Scott Stevens or Adcock/Malceski???

[gcraw]

Got $440k in the bank and I have Scott Stevens pencilled in at $402,300, leaving me a snip under $40k. I have Houligan, Raines and Hill as bargain picks already and Stevens' pre-season numbers stand out like a nun in a miniskirt. Am I missing why nobody seems to have him in their side?

If he's a dud then there's Adcock (seems popular) or Malceski (not so popular)... have I missed any?

Cheers in advance for the wisdom.

[Bo]

Stevens is a very good and unpopular fantasy team player. I wouldn't take him, even though there's nothing wrong with him at all. Go with it, after 2 rounds you'll either be vindicated and look like a genius, or you can quietly switch for adcock/malceski whomever is playing better and go about your business.

Course you could just take adcock and be fine :) Stevens is kinda risky

[Watto]

Adcock

[freezer]

Whatever you do, don't get malceski...he has been terrible in SC this year.

Adcock seems to get more consistent scores. Stevens was $280K two weeks ago, but I thought he was too unpredictable to pick up.

[tony73]

Freezer this thread was started in March, I think Watto was just making a statement as to who has gone better now ;D

I have Adcock, and am quite pleased now

[freezer]

i wish i had taken adcock!

[tony73]

I will be considering straight swap Adcock to Drummond in 3 weeks

The figures will be real close

Thoughts

[freezer]

good move tony, as long as drummond can stay on the park, he is the got to man for the lions.

I will be doing the same thing with malceksi once drummonds price drops