10 Responses to “Draft Day Debate – Brandon LaFell vs. Dexter McCluster”

  1. Z-A says:

    I can’t really disagree with any of this, but the big question is how a guy like McCluster fits into fantasy football. I liken him to Percy Harvin, whose numbers last year were decent, but hard at times to work into your starting lineup. Not sure McCluster will be much different unless we look back on the 2009 and 2010 drafts as the first of a larger trend towards these hybrid-type players. You could be ahead of the cusp…or you could be riding an NFL fad.

  2. Meineymoe says:

    thanks, Ken – very enjoyable read! I like the analogies. I’m probably not going to take a chance on either of these guys, though I do find McCluster intriguing, as Z-A pointed out, in that “hybrid-type players” way.


  3. Jim B says:

    I think the one big thing McCluster has in his favor is Charlie Weiss. With Weiss calling plays, he will find a way to get this kid involved. That 2-3 yard slant pass was made for McCluster. He gets by the initial tackler and it’s off to the races.

  4. Dan Hosler says:

    McCluster is very intriguing and while I haven’t been able to get him in a league yet, I wouldn’t hesitate doing so. However, I wouldn’t spend a 4th round rookie pick on LaFell. He isn’t fast, has poor hands and doesn’t run good routes so in my eyes he is a less experienced Dwayne Jarrett 😉

    Just my 2 cents though

  5. aplayer says:

    you break the players down saying lafell has the advantage 3-2 then you say take mcluster.what was the piont of breaking them down?

  6. Ken Kelly says:

    The breakdowns aren’t an exact science where 3-2 or 4-1 would automatically make someone the winner. To most, the metrics themselves aren’t even. You’re assuming that size, situation and durability are “one better” than speed and production. Some may argue production should be worth “2 points,” character worth “1/2 point,” etc.

    The breakdowns are essentially just a way to distinguish unique strengths of two very closely ranked players, to be used as discussion points, not a scorecard, per se.

  7. chad says:

    i agree that a player like mccluster has never been a successful fantasy player. it sounds good in theory that he is a “swiss army knife” type player that can do a variety of different things. but those type of players are much more valuable to an actual nfl team then to fantasy teams. there has never been a player that has been a rb/wr/kr that has had any real value in fantasy circles. i would be very interested to hear your rebuttal to this argument ken.

  8. Ken says:

    Hey Chad!

    There isn’t a huge argument to be had, really. The debate is about two guys being looked at closely in the mid-to-late 2nd round of most rookie dynasty circles. In no way am I saying either of these two players are going to be studs. In fact, the bust rate on 2nd round picks in a rookie draft is somewhere around 70%, receivers even higher.

    With McCluster, I see him as a guy who can score points in return yardage leagues, PPR leagues and bring an added dimension to a team (which could result in lots of scoring chances). Reggie Bush and Leon Washington are very similar, and while not stars by any means, they still have value to a team, both in fantasy and reality.

    I’m just not overly impressed by LaFell. He seems very ordinary to me, but he’ll have his chance as well.

    We’re talking about 2nd round guys who are realistically flyer-type players. I’ll take the one I see as having more talent.

  9. brian says:

    Great read Ken. I picked McCluster at 1.10 in our recent dynasty draft simply because I wanted immediate production and with Crabtree and Britt on my roster from last year haven’t been able to justify another 2-3 year project at WR. The point has been made that a player of his size and position hasn’t become a valid fantasy option, while this may be true I thoroughly believe the NFL is an evolving animal and the day is coming. I’d say for a rookie, Harvin’s numbers were above average. If the top 5 RB are gone along with WR1 & 2, I feel rookie drafts are a grab your guy scenario. Sure you can look at value, estimated time to develop, etc. but if you don’t pick again until 2.10 you have to take your guy.

    It has been a pleasure watching McCluster slowly crawl up draft boards after our draft. I’ll admit when I took him I felt it was a reach, however there was nothing else there I wanted and no one would trade into the spot, so you have to go with your gut. In all of my years playing fantasy I’ve finally decided that if they can do it in college (and their game translates) get the man you want. This makes it easier to hold on to that player if the first year doesn’t pan out and the trade offers start flying in. I drafted Rice after watching him destroy the Big East for years. After McClain took off their rookie year I was looking to deal him all summer. Well summer went and I couldn’t get the value I wanted, no I sit with a backfield comprised of 2 of the best 4 backs in football with MJD.

    My opinion would be, if you watched Lafell and fell in love with his game, grab him. If not and you have ever seen McCluster play ball, well there isn’t much of an option.

    Great piece.

  10. lou says:

    McCluster will be the next chris johnson

Leave a Comment