jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 For the second year in a row I have the #1 pick in a redraft league (blind draw). Once again I am taking Mr Manning as the #1 pick. Due to our scoring rules, QB's are ver valuable. We start 2 QB 2 RB 2 WR 1 TE 1 K 1 ST-DEF Some of our rules All TD's worth 6 points 6 points for passing yeards >300 6 points for rushing yards > 100 6 points for rec yards >100 Based on our scoring system and lineups QB are generally far more valauble than RB. I expect LT to go within top 5 and S Jackson to be only other first round RB It is very hard to find a mock draft that fits our sytem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Manning ought to go about mid-first round in this league, but there is not the QB value in this league that you are alluding to or that your leaguemates are over-reacting to. I'd be willing to go with a QB combo of something like Delhomme, Garcia, & McNair and load up on RBs and WRs in the first 5 rounds, and kick ass the rest of the way. You could literally have 3 to 4 players with 1st round value on your team while everyone else is fretting about having 2 starting QBs, when the QB value levels off to almost flat after the top 10 to 12 are gone. When the entire league is on a run in one position, the smart owner finds the great value in another position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) For starters, I think your scoring rules are lame. To begin with, the 100 and 300 yd thresholds are just so arbitrary. If I have a RB that gets me 80 yds rushing and 80 yds receiving every week, I don't get jack. If you have a guy who gets 100 yds rushing half the time and no receiving yards at all, he at least gets you the bonus. Also, the reason why QBs should get less pts for TDs is because an average one throws for 20 while either a RB or WR who does so is top of the heap. Now, the biggest mistake anyone makes is to think that QB friendly scoring means you need to take QB higher. Your ranks should be based on how good a player is relative to others at his position. The reason why RBs go early is because there are only about 15 or so who are assured of getting the ball 20+ times a game and are on good enough teams that it matters. On the other hand, there are 32 QBs who are going to get every snap week one. Of course, about 10 or so are pretty bad and aren't worth taking but that still leaves about 20 who will be OK. If you take Manning at #1, you can only count on another 3 or so QBs getting taken before your next pick even if everyone is QB happy. That means you're looking at a Ronnie Brown or so as your #1 RB. Frankly, I'd rather have LT and someone like Donovan McNabb or Marc Bulger over Manning and Ronnie Brown. If you want, you can double up on QB at 24/25 assuming that there are two good ones worth taking. That said, I would still take stud RBs and WRs if it has gotten to the 10th or 12th best QBs out there. Be the guy who capitalizes on the fact that everyone else is going crazy for QBs I was in a 2 QB league and blew off the position while everyone else was going crazy with it. I ended up with great RBs and WRs and took a young McNabb and Jeff Garcia in his first year or two as starter at SF. Everyone heckled me to no end that I was starting week one with those two QBs. They finished #3 and #5 in the league and I was already stacked at the other positions because I waited. Needless to say, their money more than made up for all the grief I took. Edited August 9, 2007 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Others have covered it. Manning is a mid first rounder here. The value still lies with LT for the first pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 didn't look to me like he was asking for any advice guys. he's just stating what he's doing, and for some reason felt compelled to tell us. go get 'em jjwbean! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Manning ought to go about mid-first round in this league, but there is not the QB value in this league that you are alluding to or that your leaguemates are over-reacting to. I'd be willing to go with a QB combo of something like Delhomme, Garcia, & McNair and load up on RBs and WRs in the first 5 rounds, and kick ass the rest of the way. You could literally have 3 to 4 players with 1st round value on your team while everyone else is fretting about having 2 starting QBs, when the QB value levels off to almost flat after the top 10 to 12 are gone. When the entire league is on a run in one position, the smart owner finds the great value in another position. I agree with this and others. Grab LT with that 1st pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 didn't look to me like he was asking for any advice guys. he's just stating what he's doing, and for some reason felt compelled to tell us. go get 'em jjwbean! Well, then I feel compelled to tell him that he's f'ing up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Well, then I feel compelled to tell him that he's f'ing up. i would expect no less ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLGRAF Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 As many have stated in this and other threads, the scoring system is not really that relevant, because ALL QBs benefit, not just Peyton Manning. But, in a league where you start two QBs and two RBs, I'd draft LT2 first overall, then Manning 2nd, since the depth of QBs and RBs is similar (i.e usually one main QB per NFL team, and one main RB per NFL team), and I think there is a significant gap between Manning and the rest of the QBs, which makes him more valuable than any RB besides LT2. I'm curious if your scoring system has been the same for a few years, and if so, has your league winner always tended to draft a QB very early? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 As many have stated in this and other threads, the scoring system is not really that relevant, because ALL QBs benefit, not just Peyton Manning. But, in a league where you start two QBs and two RBs, I'd draft LT2 first overall, then Manning 2nd, since the depth of QBs and RBs is similar (i.e usually one main QB per NFL team, and one main RB per NFL team), and I think there is a significant gap between Manning and the rest of the QBs, which makes him more valuable than any RB besides LT2. I'm curious if your scoring system has been the same for a few years, and if so, has your league winner always tended to draft a QB very early? That's actually not true. There really isn't one main RB per team. Plenty use committee which is why sure fire #1 RBs are such a premium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 That's actually not true. There really isn't one main RB per team. Plenty use committee which is why sure fire #1 RBs are such a premium. And, hostorically there are usually a couple QBs each year that put up Manning like numbers.. in fact, in many scoring sytems Manning wasn't even the #1 scoring QB the year he went for 49 TDs.. Culpepper was. He's just the most consistent of the top performing QBs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglou Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 As other have said you have to with LT no doubt. P. Manning is my favorite player in the NFL but he isn't worth the top pick in any draft unless it is a QB only League and I have never seen one of those. Just think worst case, you take LT and end up with Matt Leinhart and Jon Kitna as QB in my thoughts are this isn't a bad spots to be with regaurds to your scoring system. In a Mike Martz offense and with a defense as bad as the Lions Kitna could easily have 300 yd games week in and week out. With the WR Leinhart has, the schedule he plays, and the Def. the Cardinals have same goes for him. But LT, Leinhart, and Kitna are better than P.Manning, E.Manning, and Ronnie Brown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 Took Manning #1 last year with same system. Went 13-1 in regular season. Set a record for mosit points scored in a seaon. Lost in Super Bowl 52-51 Here are the top scorers from 2006 Player FPTS Tomlinson, LaDa 267 Manning, Peyton QB 248 Brees, Drew QB NO 196 Jackson, Steven RB STL 189 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 186 Johnson, Larry RB KC 183 Vick, Michael QB ATL 180 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Kitna, Jon QB DET 156 Brady, Tom QB NE 148 Manning, Eli QB NYG 144 Parker, Willie RB PIT 141 Grossman, Rex QB CHI 138 Rivers, Philip QB SD 134 Favre, Brett QB GB 132 Gore, Frank RB SF 123 McNabb, Donovan 120 Losman, J.P. QB BUF 120 Roethlisberger, Ben 120 Romo, Tony QB DAL 118 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 In our league QB's rule. You can not wait to get a QB to pick #24 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 I would love to LT at #1. But I would end up with Alex Smith & Rex Grossman as QB;s. That would be certain death in this league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 What you posted just proves that RBs have more value. SO many QBs score so similarly. DO a quick value analysis.... just of RB and QB if you want. Better if you use a 3 year trend, but just look at last year. Assuming a 12 team league, please post the top 24 QBs and the top 24 RBs. (Top 20 if a 10 teams league) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 What you posted just proves that RBs have more value. SO many QBs score so similarly. DO a quick value analysis.... just of RB and QB if you want. Better if you use a 3 year trend, but just look at last year. Assuming a 12 team league, please post the top 24 QBs and the top 24 RBs. (Top 20 if a 10 teams league) What LT did last year was a fluke with our scoring system. Most years, the top RB end up about 7th for total points. Yuo guys will never change my mind. We have been using this same system for 12 years. I know how people draft, I know the scroing sytem. I knowthat Manning is by far the most valuable player in my league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 What LT did last year was a fluke with our scoring system. Most years, the top RB end up about 7th for total points. Yuo guys will never change my mind. We have been using this same system for 12 years. I know how people draft, I know the scroing sytem. I knowthat Manning is by far the most valuable player in my league So what was the purpose of your post? Also, why dont you humor us with posting the top 24 QBs and RBs in your scoring system, ideally for each of the last 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 Here are the points for the past 3 years Moral of story - you need to pick the right RB and QB combo to outplayManning's consitency 2006 FPTS Tomlinson, LaDa 267 Manning, Peyton QB 248 Brees, Drew QB NO 196 Jackson, Steven RB STL 189 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 186 Johnson, Larry RB KC 183 Vick, Michael QB ATL 180 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Kitna, Jon QB DET 156 Brady, Tom QB NE 148 Manning, Eli QB NYG 144 Parker, Willie RB PIT 141 Grossman, Rex QB CHI 138 Rivers, Philip QB SD 134 Favre, Brett QB GB 132 Gore, Frank RB SF 123 McNabb, Donovan 120 Losman, J.P. QB BUF 120 Roethlisberger, Ben 120 Romo, Tony QB DAL 118 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 2005 FL FPTS Palmer, Carson QB CIN 2 218 Johnson, Larry RB KC 4 195 Manning, Peyton 2 186 Tomlinson, LaDainian RB SD 1 183 Brady, Tom QB NE 3 180 Manning, Eli QB NYG 2 170 Alexander, Shaun RB SEA 1 154 Bledsoe, Drew 8 152 Brees, Drew QB NO 5 150 Delhomme, Jake 6 150 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 1 150 Collins, Kerry 4 144 Favre, Brett QB GB 7 142 Brunell, Mark QB WAS 6 140 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 1 137 James, Edgerrin RB ARI 1 129 Vick, Michael QB ATL 5 128 Smith, Steve WR CAR 1 123 Green, Trent QB MIA 4 122 Plummer, Jake QB TB 2 122 Roethlisberger, Ben QB PIT 1 120 Portis, Clinton RB WAS 2 119 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 0 117 Frerotte, Gus QB STL 4 108 Gates, Antonio TE SD 0 108 Harrison, Marvin WR IND 0 108 2004 FPTS Manning, Peyton QB IND 339 Culpepper, Daunte QB OAK 297 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 222 Green, Trent QB MIA 209 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 202 Favre, Brett QB GB 202 Alexander, Shaun RB SEA 189 Brady, Tom QB NE 186 Plummer, Jake QB TB 186 Brees, Drew QB NO 174 Brooks, Aaron QB OAK 170 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Martin, Curtis RB NYJ 153 Tomlinson, LaDainian RB SD 153 Vick, Michael QB ATL 150 Dillon, Corey RB NE 149 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 142 Muhammad, Muhsin WR CHI 141 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 135 Gonzalez, Tony TE KC 129 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 126 Gates, Antonio TE SD 126 Williams, Domanick RB HOU 120 Griese, Brian QB CHI 120 Owens, Terrell WR DAL 120 Bledsoe, Drew QB DAL 120 Walker, Javon WR DEN 117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Good for you-take him. I just love Bush Leagues and their wackiness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 '8/9/07 8:39pm' post='2120093']Good for you-take him. I just love Bush Leagues and their wackiness [/size] Your league is no better or no worse than ours. My only point is that is some leagues, taking a QB at #1 should be considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 [/size][/size]Your league is no better or no worse than ours. My only point is that is some leagues, taking a QB at #1 should be considered. You never said that in your post, nor have you complied with the simple request to post the top 24 RBs and top 24 Qbs for your scoring system for each of the past 3 years. No one here has ever disputed that there aren't leagues where taking a QB in the first is not a plausible option, but, it is almost always because of an increase to two starting QBs, not because of a scoring system that does this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 [/size][/size]Your league is no better or no worse than ours. My only point is that is some leagues, taking a QB at #1 should be considered. Well sure. For that matter, make FGs worth 10 and PATs worth 5. Then give a 3 pt bonus for for all TDs scored from 8-16 yards. The point I made is that scoring should somehow reflect performance on the field and yours doesn't. Rather it rewards TD vultures and one dimensional RBs. Well, it does QBs as well, but I still don't think that automatically makes QBs any more valuable. To be honest, I think it is a fine idea to somehow minimize the value of RBs. However, that may not change the fact that RBs should go first because, as has been stated, there aren't 24 RBs that can be counted on for good production most years. That means somebody is going to be starting a pretty lame RB. Not that I would be all that excited about starting the 24th best QB either, but at least dude is getting every snap. Further, are you implying that everyone goes QB/QB with the first two picks? If that is really the case, I suppose you may as well take Manning and whomever the 24th best QB is and then take LT anyway. Sounds like a great time. Perhaps your strategy works, though I'm more inclined to give props to someone who does well in a league who's scoring is less random. I mean, I've played in TD intensive leagues (which yours is by nature of the fact that you don't get yardage bonuses for less than 100 yds) and won more than one championship based on the fact that my FG kicker went off down the stretch. I was certainly happy for the money but I hardly felt that I had really proven any superior football knowledge. So, in closing, I think you're great. Thank you for posting and giving me the opportunity to experience your greatness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) I guess to make you happy, I need to drop the draft stragedy that is effective for this league and use your "RB's are god" rubber stamp method. I can not change the rules, so I must learn to live within the sytem. Edited August 9, 2007 by jjwbean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 So, in closing, I think you're great. Thank you for posting and giving me the opportunity to experience your greatness. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) I guess to make you happy, I need to drop the draft stragedy that is effective for this league and use your "RB's are god" rubber stamp method.I can not change the rules, so I must learn to live within the sytem. Mine is not a rubber stamp method. Rather it is based on supply and demand. Even in traditional leagues, I might not go RB 1st if I had pick 8-12 because I'm not so fired up about who's there. I will also take a guy like A Gates way sooner than most simply because he is so much better than all the other TEs. My point is this, LT is a freaking animal and his relative value compared to the 24th best RB is far greater than Manning is relative to the 24th QB. If anyone is applying the rubber stamp, it is you. Edited August 9, 2007 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.