evilkapitalist

here's a good site to check: http://www.fantasyalgorithms.com/schedule.html in my experience, SOS is really only relevant for two positions: RB and D. I don't know why but QB doesn't seem to be effected as much and for WR it's more an issue of who the WR is being covered by. for first round and second round RB's it's not that important unless i'm making a judgement call between two relatively similar backs........where it does make a big difference is for later round RB3's. e.g., Jax had the easiest schedule last year for RB's and I got Fred and MJD late in my 2006 draft (By the way, it looks like Jax has an easy sched again) Easy sched is important for later round picks bc obviously the skill level is potentially less but also i think it lowers the chances for injury when u r dealing with a player like fragile fred. based on this assumption, i like f taylor, foster/williams, ahman green, and lamont jordan as late round draft picks this year. foster is this year's f taylor IMO ( i know the injury risk but he's worth a flyer if u can get him in the 8th round). D is hopefully self explanatory.

you don't have to go back too far to find another coaching miscue: charlie weis going for it on 4th and 3 at his own 35 against LSU

the madden curse continues. SA was running fine until that f'in commercial.

the issue is that people are arguing different things: who is the better wr? harrison who is the better fantasy wr? wayne harrison is still a better wr than wayne but the difference between the two is not enough any more to make up for harrison consistently facing a #1 cb and potential double teams trying to decide who will be the better wr next year is a total crap shoot because you don't know how teams will cover them......both will be good 3rd round picks in my opinion but wayne should be slightly more valuable bc he gets targeted more in the red zone. but again, if marvin sees single coverage nex year, he wll put up better numbers than wayne the only way you can avoid the headache is by taking peyton and avoiding these two wr's, which will be tough if they slip to the 3rd round.

tough call but its got to be between ronnie and deuce. with MIA starting to play better and MIN crapping the bed, Ronnie is a good start but I agree with the other posters, get involved in the cinci - NO shoot out and start the deuce.

I like this trade bc I think Gore is a minor upgrade on KJ (KJ's schedule is a disaster), Bulger has question marks now that StL lost O Pace, and I have Donte Stallworth to slide into Harrison's position. Let me know what you think and I will try to help you.

KJ will not do well after AZ this weekend. The Det O-line is a zero and Det has the toughest schedule against the run for the last 6 games of the season. I am a KJ owner and looking to unload him before the tade deadline.

We start 3 WR's and I have 5 potential top 20 WR's with Marvin, TO, Colston, Stallworth, and Berrian. I need to figure out who I should trade before the deadline in the next 24 hours. I think my biggest weaknesses are: 1) D/ST (this is quite valuable in our league since you get bonus points for points and yards allowed along with 2 points for every sack/int/fr) 2) TE for the next 3 weeks while Gonzo is out 3) Stud RB (after this week, I think KJ is going to fall off a cliff in terms of production due to his sched of MIA, NE, MIN, GB, CHI, DAL ...........and Alexander is still a big question mark) 4) Backup QB (I felt OK with Bulger until Pace was lost for the season and StL's playoff sched is a disaster. I know I am probably panicking but I think I need a quality backup now for the playoffs.) I might beable to unload KJ, Jamal Lewis, and Marvin Harrison for Steven Jackson, LJ Smith, and Balt D (the other team needs WR help and RB depth and has both LJ Smith and Randy McMichael) I could also trade Berrian straight up to a team with Romo, Vick, and Manning (also weak at WR) for either Vick or Romo. Any advice on the tades above or whether I should sit tight with what I have is much appreciated. Also, I will help with any questions you have.