Tick
Footballguy
Mosley's my guess.Can Cashman play the Mike? Or for that matter do they even have a Mike? Going to be interesting to see how it plays out.
Mosley's my guess.Can Cashman play the Mike? Or for that matter do they even have a Mike? Going to be interesting to see how it plays out.
Can? Sure. Guy's gotta figure out how to stay on the field first though.Can Cashman play the Mike? Or for that matter do they even have a Mike? Going to be interesting to see how it plays out.
What about Will Harris? He may be relegated to sub packages, but if he's able to earn 100% I think his skill set is better suited for our game.Others are clearer. Melvin Ingram is expiring. Nwosu goes to OLB. Tillery to DE. Derwin James loses upside. Rayshawn Jenkins becomes irrelevant. Jabari Zuniga, Julian Okwara, and Austin Bryant become deep sleepers at DE. Sadly, the Jets have nothing else of interest other than Big Q (still obviously a DT in my eye). Da'Shawn Hand should go to DT, but he was inexplicably changed to DE a couple years ago. I don't know if Davenport pays any attention to IDPs this deep.
A couple of Lions are tricky. Does jamie collins's role look like Demario Davis's? He might spend another off-season way undervalued. And dare I say, dare I invoke the name TRACY WALKER?!
Forgot about him. Course he hasn't seen the field much in 2 years, maybe I should just keep on forgetting about him. Can probably snag Cashman for a 4th or if lucky a 5th come open trading for new league year. Think Mosley will still be overpriced even with the large lay over.Mosley's my guess.
Personally, I wouldn't pay anything for Cashman. If he's free on waivers and you need a 6th LB or something, go for it... but he's pretty far down for me. I rostered him off and on over the past two years and he just hasn't grabbed the opportunity enough to convince me... maybe with a new coaching staff he'll make a move up, but that's pretty flimsy for me.Forgot about him. Course he hasn't seen the field much in 2 years, maybe I should just keep on forgetting about him. Can probably snag Cashman for a 4th or if lucky a 5th come open trading for new league year. Think Mosley will still be overpriced even with the large lay over.
That's a good way to put it... load up on six guys you don't necessarily believe in, hope 1-2 get to be this year's Hewitt or Bostic, maybe even land a Kiser... but don't depend on them and be willing to recycle them when we learn from the draft, FA, and especially training camp.MAC_32 said:I have Jewell, Cashman, Reeder, J Phillips, M Harrison, and K Martin behind B Martinez, D Bush, E Kendricks, and Hewitt. I'll be thrilled if 2 of them are worth my LB5 and LB6 come May, but I'm not expecting it. That's how I'm approaching Cashman and others of their ilk.
Isn't this what the Raiders do every off season ?That's a good way to put it... load up on six guys you don't necessarily believe in, hope 1-2 get to be this year's Hewitt or Bostic, maybe even land a Kiser... but don't depend on them and be willing to recycle them when we learn from the draft, FA, and especially training camp.
Haason Reddick to DE. NiceHere are the first set of 2021 position changes to take place tomorrow morning... https://t.co/BzCQlWgvrm
I that’s Tzikas’s MFL position converter, where you can convert your league to different positions defined by him.Anybody see this? Whole lotta MFL LB designations now DEs. Re-posted from StickyZ Dynasty FF via Tom Kislingbury. I have no idea how accurate this is. It was endorsed by Kislingbury, though.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rf5m-7DPzwfJViYNYZliBXVnaGuucrYAZhVCQlPTbI4/edit#gid=662154673
Gotcha. So not a very good thing. I saw the original position designations and thought that these were more changes. Okay. Sorry about that.I that’s Tzikas’s MFL position converter, where you can convert your league to different positions defined by him.
Revisting this, noting that JAX has 2 DE's switching to DT yet none of the DEs to LB. Any chance we don't see Josh Allen as LB? Other DEs there (if there are any that have relevance) moving to LB?Here are the first set of 2021 position changes to take place tomorrow morning... https://t.co/BzCQlWgvrm
Yeah, that makes no sense that the two obvious 5-techniques on that roster are tagged DTs. It wreaks of a situation that Gary Davenport could watch in August and say, "duh." Keep in mind he was threatening to change Allen to LB when Todd Wash was there.Flying Elvis said:Revisting this, noting that JAX has 2 DE's switching to DT yet none of the DEs to LB. Any chance we don't see Josh Allen as LB? Other DEs there (if there are any that have relevance) moving to LB?
Gary DavenportUpcoming changes....https://twitter.com/IDPSharks/status/1397984579194085387?s=19
Interesting that they didn't switch K.Neal to LB given all the talk about him playing there. Hopefully they leave him at S in MFL and then he has some decent value!Upcoming changes....https://twitter.com/IDPSharks/status/1397984579194085387?s=19
Davenport has mentioned this a couple of times on Twitter recently, basically saying that after they drafted two LBs, he expects Neal to stay a SS.Interesting that they didn't switch K.Neal to LB given all the talk about him playing there. Hopefully they leave him at S in MFL and then he has some decent value!
Yeah, I have lots of CJGJ in dynasty with the expectation Davenport would switch him to CB like he did Damontae Kazee. Wouldn't it be nice is position designations were logical, even systematic and predictable?CJ Gardner staying at safety is driving me nuts.
The guys covers the slot all game long, i thought actual position x snaps is what Gary was looking at !?
I saw that. I also noted Davenport said he had "respect" for Kislingbury's "research." But he gently omitted Kislingbury's conclusive powers, because what is Kislingbury really going to tell him? That positional designations themselves are antiquated? Because after reading enough Kislingbury, he's sort of nihilistic about...well...everything. The doom and gloom about futility doesn't seem to stop with him.There was the beginning of a good interaction on Twitter between Kislingbury and Davenport... I hope that turns into some kind of collaboration that improves MFL positional designations.
Good summary. I think when it comes to specifics, Kislingbury would be a good person to challenge Davenport, though - there are kind of two approaches that can be taken for positional designation:I saw that. I also noted Davenport said he had "respect" for Kislingbury's "research." But he gently omitted Kislingbury's conclusive powers, because what is Kislingbury really going to tell him? That positional designations themselves are antiquated? Because after reading enough Kislingbury, he's sort of nihilistic about...well...everything. The doom and gloom about futility doesn't seem to stop with him.
That's kind of an aside, but I find his commentary interesting. His commentary seems to go like this:
But yeah, I suppose Gary Davenport would do well to listen to Kislingbury, who does do a ton of research. Maybe they could rein each other in a bit in their excesses and judgments.
- Everything is volume aside from a very, very select few players
- You as a talent evaluator have no control over volume because coaches do dumb things
- So forget it, it's futile
- Oh, and those positional designations if you play IDP? They don't really fit modern football, so have fun scraping the barrel for your 3 LB league as the league moves towards even dime packages being called more often than three linebacker sets.
+1Good summary. I think when it comes to specifics, Kislingbury would be a good person to challenge Davenport, though - there are kind of two approaches that can be taken for positional designation:
Davenport takes the former approach, Kislingbury seems to be pushing for the latter, but hasn't found the exact combination that defines a player, mostly because everyone agrees that a LB covering a slot is an LB, but any concrete definition says he's a CB on that snap.
- I know it when I see it.
- I have hard criteria that I won't diverge from. Hand down = DL or outside tackles = OLB, and it's total number of snaps in a role for player in the same role and documented reasons for projections for players in new schemes.
The problem I see is that you pretty much have to go to one extreme or the other, and nothing in between makes sense. Because if you have rules, you can't deviate without getting called on it, and if you know it when you see it, you can't mention any criteria or you'll get endless abuse for the places where you deviate from those rules.
Yeah, I have lots of CJGJ in dynasty with the expectation Davenport would switch him to CB like he did Damontae Kazee. Wouldn't it be nice is position designations were logical, even systematic and predictable?
I don't know why people complain about this any more. If you don't want players to get hosed by positional designations then change your scoring to even them out. The only reason for a league to have this variance is because they want it. I LOVE these things, I can take big advantage with my combination of paying attention to what's being discussed, paying attention to past trends and what's likely to change and buying low in anticipation, and being first/most aggressive to the punch when unexpected things do come up. This is what FF is all about to me and it's what I lament most about today's landscape where any donkey with a twatter feed and sleeperbot can click 2 buttons and compete.There was the beginning of a good interaction on Twitter between Kislingbury and Davenport... I hope that turns into some kind of collaboration that improves MFL positional designations.
So what is it in your scoring system that makes the DE position as deep as the LB position?I don't know why people complain about this any more. If you don't want players to get hosed by positional designations then change your scoring to even them out. The only reason for a league to have this variance is because they want it. I LOVE these things, I can take big advantage with my combination of paying attention to what's being discussed, paying attention to past trends and what's likely to change and buying low in anticipation, and being first/most aggressive to the punch when unexpected things do come up. This is what FF is all about to me and it's what I lament most about today's landscape where any donkey with a twatter feed and sleeperbot can click 2 buttons and compete.
That's not really the point, it's about profit/roster building/equity. If you can sell Khalil Mack for a 1st the month before he gets classified back to LB and becomes worthless you can then use that 1st to go bolster another position. Then you can go get Carl Lawson for a song since he's a worthless SLB but oh wait, now he's a DE and you have a useful starter for nothing and a 1st rounder profit.Tick said:So what is it in your scoring system that makes the DE position as deep as the LB position?
Some of that depends on the scoring system. If you have a big play scoring system that rewards sacks, QB Hits, Hurries, etc highly compared to tackles you can bring OLB's up in value by equating the big play guys to the tackle monsters. You still have advantages (tackle guys are more consistent) and disadvantages (may average 10 ppg but it's because it's 18 one week and 2 the next) but you can manipulate the scoring parameters to give value to lots of different type players. It all depends on the type of league you want to be in.Of course we all take advantage of it, I've been starting OLBs at DE since Adalius Thomas, and I sell IDPs whenever possible knowing that even if we don't expect a positional change, it can happen for no real reason, or a new scheme can tank a player's value (Vilma). I also stash great DEs that get classified as OLBs in the offseason in case they're reclassified or a new scheme is implemented.
I profit on the changes overall... but I don't see how a scoring change is going to keep a player from getting hosed by switching position designation from DE to OLB. If Joey Bosa switches designation without anything really changing in his role, it's going to suck for a lot of owners.
He should be listed as a LB this year since he's playing LB.On Twitter, Davenport answered a question about Joey Bosa that made it sound like Davenport is bracing himself for the backlash of changing him to an LB unless training camp shows a surprise.
In the one league i have him i'm trying to figure out if i can trade him before this happensAnyone else's heart skip a beat when this thread gets bumped?
I hear you, but if your leaguemates are astute, that'll just seem insulting.In the one league i have him i'm trying to figure out if i can trade him before this happens
In my salary cap league our rules state that the position designation at the time the owner awards the contract remains for the duration of the contract. That way you don't get screwed if something changes during the contract. However, if his position changes and his contract ends the new contract will be at the current positional designation.I hear you, but if your leaguemates are astute, that'll just seem insulting.
I don't even have Bosa, it's just the general thought of planning for the future or, say I spent some FAAB on Joseph Ossai, who is classified as a DE now, and they then decide he's a linebacker in a 3-4. It hurts people that are planning on designations and really gives no recourse. It's not taken lightly by Davenport, but it has the effect of "Hah! We switched him!"
MFL really needs to get with the EDGE position, I think, as does Zealots.
Great rule. Tried to get that added in my leagues but no goIn my salary cap league our rules state that the position designation at the time the owner awards the contract remains for the duration of the contract. That way you don't get screwed if something changes during the contract. However, if his position changes and his contract ends the new contract will be at the current positional designation.
Why were they against it? Seems like the fairest method for everyone. It can hurt you too if you lock a guy in LB at the changes to DE so it isn't always a benefit. It just makes it clear what you are getting into for a contract.Great rule. Tried to get that added in my leagues but no go
That is such a terrible answer. The answer is simple. What position will he be playing based on the defense they are running. It's likely a 3-4 so he should be a LB. Putting emotion into the decision by the people assigning the designation is what leads to inconsistency and people really getting upset.@IDPSharks
Should Joey Bosa player coaches be preparing for a 2021 season with him being designated as an OLB on
@MyFantasyLeague ?
Replying to
@AndrewMiley
and
@MyFantasyLeague
That's the question that haunts my every waking moment. Because regardless of the decision I make, there will be an onslaught of pitchforks and torches. Can't decide off a week or two of OTAs, but Staley has said he won't hammer guys into scheme.
Completely agree. The answer is simple right now. "The team is moving from 4-3 to 3-4 so Bosa will be OLB unless camp/preseason shows something different."That is such a terrible answer. The answer is simple. What position will he be playing based on the defense they are running. It's likely a 3-4 so he should be a LB. Putting emotion into the decision by the people assigning the designation is what leads to inconsistency and people really getting upset.
I was able to get a good enough return (Hunter). I can see a Hunter owner just wanting out.I can't find anyone interested in Bosa in the league I have him.