Go with Mendenhall! Even DeAngelo Williams scored on them!
|
Would anyone accept this trade?
Player 1 has all three starting WR's on bye this week (one being Hakeem Nicks). Player 1 also only has 2 decent QB's on his roster (and the other decent QB options are taken), one of which is Tony Romo who is out for 6-8 weeks. Player 1 has only one sub-decent WR option on the bench.
Player 2 offers to trade Joe Flacco + Patrick Crayton for Hakeen Nicks.
|
On October 28 2010 11:13 Ferrose wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 09:38 DannyJ wrote: Poor poeple in London always get stuck with such crappy teams / games. I know right? I can't think of a better way to promote the NFL than having a showmatch between the 1-6 49ers and 2-5 Broncos -_-
Two teams desperate for a win can potentially lead to good games. However, the field at Wembley stadium, last I heard, is terrible for football. Can anyone confirm?
|
On October 28 2010 12:20 Xception704 wrote: Would anyone accept this trade?
Player 1 has all three starting WR's on bye this week (one being Hakeem Nicks). Player 1 also only has 2 decent QB's on his roster (and the other decent QB options are taken), one of which is Tony Romo who is out for 6-8 weeks. Player 1 has only one sub-decent WR option on the bench.
Player 2 offers to trade Joe Flacco + Patrick Crayton for Hakeen Nicks.
No, just concede the week and keep Hakeem Nicks, unless you absolutely need to win this week to stay in the race to playoff. But even with Flacco and Crayton, a win isn't a guarantee by any stretch, so keep Hakeem Nicks; he is money! Since all 3 starting WR are on bye this week, I'm guessing they are something like Nicks, Roddy White, Jeremy Maclin or Anquan Boldin? That is a solid 3 WRs. This goes back to the philosophy that 1 stud is way more valueable than 2 or more mediocre players.
|
On October 28 2010 13:31 don_kyuhote wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 12:20 Xception704 wrote: Would anyone accept this trade?
Player 1 has all three starting WR's on bye this week (one being Hakeem Nicks). Player 1 also only has 2 decent QB's on his roster (and the other decent QB options are taken), one of which is Tony Romo who is out for 6-8 weeks. Player 1 has only one sub-decent WR option on the bench.
Player 2 offers to trade Joe Flacco + Patrick Crayton for Hakeen Nicks. No, just concede the week and keep Hakeem Nicks, unless you absolutely need to win this week to stay in the race to playoff. But even with Flacco and Crayton, a win isn't a guarantee by any stretch, so keep Hakeem Nicks; he is money! This goes back to the philosophy that 1 stud is way more valueable than 2 or more mediocre players.
Haha I'm player 2. And Flacco has actually been money the past 5 weeks. Going for 17, 10, 14, 16, 15 points, respectively.
|
Well Flacco is on bye this week so if he was worried about winning this week, the trade reduces down to Crayton for Nicks which is pretty dumb to accept.
|
Nicks is insanely good. That person would be moronic to accept that offer.
I Wonder how many times the Giants staff screams at him for holding the ball like its a nerf ball. His hands are insanely big.
|
On October 28 2010 13:42 don_kyuhote wrote: Well Flacco is on bye this week so if he was worried about winning this week, the trade reduces down to Crayton for Nicks which is pretty dumb to accept.
Well not really considering he'd get Flacco for the rest of the season instead of picking up a scrubby 5 points per game QB.
Although now that I think about it, that would be a pretty bad trade.
What about Davone Bess + Michael Vick for nicks?
|
What QB does he have now, besides Romo?
|
On October 28 2010 13:58 DannyJ wrote: What QB does he have now, besides Romo?
Kyle Orton
|
Oh... well he has the 3rd best quarter back in all of FF.
You have basically no leverage at all 
|
|
|
|
|
|