Tag: DynaBowl

The Dynabowl 2022 Draft Entrance Survey

Well, the 2022 Dynabowl Draft is in the books. Before it all went down, I asked the GMs to make some predictions about what might happen, and these are the results.

First up, I asked GMs to predict the first round. Some people had an advantage, as they were picking in the first round, sometimes more than once. It certainly made things easier for the Sadness, given their surprise pick of Quay Walker at 10, while the Hurricanes predicted 4 defensive players to go in the first round, which would have been a record, but failed to spot that Walker was the one who would actually. They also incorrectly predicted a trade for pick 8, but failed to nominate who the player taken there would be.

Here’s the full table, along with a score for how accurate people were at guessing. I put my inaccuracy down to not researching the round as I wasn’t going to pick there.

Fashionably late, I received the entrance survey from the Losers shortly after publication and can now add their predictions here, predictions which netted 30 points, leaving Kelkowski as the king predictors:

And after that, let us all salute The Champions for their predictions:

2. How many trades will there be during the draft?

The correct answer was 6. If you’d done your research you could have guessed it would be in this neighbourhood because a glimpse into the past shows that since 2018 there’s been 6, 6, 5 and 4 trades (though 2018 had two trades mid-draft for 2019 picks. However, going back further in time we see that 2017 had 13 trades, 2016 had 10 and 2015 – the first draft in the books, had a whopping 15 trades in during the draft. Insanity. There were only 7 rounds for each of those drafts too…

So what did we say? Well, living in the past we had the Sadness, who went for an astonishing 14 (!!!), while Hard and the Hurricanes both said 10. Some more sensible guesses were had from Tamworth (8), Kelkowski (7), Champions (7), and the Bombermen (8, though admitting “I am literally plucking a number out of the air there”), while the Brees (2) really low-balled it.

Late comer Losers topped everyone, suggesting a total of 15 trades, commenting “Stupid fucking question”, which I assume means that the answer was so obvious why even bother asking.

And at this point I would note that the commentary was pretty scant from most respondents so if this is a bit dry, you know who to blame. (Yourself and everyone but me).

3. Which pick will be the first pick traded?

The correct answer was 2.07, it belonged to the Bombermen, until it was sold to the Tamworth Two. But did anyone get it right?

We already know the Hurricanes guessed that 1.08 would be traded away.

Tamworth went for 2.04, perhaps indicating a desire to get up even higher than they managed.

Kelkwoski plumped for Chris selling 1.09, along the same lines as the Hurricanes guess.

The Bombermen stated “I think Chris will trade one of his first round picks. While I don’t really think that Dave will trade up, but he could be convinced  because I fancy he wants Skyy Moore. But I don’t know, really.” So there definitely was something in the air about Chris making a move, and Moore did, indeed, go at 9 so if he had been sought after you’d have needed to make this leap.

The Brees thought pick 1.04 would have a buyer – a pick which the Champions spent on Treylon Burks.

The Sadness matched Tamworth in plumping for 2.04 while the Hard plumped for 1.06 and the Champions went high, suggesting 1.02 would be on the move.

The Losers were non-committal – “This is more a question of buyer than seller. I’d move 3, but I don’t think I’ll find a buyer”

That meant three people thought Chris was trading, 3 thought Max was, one vote for the Brees and one for the Sadness.

4. Will the first pick traded be for a player (or players), picks, or a combination?

The first trade that happened was 2.07 & 5.07 for 3.08, 4.08 and 4.09, so all picks.

The Brees, Hard and Champions (and the late-comer Losers) said it would be solely for picks, though the Sadness appears to have suggested 2.04 would be sold for 3.05 straight up. Everyone else said a player+pick deal which, based on history, was probably the right guess.

5. Who will be involved in the first trade?

The correct answer was Bombermen and Tamworth, which no one got right. Probably not a surprise.

We had a Hard/Brees trade (Hurricanes and Hard – though the Hard said that he could alternatively trade with the Hurricanes of Champions, so he was sold on himself trading, just like everyone else), Dungeoneers/Champions (Tamworth), Hard and apparently no one else (Kelkwoski), “I already said – Slatz and Chris. Definitely Chris. No real idea about Slatz. Maybe Ian?” (Bombermen), Champions/Hard (Brees), Sadness/Hurricanes (Champions) and Champions/Tamworth (Sadness). Oh, and “Chris” (Losers).

So out of all that there was one half of the trade was guessed correctly, once.

6. Which position are you most keen to pick up to be a contributor for this season?

The Hurricanes wanted a RB and got James Cook. He shoots, he scores.

Tamworth also wanted an RB, but didn’t have a pick until the third round. They traded up for Dameon Pierce and Tyler Allgeier in the second, and also picked up a “Treston Ebner”, whatever that is, in the 11th round. Mission accomplished perhaps as well as could be expected given the capital available at the start of the draft.

Kelkowski wanted a DT to contribute this season, which was probably a tough ask regardless. Even tougher when they don’t end up picking one the whole draft.

The Bombermen said “Running Back. It’s the position most likely to have an impact in the first season.” But they only took one in the 7th (Jerome Ford) and 9th (Jashaun Corbin), so that’s unlikely to have much impact. But the options were a bit thin on the ground this year.

The Brees wanted a wide receiver and got three of them – Garrett Wilson (1st), Alec Pierce (3rd) and Velus Jones (11th). Jones, in particular is a bit of a steal there given the opportunity in Chicago.

The Sadness wanted a linebacker and snaffled up Quay Walker in the first round along with Devin Lloyd in the 2nd and Damone Clark in the 11th. Got that one pretty well covered. Now to see if they contribute first up.

The Champions were after a wide receiver (“Shame about the players”) and came away with 5 of them – their top three picks – Burks (1.04), Williams (1.07) and Pickens (2.04), as well as guys in the 9th and 11th who you’ve never heard of and never will again.

The Hard took this question seriously and responded “I think it’s a really good and deep WR class, so will be upset if I don’t come away with 2 good WRs from the 1st 3 rounds. I generally really like the talent in rounds 3-4. It feels like a draft lacking that top end talent (round 2 is a wasteland) but with great depth.” And on the back of that he has Olave and Moore (1.08 and 1.09) as well as Wan’Dale Robinson in the third. All in all, a good day at the office.

The Losers wanted an RB, and fulfilled that to some degree by taking one in the 7th, the 8th and 11th. It’s possible none of those players take any meaningful snaps.

7. Which player are you most keen to get/most likely to reach for?

I think most people took this as the player they most wanted, whereas I was hoping for the player who appealed to the GM more than the consensus, so they might get jittery and take early – ie I basically wanted to know who you would reach for. I’ll reword it next time.

This became obvious from the first answer I looked at, the Hurricanes proclaiming they were most keen to get Breece Hall, the consensus number 1 overall pick. Not really possible to reach for him, is it?

Tamworth were only mildly closer to the question I really wanted to ask, suggesting James Cook “but he will go too early”. Yes he will. He’ll go fifth when your first pick coming into the draft wasn’t until the third round.

A more sensible response came from Kelkowski: “Given my first pick is at 20, I’m hoping Spiller falls to me there”. Given they traded away pick number 20, they can be very pleased at nabbing Spiller at 3.10, thirtieth overall.

The Bombermen can be equally happy, stating “Doubs, the Green Bay wide receiver. But I’m not so excited that I’ll be grabbing him in the 2nd or anything.” Instead it was 4.08, 38th overall, that they picked up Doubs, right about where he should have been going.

The Brees went for Chris Olave who, unless they traded up to the top two, probably couldn’t have been considered a reach, but if he was the player the most wanted, they had the chance at 6 and declined the option.

The Sadness offered a window into their world by responding ‘Dunno’, which is either the least helpful response possible, or the name of a player so under the radar it could have succeeded in a mission against a nondescript enemy in Top Gun: Maverick.

The Hard said “Rachaad White. Great upside, plus he covers me for Fournette. I’d prefer to take him at about pick 15, but if I can’t get a better option I’m happy with him at #9.” and promptly took him at 18, so all in all, very happy with his work.

The Losers managed to fall on both sides of the coin, with the obvious desire and the one more in keeping with the aim of the question. He didn’t get either player though: “Well, Breece Hall would be nice. But failing him, I like Rachaad White as a good size-speed guy with pass catching skills in a good situation.”

And finally the Champions sums up what everyone is really thinking: “Whichever one Slatz tells me afterwards was my stupidest pick/biggest reach.”

8. Who will make the consensus biggest reach (Draft Exit Survey will be the judge)?

Hurricanes says Hard

Tamworth says Dungeoneers

Kelkowski says Tamworth

Bombermen says (incorrectly) “Everyone will say me. It won’t be me. I swear it. I’ll say…. (pulls name out of hat)… [Tamworth]. No, wait, it’ll be [the Hurricanes]. I won’t spoil the answers that are coming up by saying who….”

Brees appears to think that James Cook was also taking part in the draft and would make the biggest reach… Presumably this mean that he would be the biggest reach (not the question asked), but maybe the post-draft survey will confirm this as correct, seeing as he went fifth overall to the Hurricanes.

Hard says Hurricanes, in a nice bout of symmetry.

The Losers were perhaps a little down on themselves, stating the person most likely to make the consensus reach will be “Me – a lot will depend on if I can swing a deal, but I want Jordan Davis in the second”

And the Champions nominate the Champions.

9. Who will get the consensus biggest bargain?

The Champions says “The Hard – this is how he does well”, and, as recent analysis has shown, unless you don’t believe in all that analysis bollocks (I know I don’t), it is how he does well.

The Hard nominated the Bombermen. Which is very nice of them. I doubt that will hold up now.

The Sadness also believes in the Hard’s drafting ability.

As well as James Cook, Jameson Williams was also making picks in this draft, according to the Brees, and will end up with the biggest bargain… Again, if we change the question to the one they answered, maybe this could be right. He came off the board to the Champions at 1.07. Will that prove to be a bigger bargain that Velus Jones in the 11th round?

We thought the Champions had nailed it above, did the Bombermen nail it here: “Somebody will fall into the Losers’s lap that everyone thinks is great who will then get injured and his career will never really take off”?

Kelkowski and the Hurricanes both thought the Losers would get the biggest bargain, while Tamworth thought the Brees would. They offered no reasoning or colourful commentary on this.

The Losers made possibly the most prescient comment: “Whoever picks Tyler Algieier? Unless someone reaches for him in the 2nd or something mad. He’s probably a 4th round sort of pick, and with no other competition that’ll be a bargain for a potentially competent starting RB.”

Algieier was taken by Tamworth at 2.09 (19th overall).

10. When will the first QB go off the board (round and pick number)? & 11. Who will be the first QB taken?

The correct answer here was Malik Willis at 5.05. For me, he was top of my list at QB, but I had hoped that perhaps that wasn’t the thinking elsewhere in the league. Let’s find out.

The Hurricanes, who took Willis at 5.05, plumped for Howell at 4.08 (originally a Tamworth pick, but traded to the Bombermen in the draft), which would have been quite remarkable given he was the 6th QB taken in the draft and the Commanders also just traded a fair bit of capital for Wentz. But hey. The pick was pretty close.

Tamworth went for Pickett at 3.04, which would have been a Champions pick.

Kelkowski also thought Pickett would go, but seemed to think he would go in the first round, putting down pick 10 as the slot he’d go in. No QB has gone first round before. A remarkable suggestion. A reminder that Pickett when at 8.09 to the Hard.

The Bombermen suggested the first QB would go to the Hurricanes (bing bing bing), but went a round early at 4.05… “Pickett – [the Hurricanes] will take him because he’s a Steeler. It will be the consensus reach.”

The Brees went for the same player, but even higher, at 2.09, which would have been a Hard pick.

The Sadness also plumped for Pickett and also seemed to suggest Neil would take him by isolating pick 3.05 as the spot he’d come off the board.

The Hard has a bone to pick with lots of people after stating “Kenny Pickett. If it’s anyone else it’s a mad pick. I like Corral’s chances for this year too. I’m not sure I’d even bother with any of the others.” We’ve already mentioned they took Pickett themselves, and a long way below the 4.10 (Kelkowski) slot he thought he would go in.

The Losers also said Pickett. “Nobody should be picking Pickett before the 6th round. No other QB should be drafted in the first 7 or 8. He’ll probably go in the 4th though, pick 37”, with, for some reason, the Bombermen taking him (or trading out of the pick, I guess).

The Champions also went for the 4th round, suggesting “4.06, wait that’s me, 4.07”. As for who? “Slim Pickens”. Thanks. For. That.

12. When will the first defensive player go off the board (round and pick number)? & 13. Who will be the first defensive player taken?

Real answer: Quay Walker, 1.10.

Commentary from the Champions: “Honestly, it should probably be 1.01. Have [the Dungeoneers] got the balls for it? Given I’ve said [the Sadness] will trade down I’ll say [the Losers] will at 1.03. Maybe [they]’ll play it more traditional but [they’re] just crazy enough.” Nailed. It. And likewise nailed the who: “I’ve [said the Losers] will do it so I’ll say Aidan Hutchinson as [they] only [have] 3 DEs.” Given the Losers respect for his “T-Rex arms”, couldn’t have been more right.

The Hard were one place and one player out, opting for 2.01 and Devin Lloyd (second defensive player at 2.02). Perceptive. The Losers also went for 2.01, but said it would be Hutchison.

The Sadness nailed it. Because they knew they intended to take Walker at 1.10. I’m not giving points for predicting what you’re going to do. Sorry.

The Brees said Aidan Hutchison at 2.07. He was the 4th defensive player at 2.05, so not a million miles away for the draft spot at least.

Let’s see what the Bombermen have to offer… “2.07? I might take one. Though I could see one going earlier,” and “Hutchison? The Detroit DE taken with the second pick.” So cribbing notes from the Brees then.

2.07 is clearly in vogue as Kelkowski picked Devin Lloyd to be the first defensive player taken in that slot. Perhaps the Bombermen have developed a reputation for taking defensive players early? However, they’ve normally done it in the first round.

Tamworth were pretty close pick-wise, opting for 1.08 – the only one to suggest a defensive player would go in the first. They also managed to write this as a footer rather than in the body of the text. Just a bit of flavour of the kind of rubbish I have to put up with. Anyway, they correctly predicted the pick would be Walker. Bravo! That said, their predicted first round – the first question of this survey, said the Hard would take Skyy Moore at 1.08, so draw your own conclusions.

Finally the Hurricanes thought safety Kyle Hamilton would come off the board 4th, which must make him a steal for the Sadness at 3.02.

14. Who will take the most defensive players?

Volume or percentage, the answer is the same:

The Champions were close. Ish. “Probably [us]. [We] have a history of not taking offensive players after the first 3 rounds except for the odd TE.” Two odd WRs and an odd RB in the final 4 rounds put to rest any dreams in that direction.

The Hard sort of nailed this one, suggesting the Sadness, who were any acceptable right answer by volume.

The Sadness also knew their destiny and predicted they would top the list too.

The Brees also put themselves forward but were a little further from being accurate.

The Bombermen threw themselves and the Champions into the ring and get nothing in return.

The Losers pumped for themselves and weren’t a million miles out: “I’m hoping it’ll be me. I need to do some work.”

Kelkowski gets the dunces hat for nominating themselves, while Tamworth opted for the Brees and the Hurricanes opted for the Champions.

15. How long will the draft last (in days, hours and minutes)?

Actual answer – 6 days, 1 hour and 8 minutes. Well done to the Champions for just being closer than Tamworth:

The latecomer Losers said 3 days, 4 hours, 11 minutes, putting them as the second most inaccurate. Again, it’s a “stupid fucking question”, but if they think it’s so obvious, they were an awfully long way out…

Who is Going to Win the 2018 Dynabowl? by Ian Kulkowski (Hint – it’s not me!)

The question everyone is talking about at the moment is who is going to win this year’s Dynabowl?  When Bendy’s poll first appeared on MFL I excitedly scanned through all of the rosters (I do love a good poll) and determined that Max & Mike seemed the strongest.  I plumped for Mike on the basis of Zeke, Hunt & Freeman at RB, and that was that, decision made and I could now move on with my life.

But no.  That was not the case.  My mind was now racing – have I made the right call?  Have I given enough consideration to Defense, or Special Teams for that matter?  I vowed that this unsubstantiated selection simply won’t do and I needed to look deeper in order to be truly happy with my selection.  And so here I’ll run you through my results and determine once and for all who will win the 2018 Dynabowl.  The results might just shock you to the core! (They won’t).

I wanted a simple method of deciding who had the strongest roster (and more importantly starting 22) so I decided to use positional rankings to determine who was strongest at each position and then use that to guess who is best overall.  Once I started I quickly realised this was a pretty pointless exercise but I’m not one to abandon these kind of fruitless ventures so I ploughed on.  I suppose it ultimately did give me and understanding of where everyone’s strengths and weaknesses lie, including my own, which may help in identifying potential trade opportunities.  Which is good especially seen as I’m such a big trader!  It also proved to be useful prep for the upcoming C’Bowl draft, which seen as my C’bowl record is currently second to none could be quite important.

Speaking of which I really need to improve my early round draft record in the C’Bowl.  Here’s my first two pick in each of the 5 years I’ve been part of the league –

Ian’s first chart

How fucking terrible is that!!  Only 2 finished top 10 at their position (one of whom is Gronk! Duh!) and only 2 more top 20!  I even picked Gurley when he was shit!  No wonder I never make the playoffs.  But look out this year as I’m now fully prepared to not repeat the mistakes I’ve made over and over for the last 5 years!

Where was I? Oh yes, Dynabowl rankings.  We’ll start with the Offense as they are much more easily and reliably ranked.  I used fantasypros consensus draft rankings to rank each position then used those classify each player as one of three categories –

  • stud – automatic plug in and play each week
  • starter – remainder of the top ranked players who would be a starter in our league, so top 10 QB’s, top 25 RB’s top 35 WR’s etc.
  • back up – double the number of starters

I’ve ignored everyone else who is rostered as they are either likely to development stashes or just guys you have a crush on and like to have around (hello 2016 Dynabowl winning QB El Jaguar!). So without any further ado let’s get into it…..

Quarterback

Ian’s second chart

I simply ranked teams QB’s by the ranks of their no.1 as we only need to start 1.  So T2 come out on top with A.A.Ron.  According to the rankings there are 3 teams with no starter quality QB’s – Sadness, Bombermen & Losers, with the Losers barely scraping even a back up in Derek Carr.  Although Bendy’s QB crew are all ranked 13-15 (nice grouping) you could easily see 1 of them breaking the top 10, or even 5.  There will certainly be some selection headaches in the weeks to come!

Check out Pete’s QB’s!!  Whooo boy he has the position nailed!!  Surely a trade opportunity here Pete?

Running Back

Ian’s third table

Max and Bendy both have 2 studs at this crucial position so look well set but they are bettered by Mike with a group boasting 3 studs plus one extra starter!  All those years of early picks are beginning to pay off!  Slatz scrapes into playoff contention here with 1 stud backed up by 2 highly ranked starters.

Things don’t look great for me and Bean here with no studs and a few lowly ranked starters.  Some attention is required here.  Meanwhile Chris’s reliance on No.1 ranked RB Gurley (where were you in 2016??) and his strong WR corps is stark as he has only one other RB ranked inside the top 50, and that’s Kenyan Drake!

Wide Receiver

This is Ian’s 4th table

Max & Chris grade highest on WR’s with 2 studs and 2 starters each.  I’ve put Max on top due to him having 2 in the top 4.  Pete is very close also with 2 studs and 2 starters – all those early picks paying off again?!

My deficiency at WR is clear to see with only one starter rostered.  Slatz is not too far ahead although his strategy of playing the long game with Josh Gordon could finally be about to pay off.

Tight End

Ian’s fifth table – how many of these do you think there are?

As with QB’s I’ve pretty much ranked TE’s by the no.1 on each roster as we mostly start only one.  Neil and Max have the only 2 studs which puts them top of the pile (although Neil currently can’t afford Gronk – watch this space). Pete’s young TE’s – whilst exiting – look a little weak here and slatz doesn’t own a single TE ranked in the top 20!

Offense Summary

Overall Max looks to have the strongest offence grading in the top 3 in each position.  A starting line-up of Brady, Bell, Cook, Ajayi, Hopkins, Julio, Tate, Sanders & Kelce should pile on the points week on week.

Mike isn’t far behind with the strongest group of RB’s and very good WR corps.  QB looks to be his weakness although a Rivers / Goff combo is more than capable of delivering.

Pete & Goody/Mat also boast strong offenses with minimal weaknesses which should enable them to push for the payoffs this year.

And what of Chris?  The Reigning champ is strong at WR but will it be enough to make up for his deficiencies elsewhere, especially RB after Gurley (Shakes fist at 2016 Gurley!)

At the other end of the scale my offense looks dire.  The halcyon days of regular playoff appearances appear to be long gone with a long rebuild process required.  Slatz is in a similar position although his RB’s are showing potential to develop into solid group.

Defence

So that’s the easy part done.  Defence is a bit of a different story as there aren’t really the ranks available that represent the depth and scoring in our league to do the same exercise.  After much research I decided the only way to do it was to come up with my own rankings!  To do this I’ve blended together a combination of FFtoday rankings (as these seems the most representative of Dynabowl scoring and have enough depth) and MFL’s own player projections to create a hybrid IDP ranking which definitely provides an undisputable view of who has the strongest D!  So 2 sets of bollocks rankings combined will surely provide a flawless outcome!  That’s the theory (*sigh).

So how does this play out…..

Defensive Tackle

The sixth one. And it’s not the last…

Malik Jackson is the no.1 ranked DT??! What??!  Well that ridicules my ranking system straight away.  What a waste of time!!!!  Seen as it puts me as top ranked I’m going to plough on with this pointless exercise regardless.  With Nose Tackle Damon Harrison also ranked as a starter (jesus what a load of shit) my strength at the position is secure.  I think I’m possibly doing T2 a bit of a disservice putting them below me as their 2 solid starters are clearly the best DT combo in the league.

Pete and Chris have work to do at this position with no DT’s ranked as starters on their roster.

Defensive End

Still going strong at 7 (seven)

DE is clearly Bendy’s position of strength with 2 studs backed up by another starter.  Max isn’t far behind as he also has 2 studs at the position.  Pete & Chris also look to have a good amount of depth at the top of the rankings although maybe some lineup headaches to come.  Once again I have the number ranked player at the position!

Neil sits at the bottom of the pile for DE’s with no starters on his roster and is the only team with a significant need at this positon.

Linebacker

He’s got to be running out of these soon, right?

Mike and Chris sit comfortably atop the LB rankings with 2 studs each plus at least 2 starters to round out their lineups each week.  My group comes next with 1 stud plus a whopping 6 further starts to choose from (trade anyone?!).

Everyone has starters at this position (hard not to when there’s 40 of them!) but Max , Bendy & Pete are the 3 squads without any studs so sit at the bottom of the pile.

Safety

Number Nine. Number Nine. Number Nine.

Now this where it starts to get silly.  Both the rankings and stat projections are pretty much completely pointless when it comes to DB’s so drawing any sort of conclusion from this isn’t much use!  Nevertheless here we are…..

Goody / Mat are locked in at Safety with 2 studs and a starter.  Chris and Pete also look to be in a nice position.

Neil and Slate sit at the bottom with Slate boasting only one guy raked as a backup.

Cornerback

It’s the last one! I promise. 10. 10 of them!

This is just a random set of numbers so I’m not even going to bother commenting.

Defense Summary

What to make of that load of Shit?

Goody / Mat, Chris and me seem to have the strongest overall units.  Goody / Mat have no real weak spots on D whilst Chris only has holes at DT and CB and we know how he loves to create work for Bendy by heavily streaming those positions.  I think some dodgy rankings have bumped me up the list a little!

Max grades in the bottom half at each position besides DE so his strong offence will have to work hard to make up for his deficiencies in the D.  Bendy is in a similar position although slightly above Max in most areas.

So who will win the 2018 Dynabowl???

To be hones after all that I’m none the wiser.  Probably more confused even!!  The way I see there’s a fairly clear split between who’s going to be challenging for the playoffs and who’s battling for that No.1 pick.  The winner as usual will probably be decided by Kickers & Punters.  So in no particular order –

Playoff contenders

  • East Flanders Dungeoneers – Strong on Offense with crazy QB’s depth, Not bad on D but LB and DT look to be issues.
  • Tamworth Two – No obvious are of weakness with a very balanced roster.
  • Dynasty of Sadness – Strong offence despite lack of obvious starter at QB and no major issues on D besides DE.
  • Champions of the Sun – Extremely strong offence but weak in several positions on D.
  • Dyna Hard – RB a real concern but defense looks strong besides DT & CB.

Fighting for No.1 Pick

  • Here Comes the Brees – a lack of real quality on offence will cost them, Defense looks solid.
  • Dynasore Losers – Still very much in rebuild mode, some signs of building nice young roster at RB & LB.
  • DynaForOne Firebirds – Neil’s roster is so thin there’s lots of work to do to make this a competitive squad. I still don’t know how he’s going to get under the cap!
  • Dynabalster Bombermen – A good offence for Bendy despite his selection headache at QB but Defense may not have enough.
  • Kelkowski Don’t Play by No Dyna Rules – Offense is truly awful in need of a complete rebuild! Not bad on D.

A Trade Retrospective

With another draft in the books, I thought it’d be interesting to take a retrospective look at some of the more complicated trades over recent seasons, and the domino effect of those trades, so I’ve picked out six that I think are more complicated and wide reaching, or involved big names in trades to see what sort of return they netted in the end. I’ve avoided some of the bigger seeming trades where minimal picks were involved (the TY Hilton trade for example) as they essentially come down to player valuation at the time, and focused on pick heavy trades – particularly where they involved further trading down the line. I’ve ranked them very unscientifically in order of blockbusteriness and interestingness.

Six

  • DynaForOne Firebirds – 2016 3.02 & 5.02 and 2017 Round 5 Pick
  • Dynasty of Sadness – 2016 2.02

Two teams that will turn up pretty often in these trades in are the Sadness and the Firebirds, but I like this trade because while there’s a lot of multi-pick trades where team A moves up a few places in a high round at the cost of moving down more places in a later round this is a much simpler decision to pay to move up. So what does the trade value chart make of this? 2.02 is worth 1200 points while 3.02 (780) and 5.02 (480) combine to more points without the additional 5th rounder in 2017 (based on 6.05 this is worth 350). In total the Firebirds paid 1610 points, the equivalent of 1.06 in order to get this pick. Or should I say, get this pick back. Since he’d previously traded it to the Sadness in exchange for Markus Wheaton about a month before. So… Firebirds ended up giving up three picks, of decent value, in order to get back a pick he spent on Markus Wheaton (who’s scored a whopping 13.1 points for him since the trade), which seemed a reach for a guy who was only around the 40th best receiver the season before (although he did finish the previous season hot).

So what did the Firebirds end up with, aside from Wheaton, for this treasure trove – CJ Prosise. A handcuff to the Thomas Rawls, acquired in an earlier trade (1.09 spent on Devontae Booker and 2.05 which was traded on again and eventually spent on Kenyan Drake, and neither of which Neil originally started with, as I’ll cover later). Prosise looked reasonably good in limited action before his injury, and getting the handcuff to Rawls seems smart in retrospect given how much he’s struggled with injuries when he’s played and how unconvinced by him Seattle seemed to be last year. Sadly that might not be enough with Lacy now in town, the expensively acquired Prosise and Rawls could both be out of the picture, unless they get smart, team up and open a burger joint near CitiLink Field.

That’s just looking at the Firebirds side of the trade though, what happened to the picks the Sadness acquired. 3.02 was spent on Mike Thomas, sadly not the one in New Orleans. LA Rams receiver Mike Thomas has been considerably worse, with a total of only 6.2 points as a rookie. He may yet turn into a good receiver, but the Rams passing offence doesn’t seem any better than last year’s putrid edition, the Rams invested in more weapons for Goff that might see Thomas fall down the depth chart all together and right now he’s probably a candidate for the chop, only one year in. And speaking of the putrid Rams offence, 5.02 was spent on the source of the terrible smell – Jared Goff. I think we all know how that’s turned out so far. As for the 2017 5th rounder (5.04) – it’s turned into Ishmael Zamora, the dog-beater. There’s really no way to know how that pick turns out at this point, but unless the plan is to dress Thomas and Goff as dogs then I’m not sure Zamora will really end up being the important part of rescuing this trade for the Sadness.

I don’t think we can pick winners or losers on a lot of these, but if we were, I’d probably shade this one to Neil right now. It also highlights an interesting point – trading down and getting good value for a premium pick is a solid strategy, but you have to spend the picks wisely when you do, not on the Rams passing offence.

Five

  • Tamworth Two – Snead, Willie NOS WR, 2016 Round 1 Pick and 2017 Round 2 Pick
  • DynaForOne Firebirds – Thomas, Demaryius DEN WR

So here’s a different sort of trade to the first – a player swap, with picks to make up the difference. This pick took place in season, so the final value of both picks wasn’t known at the point of trade, but one was for the current season and it was done at the deadline with T2 in the thick of the playoff battle, so I’d call it the 1.08 pick on average, rather than the usual 1.05 average that I’d use for a future pick, but the total value of the picks still comes to close to the 3rd overall pick. That’s a lot of value, but Thomas was a stud receiver at the time, number three overall in 2014 but struggling a little in 2015 – mostly because of Peyton Manning falling off a cliff and being unable to complete a pass over 10 yards. Those sorts of talents are generally going for double firsts, which suggests Snead – not unreasonably as he’d end up putting up nearly 1,000 yards as a rookie over only 9 games, a record for an undrafted player’s rookie season – was either valued at a first himself, or maybe that the Firebirds gave Thomas up slightly cheap.

In actual fact though this is a really savvy deal, Thomas’ struggles continued in 2016 and it’s hard to remember a receiver coming back from the sort of extended dip he’s struggled through and T2 have been left with a top six salary for a player who couldn’t crack the top 20 in 2016. Between the IRL big contract and the continued problems at QB for Denver it’s not unreasonable to suggest the struggles aren’t going away. As for Snead, he followed up his 984 yards and 3 TDs with 895 yards and 4 TDs, but over 16 games. That’s probably because of the emergence of Michael Thomas in the second half of the year and the presence of Cooks, with Cooks gone Snead could break out in a bigger role in 2017. And if nothing else, he’s been so much cheaper than Thomas for similar production, and is younger, so without the picks I’d be tempted to call Neil a winner here – despite Thomas having a proven ceiling considerably higher. However, put that aside, because the pick value removes any doubt. Even with the worst picks in the world Neil’s value on this trade is off the chart. Which is probably good as Neil spent the first rounder he received as part of the Rawls trade (along with 2.05 which ended up traded around until it became Kenyan Drake – told you it would come up again), which has worked out OK, but hasn’t produced the top ten stud RB he would have hoped given the price. The 2.05 pick that the 2017 pick also ended up traded, to the Sadness along with 2.04 (and was spent on James Conner), to get the 9th overall pick which was spent on Alvin Kamara. Given that the pick traded for Rawls ended up the same pick that then subsequently got traded in 2017 the best way to look at this is probably that it’s Thomas for Snead and Rawls. Even with Rawls disappointing 2016 and unconvincing position for 2017, I’d call Neil a clear winner on this one simply because I’m not convinced Thomas has a path back to being an elite receiver right now. A pattern is emerging, don’t fuck with Neil when it comes to trades.

Four

  • Dynasty of Sadness – Tate, Golden DET WR and 2016 Picks 3.01 & 5.01
  • Champions of the Sun – 2016 Picks 1.06 & 3.10

It wouldn’t be a trade review if these two didn’t show up in it somewhere trading picks. While a lot of their trades are the sort of up in one round down in another sort of trades I mentioned in the first trade I highlighted, this one is a little more straight-forward. This is a chunk of stuff given up by one team to get a high pick off the other. I picked this one here as it involves a player as a makeweight to trade up, unlike number six which was purely about picks or number five which was mostly about trading for a star.

Let’s start with the pick valuation and see what it values Tate as in terms of a pick. Champions are giving up 2220 points of value, while Sadness give up 1290, a difference of 930 which equates to somewhere roughly in the middle of 2.07 and 2.08. Given the valuations we’ve seen of Thomas, Snead and Landry, this is probably on the low side for Tate, who was coming off something of a breakout first year in Detroit and looking at a potentially bigger role with Megatron retiring. Even with him not being as young as any of those mentioned, it’s still less than was paid for Wheaton who was considerably less productive and with far greater downside. Initially then this looks like being advantage Champions.

Fortunately for the Sadness, they played a blinder with the big pick, nabbing Michael Thomas at 1.06 – a top receiver in his rookie season, and a big part (along with Elliot) of why the Sadness made a playoff run. With Cooks gone, he has an opportunity to take on an even bigger role in the next couple of seasons. The 3.10 pick was spent on Jordan Payton who’s delivered the square root of fuck all so far in Cleveland, but there’s time for that to change. Similarly the two picks given up by Sadness have gone on QB development prospect Paxton Lynch who’s shown little to nothing so far (though was not expected to deliver anything in 2016), and Washington RB non-event Keith Marshall as the Champions correctly didn’t trust Matt Jones, but wrongly pegged Marshall rather than Fat Rob Kelley as the solution.

Right now this trade essentially boils down to Tate for Thomas, and that’s a clear win for the Dynasty of Sadness.

Three

  • Dynasty of Sadness – Bryant, Dez DAL WR and 2017 Round 5 Pick
  • Dyna Hard – Morris, Alfred DAL RB and Diggs, Stefon MIN WR and 2016 Pick 1.08 and 2017 Round 1 Pick

OK, so as a one-off trade goes, this is probably the blockbusteriest trade so far in the Dynabowl, two firsts, Stefon Diggs and Alfred Morris for Dez Bryant and a make-weight future 5th. It’s like the Thomas trade, only with sprinkles on top (Morris, two firsts instead of a first and a second). Only here’s the thing, much like Thomas, Bryant comes with a huge price tag and was coming off a disappointing year – injuries rather than Peyton Manning being the limiting factor as he produced only 57 points. And much like Thomas, he failed to deliver in 2016 as well, an injury hit start hurting his total points and putting him out of the top twenty, but even his point per game return wouldn’t have been enough for a top ten finish. As for Diggs – he wasn’t as electric as Snead in his rookie year, but he showed flashes and attracted interest off the taxi squad. Much like Snead, he’s not a better player than the one he’s been traded for… yet. But he’s in a position to succeed, as a key part of his offence, and you’d rather be buying stock in Snead/Diggs right now than in Bryant or Thomas (though I’d favour Bryant over Thomas as a comeback candidate, because the Cowboys are better at QB right now and because Bryant’s been hurt rather than just bad).

Morris is mostly irrelevant to this trade, but he had a relatively unfriendly salary for a handcuff to the Sadness’ presumptive number one Elliot, so it was a worthwhile addition with cap space spare.

As for the picks – the 2016 1.08 was used on Kenneth Dixon, who’s sometimes looked good, but failed to really cement himself as the Baltimore lead running back as yet, unless he does this seems like a lost pick. The 2017 pick was traded back twice, to 1.08 with the Brees, then 2.01 with the Dungeoneers, netting a fifth rounder (subsequently traded down to move up from 2.04 to 2.02) and to move up 5 places in the 4th. The final landing spot at 2.01 was used on Kareem Hunt. Hunt has talent and if either he or Dixon end up as a number one back and a good RB1/2 to complement Elliot as the Sadness’ stud then they’re clear winners here. Similarly if Diggs develops into a good receiver at a WR2 sort of level, while Bryant fails to become a clear WR1 again, then you’d have to call the Sadness winners here, however if Dixon and Hunt end up in RBBC situations, and Diggs never really breaks out of the WR3/Flex level he was in his second year, then it’s probably going to favour Dyna Hard as I just don’t think Bryant is done yet, and even as an overpaid WR2 he still offers more than three at-best flex level players. All in all there’s a lot of ifs around this, and it could easily go either way still, so I think it’s fair to move on without declaring a clear winner.

Two

  • Dynasore Losers – 2016 1.04 to Firebirds; 2016 3.04 and 2017 Round 1 Pick to Tamworth Two
  • DynaForOne Firebirds – 2016 4.02 and 2017 Round 1 Pick
  • Tamworth Two – Landry, Jarvis MIA WR and 2016 3.09

There’s two different trades here, but ultimately the two go together as the Losers deal with the Firebirds was an attempt to recoup the 2017 first rounder lost in the deal for Landry as the 2017 draft seemed a lot stronger than the 2016 one did. So how did this all shake out?

The Firebirds gave up a pick valued in advance at 1.05, but which ultimately became 1.04, the same pick given up to get Landry, while the 2017 first became 1.02. As such the Losers didn’t lose spots in the draft as they ended up trading away their 2016 1.04 for what became the 2017 1.04, but because they ended up losing their own 1.02 and gaining the Firebirds 1.04 they did actually lose two spots. Still following? Good.

The Firebirds pick became Corey Coleman. So far he’s been better than Doctson and Treadwell, taken ahead of him, but worse than Shepherd and Michael Thomas who were taken after him. With only 60 points in his rookie season he’s a long way from being worth the first rounder given up to get him yet, but receivers do sometimes take time, and the Browns have a terrifyingly bad QB situation, so there’s still hope for him as that potentially improves.

The two picks the Firebirds gave up to get Coleman became Christian McCaffrey and Deion Jones. Right now there’s no two ways about this, Jones looks like a stud, scoring nearly 80 more points than Coleman in his rookie year as the top point scorer among (drafted) defensive rookies, and the 4th highest (drafted) rookie scorer (non-QB) in his class. Obviously, that’s only one season, but that’s all we have for both players so far.

As for the second half of the trade, the first given up on Landry was spent on Corey Davis. This worked out pretty well for both sides, with the Losers getting McCaffrey at #4 from their own trade into 2017 (who they would have taken at #2 anyway, given the need at RB) and T2 moving ahead of the Brees who had hoped to snag Davis at #3. It’s impossible to evaluate this up front, as Davis has yet to appear in an NFL game, but who wins that trade in the long run comes down to whether Landry or Davis ends up being the better receiver. As for the exchange of thirds… Rashard Higgins has produced little to nothing so far for T2, but does have great hair and plenty of time to come good (hopefully not a sign of things to come from Davis for them) while the 3.09 pick that went the other way was used in a package with Charles Sims to nab two picks from the Brees which were spent on DeAndre Washington and Adolphus Washington, if DeAndre Washington ends up a starter in Oakland then this part of the deal certainly favours the Losers, but that’s a big if with Beast Mode coming home to Oakland and looking to be the feature back for them. Adolphus may or may not do anything in the long run, it’s simply too early to say. If none of these three develop into viable fantasy options, then it will literally come down to the two receivers. While that’s certainly true when it comes to the long-term evaluation of the trade, it’s also fair to say that just on a fundamental level it’s almost always going to be better in a trade to get a young receiver with proven production rather than trading for a pick to draft one, no matter how highly they’re regarded – especially when that trade is for an unknown draft pick in the subsequent year’s draft.

The net of this three way trade is that the Losers bagged Christian McCaffrey, Deion Jones, Jarvis Landry and DeAndre Washington. T2 netted Corey Davis and Rashard Higgins while the Firebirds got Corey Coleman. A lot depends on how Coleman and Davis do over the next two or three years, but it’s fair to say that if McCaffrey is a bust the Losers have at worst got a pair of quality starters and for either T2 or the Firebirds to feel happy about their parts in this deal they’ll need their own high pick receivers to out-perform Landry at a minimum. It seems fair to say at this point though that the big loser looks to be the Firebirds, who’s Jedi trade tricks fail to work a third time as McCaffrey and Jones for Coleman seems heavily weighted in favour of the Losers, regardless of how Landry for Davis works out.

One

  • Here Comes The Brees –  2016 Picks 1.05 & 1.06 to Champions of the Sun; Donald, Aaron STL DT to Dynablaster Bombermen
  • Champions of the Sun – Robinson, Allen JAC WR
  • Dynablaster Bombermen – 2016 Round 1 & 4 Draft Picks and 2017 Round 1 Pick

Much like the previous example this is a three way trade essentially, but this with the Brees at the centre of it. In one sense the Brees gave up Donald to get Robinson, and got a 4th out of it but it’s a touch more complicated than that. Basically the Brees picked up a pair of firsts, spending the first of them, along with their own 2016 pick to get Allen Robinson. That’s not out of line with the prices paid for Bryant and Thomas, without giving up a young receiver in return. However that wrongly puts Thomas and Bryant (established studs with better seasons) on a par with Robinson who had one good season off the back of a high number of TD scores. Where Thomas and Bryant struggled to recapture their best form, which is probably what put them on the market, Robinson’s 2016 fall feels more like gravity pulling him back down (although he dropped further than I would have expected and should bounce back some in 2017). There’s arguments both ways on this as Robinson is also younger, had a decent seeming offence in place and had a season on the cheap before a massive extension would be due, however it was a massive pay rise as he jumped into the top tier of receivers, unlike Landry (who also commanded a first plus trade price) who finished just shy of a top tier extension cost. Ultimately, double firsts (and better ones than were paid for Bryant / Thomas) seems an slight overpay, just because Thomas and Landry didn’t quite stretch to double firsts, and I just don’t think he was established as a top tier player like Bryant and Thomas were, but it’s certainly not an indefensible one.

Meanwhile, Champions spent the 1.05 on Sterling Shepherd and traded away the 1.06 in the previously discussed Tate / Michael Thomas trade. So instead of picking Thomas and Shepherd and being clear winners in this trade they’ve ended up trading away a potential stud for a pair of at-best WR2s. That seems like a push at the moment, and will most likely come down to whether or not Robinson delivers WR1 value. If he doesn’t, his extension cost will mean the value pairing of Tate and Shepherd win out, but Shepherd’s ceiling is low with an in-decline Eli and a much-better Odell Beckham limiting his value to somewhere in the region of a WR3 and Tate looked poor for most of last year as Detroit struggled offensively so there’s plenty of scope for both sides to come away feeling unhappy about this, especially with what could have been for the Champions with Thomas.

And that brings us to the other side of this deal. While the Brees co-managers sit there wondering if they’re going to be stuck with a massively overpaid disappointment in Robinson, the Bombermen get Aaron Donald – outscoring all receivers and all other defensive players in both 2015 and 2016. I call that a win at almost any price. The two firsts the Bombermen gave up – 1.05 in 2016 and 1.08 in 2017 have gone on receivers, partly on Robinson as discussed and on Jon Ross (via a small trade up from 8 to 7), but realistically unless you end up with two WR1s out of that, then it’s hard to call it anything other than a loss, especially considering the massive salary differential between top tier receivers and a top DT (even after the Suh deal this summer). There is a light at the end of this tunnel though, and it might not even be a train. The Rams might be changing from a 4-3 to a 3-4 scheme with Jeff Fisher and Greg Williams being shown the door. If Donald ends up moved from DT to DE his point-scoring will drop significantly (just look at Kerry Hyder’s points in 2016’s league and in 2017’s following re-classification, they’ve virtually halved), and his extension cost will sky-rocket, if that happens then what looked like a rock solid win for the Bombermen becomes much, much more debatable. Ultimately it’ll still come down to how Robinson bounces back, and whether Ross is any sort of success, but they go from needing to find two top five receivers to maybe one top 10 receiver and a solid WR2. The 4th round pick in this trade I’ve mostly ignored so far, but for posterity’s sake it was spent on Braxton Miller, so it deserved to be ignored.

As a result then I’d say that while the Champions / Brees part of the trade is fairly even (with the Brees having the better potential to come out on top), the Brees are very much on the downside of the overall trade, swapping a defensive player who out-performs even the top receivers (for less money) for a player who isn’t a top receiver. While keeping to the cap doesn’t seem to be a problem for the Brees management as yet and maybe ameliorates some of that downside, it does still limit their ability to compete for the top free agents, or extend some useful players. It’s also fair to say that both the Brees and Champions GMs should feel more than a little bit rueful, as in both cases they had a chance to get both Shepherd and Thomas with those 1.05 and 1.06 picks and both teams would be in a better position if they’d just stopped after the first trade and used the picks they’d garnered.

 

Addendum There’s two teams not included in this write-up at all. That’s nothing against those teams, it’s just that I mostly found their trades fell into the ‘player-heavy’ category or the two picks for two picks category. The Dungeoneers did get a mention in one of the write-ups and pulled off some nice business, fleecing the Firebirds into giving up anything for Ryan Tannehill, the Bombermen into giving up good players for bad ones in the Carlos Hyde trade and getting the 1.02 pick for fat Eddie Lacy which they used on Amari Cooper (then wasted their own 1.03 on Kevin White, so that feels like a push to me). While that seems like a list of wins, they also overpaid the Brees for Keenan Allen’s one game a year and got absolutely destroyed by Kelkowski (the other team not mentioned) when they traded away Doug Baldwin for Stevie Johnson (oops). Kelkowski’s trades are mostly terribly dull and involve buying or selling expiring contracts at the trade deadline for 6th and 7th round picks.

MAX’S STAT BLATS! Week 6

Better late than never!  Or maybe not.  I’ll leave that up to you.  In week 4 I took a look at every team’s offensive performance so far in 2016 and compared it to their 2015 performance to look for improvement and decline.  This week I’ll be doing the same with the defense.  To the stats!

2016 Week 1-6 Average vs 2015 Average
Dungeoneers Brees T2 Sadness Losers Champions Firebirds Kelkowski Hard Bombermen
DT/DE -6.31 4.90 -8.94 1.80 -3.83 4.10 1.40 7.85 -5.02 -2.05
LB -0.29 8.69 3.39 -3.05 7.57 -4.63 3.14 -6.71 -1.17 3.46
CB/S 4.13 2.63 3.08 -9.36 -3.03 -9.20 5.86 -3.58 7.45 -1.51
DEF -2.46 16.22 -2.47 -10.61 0.71 -9.73 10.39 -2.44 1.26 -0.10

Defensive Line

Winners: Kelkowski are crushing it on the D-line this year!  Nearly 8 points up on 2015!  Look a bit deeper though and it has, perhaps, some of the qualities of a mirage.  Firstly, JPP and friends are averaging 22.67 points per game, slightly above average for the D-line.  It’s an improvement but it’s a movement from bottom of the pile to mid-table obscurity.  Secondly, that average is propped up by a massive 63 points in week 3 when the ghost of Malik Jackson briefly turned up to spook Ebeneezer Kelkowski.  Across the other 5 weeks they average 14.6 points, a number better only than Pete’s damp paper bag of a D-line.  Despite losing Aaron Donald, the Brees are functioning better than last season too.  Part of this is due to replacing the best DT in fantasy football with the second best in Fletcher Cox but Michael Bennett and Cameron Jordan are both solid producers too.

Losers: Oh T2, we knew thee well.  After triumphing in the “underwhelming running back” stakes last time out, Goody and Mat show us that they can disappoint on both sides of the ball.  Some of this decline is due to missing pieces (Gerald McCoy and Chandler Jones have been absent much or all of the year) but I think we see an impact of the scoring changes here.  T2 hit big on Kawann Short and Gerald McCoy last season and DTs are probably the group to take the biggest hit from the downgrading of big plays.  Both have scored very well but those 40 point games should be gone now for the most part.  A lot of last year’s big DT scorers have done worse through the start of 2016.  The Dungeoneers d-line is also down 6 points but I don’t think I can kick Pete anymore so let’s leave it at that.

Linebackers

Winners: There are two clear winners in this category, the Brees and the Losers.  Both units were very poor last season so, like Kelkowski’s D-Line, this improvement puts them in the middle of the pack rather than raising them to the top of the charts.  Slatz invested in the position in free agency and the draft with Paul Posluszny and Markus Golden delivering and Deion Jones and Leonard Floyd looking strong through the start of their rookie seasons.  The Brees, meanwhile, seem to have gone for the “2015 Josh Norman” effect and just picked up a player from waivers having a monster season in Lorenzo Alexander.  51 of the 99 points they’ve scored at LB in the last three weeks have been from him.  Improved play from Will Compton and Shaq Barrett is helping but to maintain this improvement they need Alexander to continue playing out of his skin.

Losers: What would Max Cubberley say if you asked him about the decline of his linebackers (4.5 points down on last season).  He’d tell you that they’re still scoring more than anybody else’s linebackers so you can go fuck yourself.  He’d probably also whinge on about injuries and players moving position but lets not give him a platform.  Kelkowski’s overall defensive decline continues here with their linebackers regressing the most out of all the teams (6.7 points down on last season).  Their situation is the reverse of the Losers’ and the Brees’.  Kelkowski’s LBs were among the best in the business last season and this year they’re just… average.  D’Qwell Jackson and Brandon Marshall are the main culprits here and Stephone Anthony’s reduced playing time at strong side LB for the Saints leaves them short a little bit of depth.  Zach Orr is a good wire pickup though who should be able to compensate for that.

Defensive Backs

Winners: Yuk.  Defensive back analysis.  Well, Dyna Hard and the firebirds are both doing better this season than last.  Rodney McLeod was a great pick-up for Chris and Aqib Talib’s 3 INTs so far this year certainly don’t hurt.  Chris’ DBs are comfortably the highest scoring in the league so far this season and his main problem now is the potential for PLOBbage.  With 43 cornerbacks to choose from on any given week, it’s no wonder that Neil is doing well but the PLOBbage is real here.  Trying to predict S and (particularly) CB scoring week on week is far from easy and although Neil has done a good job it must be frustrating to look at your bench every week and see the road not taken.

Losers: The Sadness and the Champions both show an equal decline at the DB spot.  For Cubberley the situation is similar to his LBs.  Despite losing 9 points a game on 2015 the Champions still have the third highest scoring set of DBs in the league so this decline is as much a result of an outlying season of success as anything else.  With Reshad Jones gone for the season now though Maxxxxxx will have to look deep into the waiver wire to try to maintain the pace.  The Sadness, on the other hand, are, by nearly 6 points per game, the worst secondary in the Dbowl.  Their decline is from mediocrity to abject failure.  Looking at the scores of his players for the year to date though you wouldn’t think you were looking at a secondary so adrift from the rest of the field.  To be honest, they’ve scored from disappointing to average every week rather than terribly and this slump is really a result of having no big weeks so far.  A couple of INTs this week could see them pick up and return closer to the average.  DBs, eh?  It’s a funny old game.

Defence

Winners: Although his DB improvement is the best, Neil has improved across the board on defence this season, scoring over 10 points more than last year per game.  At 86.20 points per game, his group is the best in the Dbowl at the moment but the week on week stats show a sharp decline.  In weeks 1-3 the Birds averaged 108 points per game on D.  In weeks 4-6 that number fell to 64 points per game.  He’s had big pieces on bye in each of those weeks but it’s something to keep an eye on.  If I was Neil I would be moving to address the obvious gap at DE in his roster.  Maybe drop a CB or two to make ro… who am I kidding, he’s never going to drop any CBs.  If you think improving by 10 points is impressive, though, look at the Brees!  A 16 point increase!  That takes them to averaging 76 points per game which is… wait… it’s bang average.  Putting aside Pete’s crepe paper D (sorry Pete) the Brees were about that far adrift of everyone else last season.  Really, it would have been more impressive to be so bad two seasons in a row.

Losers: Let’s just check in with Max Cubberley on what he thinks about his defence averaging 10 points fewer than last season.  “Go fuck yourself!”  Thought so.  The Champions are still the second best scoring defence but last week was a low outing from them and this week’s lineup has a few too many waiver wire pickups for my liking.  We’re not too far off a week where Cubberley starts 4 Texans’ linebackers and that can’t be good for anyone.  The Sadness are the other team to have lost 10 points off their average.  Most of that is their secondary, as discussed, though and there is some cause for optimism that those numbers could improve over the season.  Despite Linval Joseph’s monster season so far the Sadness only show a 2 point improvement on the D-Line though and there is room for improvement here.  Mangboob’s DEs are not inspiring and a little trade magic could really help him to improve those numbers and make a playoff push in Peter.

Overall

Winners: It will come as no surprise to anyone that the Bombermen are the big improvement on last season, averaging 24 points more per game than last season’s disappointing results.  You’ll have seen that they were conspicuous by their absence in today’s report and, indeed, their defence is operating at a 0.1 loss on last year.  All of this is offensive improvement and it looks like it has the legs to go all season.  The Sadness are the other big improvement, nearly 15 points up on last year.  This is despite giving 10 points away per game from their receivers and it shows the difference that a certified stud like Zeke Elliot can make.

Losers: Last season’s hot ticket, the Champions of the Sun, are back scrapping with everyone else this year, down 10 points on defence and 6 points on offence.  Despite all of this they’re still scoring well but some thinness at RB and secondary is coming home to roost and they’re now in a position of relying on Trevor Siemian week on week for production.  After them, Tamworth Two are having a ‘mare this season, giving away 8 points a game.  LeSean McCoy is keeping their running game above water on his own and it’s really just the D-line and special teams (!) that account for the decline.


Weekly Stats

TABLES!

Don't Look Blat In Anger
Don’t Look Blat In Anger


Peter vs. Tim Watch

Week 1: Peter (average) 179.68 vs Tim (average) 192.14.  Tim wins.  1-0 to Tim (victory margin 12.46)
Week 2: Peter (average) 184.04 vs Tim (average) 200.91.  Tim wins.  2-0 to Tim (victory margin 16.87)
Week 3: Peter (average) 192.11 vs Tim (average) 212.54  Tim wins.  3-0 to Tim (victory margin 20.43)
Week 4: Peter (average) 175.27 vs Tim (average) 198.18  Tim wins.  4-0 to Tim (victory margin 22.91)
Week 5: Peter (average) 177.50 vs Tim (average) 176.66  PETER WINS.  4-1 to Tim (victory margin 0.84)
Week 6: Peter (average) 170.47 vs Tim (average) 174.70  Sanity is restored, Tim wins.  5-1 to Tim (victory margin 4.23)

Season to Date: Peter (average) 179.85 vs Tim (average) 192.52. Tim leads (margin 12.68)