Comments on: Week 3 Lineup Rankings

By: triz

triz — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:20:04 +0000

really guy rex grossman ranks that high for week three??? pennington is way better than that scrub and dont tell me matchups id rather start pennington against the pats than grossman against palma

By: Kritter77

Kritter77 — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 22:21:20 +0000

If the A’s sign Barry Bonds, as an A’s fan I have a bad feeling that they will see their already small game to game audience dwindle even more, unless some Giants fans decide to come over, and WE DON’T WANT THEM!!! Go to Anaheim Barry, so we can embarrass u 19 times a year instead of just 6.

NO BONDS IN GREEN AND GOLD!!!

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:07:07 +0000

Keith – If I didn’t live near SF and was always given good Giants’ tix, I’d completely renounce this team. In fact, I still might. Sabean has officially become a joke, and it’s abundantly clear he’s lost touch with reality. My day has been ruined. I hope he goes to Oakland for sure now.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:03:16 +0000

Nat – Ya, I’d do that deal. I love Peterson (this isn’t a keeper league, right?), but Brad Childress will be stubborn enough to give C. Taylor too many carries once he comes back, and that QB situation looks brutal. The Rams’ line is a mess – but that just led to a bunch of dump offs to Jackson last year when Pace was out, so his fantasy value was actually boosted by the poor O-line play. He hasn’t looked great so far, but it’s early, and that division is littered with teams that can be run on. McNabb should come around as he gains more confidence in his knee. I’d do this deal.

By: Keith

Keith — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 22:54:35 +0000

Wow…Giants feel the need to announce no Bonds next year. Go Sabes! Billy Beane will be sending you a giant “Thank you card” after he signs Bonds for an $8 million deal to DH for 130 games and he OPS’ 1100. Of course, because of the Cust factor, it’s probably actually more likely that he goes to Anaheim…but I think Beane will be tempted to sign Bonds anyway. Can someone remind me why Sabean still has a good rep (other than that insane Morris trade), I mean, I would have picked Lincecum and I’d never even seen him pitch!

By: Nat

Nat — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 20:24:15 +0000

I’m just miffed as to whether or not Jackson will be that #2 pick he was projected to be 2 weeks ago.

By: Nat

Nat — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 20:19:50 +0000

What if it were just Palmer and Peterson for Jackson and McNabb?

Is it worth taking the hit at QB for the potentially major upgrade at RB?

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:58:35 +0000

Palmer is an upgrade over McNabb.

Jackson is a pretty sizeable upgrade over Peterson (but maybe not as big as it seems).

And Curry is a humongous upgrade over Johnson.

I wouldn’t do it.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:53:50 +0000

Nat – That’s tough. Definitely a close trade as far as value goes. I’m actually going to say not to do it. While I expect McNabb to bounce back, he’s still injury-prone, and I fully expect Palmer to finish as the No. 1 or No. 2 fantasy QB. While Peterson might lose some value when C. Taylor returns, that Rams’ offense is in trouble – I would still value Jackson as a top-5 back, but Curry looks like a top-20 WR as well, so you’d be losing quite a bit in the depth department.

Again, it’s real close, and I wouldn’t blame you for doing it (always good to get the best player in a trade, and Jackson clearly is it here).

By: Nat

Nat — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:34:27 +0000

Trade advice:

I’ve been offered Steven Jackson, McNabb, and Eric Johnson for Palmer, Adrian Peterson (MIN), and Ronald Curry.

Thoughts?

My RBs as it stands are Lynch, Peterson, Ronnie Brown and Green. (also I know… I had a bad draft). And Ronald Curry is currently a flex option as my #3 WR. Also, Vernon Davis is killing me at TE.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:16:58 +0000

Donald – I understand your frustration: MJD, Evans and Young were three guys I hyped up big time and have been brutal so far (well, Young has been OK). Since I view Young and McNabb has very equal starts this week, I suggest you go with your own gut and start McNabb.

He has looked pretty bad so far, but this is a must-win for Philly, and with Detroit likely throwing it a ton, that could lead to good field position for McNabb and the need to throw a lot himself. Plus, like you said, they are at home, and Detroit’s D is pretty bad. I agree, McNabb is more likely to throw for three TDs than Young is, but I obviously value Young’s ability to run quite highly. Still, McNabb is a great start this week, and it’s basically a coin flip between him and Young for me, so I recommend you go with your instinct and start McNabb.

By: Donald Trump

Donald Trump — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:53:11 +0000

Seriously bro, with jones-drew, evans, mcnabb, and vince young, I am 0-2. I need to win this week, obviously. You ranked Mcnabb and vince back-to-back, but I have to ask anyway: Who should I start this week, and why? I am leaning towards mcnabb, who plays at home. I just think he has the better chance at 3+ tds. Thoughts?

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:52:54 +0000

Dreamweapon – Your Skins are making my 4th place prediction look bad – I knew I should have had them finishing ahead of the Giants. But losing Jansen and Thomas is rough. I just looked up “the Baconator” and that thing looks tasty. Healthy too.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:50:30 +0000

RobbyHater – As Dreamweapon already stated, the Giants’ secondary is bad. As in, worst in the NFL bad. So far this season, NY has allowed seven passing TDs and an embarrassing 10.2 yards-per-attempt. Santana Moss is an elite WR when healthy, and if J. Campbell doesn’t overthrow him late in the game last Monday, he would have had a monster game (still good as is). I expect a big game from him Sunday.

Don’t read too much into me moving LT down to No. 4 this week – the top-3 just have much easier matchups (yes, I think GB’s defense is legit). I haven’t lost any confidence in LT at all, but that’s a good point you raised about the Packers’ giving up 6.0 YPC last week. I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if Tomlinson has a huge game – that team will be fired up after back to back poor offensive performances.

By: RotoScoop

RotoScoop — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:40:25 +0000

Keith – Hang onto Mark Clayton, he’ll come around….Engram could be a sneaky play, I did rank Hassellbeck awful high….That said, I wouldn’t drop any of those guys for the waiver WRs. Clayton is supposedly moving back into the starting lineup this week, so hopefully that’s a sign he is healthy – I’d probably roll the dice with him against Zona. If not, then just stick with DeAngelo.

My man-crush for Romo still runs deep, but out of a dome and in Chicago is a tough place to play. He barely missed the top-10 (11) anyway. SF did do a good job of slowing down S-Jax last week, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that game turned into a blowout. What is the estimated sked for the new A’s stadium to start getting built?

By: RobbyHater

RobbyHater — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:57:30 +0000

oh yeah, and robby sucks

By: RobbyHater

RobbyHater — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:57:15 +0000

Well note taken on Santana Moss, even with a strong matchup in the past, i hadn’t seen rotoscoop give him that high of an endorsement.
But i’m not too convinced about GB “great” defense.

They gave up 6 yards per carry to Ward last weekend. 15 carries for 90 yrds. So, thinking LT could at least match the likes of Derrick Ward and the Giants that isn’t unreasonable.

Also they’re ranked 14th in the league right now for total yards against… I wouldn’t qualify that as top 5 by any means, although allowing only 13 points against both the Giants and the Eagles may be a minor feat in their 2-0 start, i don’t believe the chargers will be held to 13 points, if GB allows their average of 300+ yards against per game, and I’d like to think LT will probably be the one getting the scores. especially since they give up nearly 100 yards on the ground per game. I’d also say San Diego’s offense is more of a threat than that of the Giants.

Chargers have been quiet, but they’ve also had the Bears at home, followed by the Pats away. Not the easiest start.

I’ve been wrong before, and I’m no expert (hence i read rotoscoop for advice). but I dont think it was an unreasonable question, i definitely take your thoughts into consideration…

By: Dreamweapon

Dreamweapon — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:29:27 +0000

I also just want to add a hearty F*CK YOU to Wendy’s for inventing the Baconator.

By: Dreamweapon

Dreamweapon — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:27:57 +0000

C’mon, Hater, you’ve seen the Jints get torched two weeks in a row (80 points in two games torched), you know the reason. I haven’t laced up cleats in like five years and am sporting a tractor tire around my midsection, and even I could get open deep against that secondary. Hell, I think my sister could probably net 3 or 4 first downs. Moss will kill those guys. GO SKINS.

Also, the Packers are an elite defense. Top-5 maybe, right now, in fact if not in reputation. That is NOT a better than average matchup (coming from a Tomlinson owner), believe me. Kampman is probably the second best DE in the NFC after Peppers and is extremely adept against the run, Cullen Jenkins is a force, and their backers (Barnett and Hawk) are all over the place. That unit could easily field a handful of Pro Bowlers. I can’t speak for Triple-D, but I have to think that’s all about matchup as opposed to any lost confidence in the MVP.

By: RobbyHater

RobbyHater — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:26:01 +0000

Yo Dalton-

Couple questions, Curious as to why Santana moss was listed so high this week, I love him, he’s on my squad, just kinda curious to see what you expect from him this week.

on the other hand, I noticed this was the first time in a while LT wasn’t atop your running back list, does that mean his slow start has affected your thoughts on him? Because I’d think at GB would be a better than average matchup for him.

Thx
RobbyHater