Comments on: Fan-Sided Blogs Takes Over Yard Barker!

By: Zach

Zach — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:56:51 +0000

I would consider some of those your talking about as a “must-start”. So we call our guys different things, no need to keep arguing

By: thebryman

thebryman — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:10:12 +0000

To me, the definition of a fantasy stud is a guy that is a starter no matter what, no matter the match up, you play them, because they are gonna get theirs. A non-stud is the kind of player you have to rotate out against a superior defense or offense. McGahee was that kind of player last year, and I think he will be again this year. I think Clayton will be as well in 12 team leagues with 3 receivers. I have always been of the belief that the guys you pick early don’t win your championship anyways. I think statistics prove that a lot of times the early picks rely on luck. The later round wins you a championship.

By: Zach

Zach — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:57:10 +0000

Sure, I hear ya. I just think of fantasy studs as the guys that win you championships like Brady, Manning, AP, LT, Westbrook and a few others. To each his own, no worries

By: thebryman

thebryman — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:16:24 +0000

By the way Zach, I’m not disputing the fact that McGahee does have some red flags with his knee now, but to write that the Ravens have no studs, then list the statistics that he expects Clayton and McGahee to achieve as not being stud material is a little mixed up if you ask me. Both of those guys are definitely ownable. I also think that he didn’t necessarily say any players weren’t worthy to be on your team after rereading the article, just that there weren’t any offensive studs, so I think the title of the link was a little misleading.