Is it insane to not bakup a stud qb

[detlef]

So you're saying I couldn't have recovered my season if I drafted Brady in the 2nd & then Trent Edwards in the 12th? I'd seriously beg to differ. Or Kurt Warner in the 11th to back up Carson Palmer, whose ADP put him as the 5th QB off the board? How about Aaron Rodgers in the 12th to back up Romo - how would that affect your season given what's happened in the past 3 weeks?

 

I guess I don't play in 8 team leagues, so when you're in 14 or 16 team leagues, you don't dare take a chance of relying on the WW for a replacement QB, because the pickings are extremely thin. If I did play in 8 team leagues, I'd agree with what you're putting forth.

I think bringing up 14 and 16 teams leagues to make a point is about as silly as basing your argument on an 8 team league. Obviously in a 16 team league, it is possible that each and every starting QB in the league could be spoken for. In a 14th it's not quite so bad but pretty close.

 

I would assume, however that most discussions here assume a 12 team league given that's the most common. And in such leagues, it makes a whole lot less sense to carry a 2nd QB when you have a stud at QB1 unless you struck late round gold with that guy. Which, again, is why I certainly think you should at least draft a 2nd one.

 

According to the average weekly scoring in my leagues (which is a very standard .04 per yard and 4 pts per TD) a whopping 1.2 pts per week separates the 17th highest from the 29. The 30th, BTW, is Trent Edwards whom you mentioned in your post.

 

So, unless someone is stockpiling very average QBs, there's a damned good chance that you can go find the 26th or 27th best guy out there rather than having the 19th waste away on your roster behind Brees. If it's either that or pick up an upside RB in week 5 once it's pretty clear that your 2nd QB pick didn't land you Rodgers, Rivers, Warner, etc, I can't see why you don't drop the QB and go from there.

[Bronco Billy]

I think bringing up 14 and 16 teams leagues to make a point is about as silly as basing your argument on an 8 team league. Obviously in a 16 team league, it is possible that each and every starting QB in the league could be spoken for. In a 14th it's not quite so bad but pretty close.

 

I would assume, however that most discussions here assume a 12 team league given that's the most common. And in such leagues, it makes a whole lot less sense to carry a 2nd QB when you have a stud at QB1 unless you struck late round gold with that guy. Which, again, is why I certainly think you should at least draft a 2nd one.

 

Okay, here's 5 12 team redraft leagues - the Huddle Ladder leagues. Which guy are you as a Romo owner going to pick up to save your season, since you drafcted a stud QB and decided not to back him up? Go ahead - these are the top 10 FA QBs available in each league.

 

HALL OF FAME

 

1 61 Anderson, Derek CLE QB 111.3

2 77 Russell, JaMarcus OAK QB 99.2

3 99 Thigpen, Tyler KCC QB 86.9

4 138 Fitzpatrick, Ryan CIN QB 73.8

5 141 Orlovsky, Dan DET QB 72.7

6 196 Kitna, Jon DET QB 55.5

7 216 Griese, Brian TBB QB 50.3

8 222 Palmer, Carson CIN QB 48.4

9 252 Wallace, Seneca SEA QB 40.1

10 277 Rosenfels, Sage HOU QB 35.1

 

 

ALL PRO

1 42 O'Sullivan, J.T. SFO QB 121.8

2 59 Flacco, Joe BAL QB 111.8

3 79 Frerotte, Gus MIN QB 97.8

4 99 Thigpen, Tyler KCC QB 86.9

5 126 Collins, Kerry TEN QB 77.3

6 138 Fitzpatrick, Ryan CIN QB 73.8

7 141 Orlovsky, Dan DET QB 72.7

8 196 Kitna, Jon DET QB 55.5

9 216 Griese, Brian TBB QB 50.3

10 222 Palmer, Carson CIN QB 48.4

 

 

SEMI PRO

1 42 O'Sullivan, J.T. SFO QB 121.8

2 59 Flacco, Joe BAL QB 111.8

3 99 Thigpen, Tyler KCC QB 86.9

4 126 Collins, Kerry TEN QB 77.3

5 138 Fitzpatrick, Ryan CIN QB 73.8

6 141 Orlovsky, Dan DET QB 72.7

7 196 Kitna, Jon DET QB 55.5

8 216 Griese, Brian TBB QB 50.3

9 222 Palmer, Carson CIN QB 48.4

10 252 Wallace, Seneca SEA QB 40.1

 

 

PRACTICE SQUAD

1 42 O'Sullivan, J.T. SFO QB 121.8

2 59 Flacco, Joe BAL QB 111.8

3 65 Cassel, Matt NEP QB 109.8

4 77 Russell, JaMarcus OAK QB 99.2

5 99 Thigpen, Tyler KCC QB 86.9

6 138 Fitzpatrick, Ryan CIN QB 73.8

7 141 Orlovsky, Dan DET QB 72.7

8 196 Kitna, Jon DET QB 55.5

9 216 Griese, Brian TBB QB 50.3

10 222 Palmer, Carson CIN QB 48.4

 

 

PEE WEE

1 42 O'Sullivan, J.T. SFO QB 121.8

2 126 Collins, Kerry TEN QB 77.3

3 138 Fitzpatrick, Ryan CIN QB 73.8

4 141 Orlovsky, Dan DET QB 72.7

5 196 Kitna, Jon DET QB 55.5

6 216 Griese, Brian TBB QB 50.3

7 252 Wallace, Seneca SEA QB 40.1

8 253 Hasselbeck, Matt SEA QB 40

9 297 Huard, Damon KCC QB 29.4

10 313 Jackson, Tarvaris MIN QB 25.4

[Grits and Shins]

It must be wonderful to be able to identify the stud QBs each year ... those that you can draft and won't have to worry about them getting hurt or underperforming.

Edited November 6, 2008 by Grits and Shins

[detlef]

Bronco, are you freaking serious?

 

What part of, "I think you should draft a 2nd QB but if your first one is a stud and the 2nd doesn't end up being all that and no better than all those guys you listed (and as I showed, the the 17th through 29th are putting up about exact same numbers), that it doesn't make sense to hold on to him at the expense of taking a shot on an upside player at another position." don't you understand?

 

So if you want to say it's stupid to not even draft a 2nd QB, be my guest. Just don't quote me considering that I've mentioned twice now that I fully believe in drafting a 2nd QB.

[Bronco Billy]

Bronco, are you freaking serious?

 

What part of, "I think you should draft a 2nd QB but if your first one is a stud and the 2nd doesn't end up being all that and no better than all those guys you listed (and as I showed, the the 17th through 29th are putting up about exact same numbers), that it doesn't make sense to hold on to him at the expense of taking a shot on an upside player at another position." don't you understand?

 

So if you want to say it's stupid to not even draft a 2nd QB, be my guest. Just don't quote me considering that I've mentioned twice now that I fully believe in drafting a 2nd QB.

 

Why would you think I'm not serious?

 

I'm asking an honest question given your parameters - 12 team redraft league and having to draw a QB off the WW. I already told you what I would have done - drafted a guy like Rodgers (which I have this year), Edwards (which I have this year), or used 2 roster spots on the Warner/Leinart AZ QB position (which I have this year, and then dropped Leinart and filled that slot with a WW skill player). That way I survive a QB injury like Brady going down, or like Romo getting tweaked, or like Palmer sucking & then getting tweaked.

 

If you believe in drafting a 2nd QB, then why in the Seven Hells do you want to argue about drafting a 2nd QB?

[detlef]

Why would you think I'm not serious?

 

I'm asking an honest question given your parameters - 12 team redraft league and having to draw a QB off the WW. I already told you what I would have done - drafted a guy like Rodgers (which I have this year), Edwards (which I have this year), or used 2 roster spots on the Warner/Leinart AZ QB position (which I have this year, and then dropped Leinart and filled that slot with a WW skill player). That way I survive a QB injury like Brady going down, or like Romo getting tweaked, or like Palmer sucking & then getting tweaked.

 

If you believe in drafting a 2nd QB, then why in the Seven Hells do you want to argue about drafting a 2nd QB?

I'm not arguing about drafting a 2nd QB, I'm arguing about carrying a 2nd QB through out the season. To be honest, I believe that's what the OP was talking about. I currently have one QB on my roster, Brees. I had Edwrds just like you for like the first 6 weeks like a good soldier should but had to drop him because I was in a major bind at another position and needed to pick up an injury replacement. Then it dawned on me that he wasn't really all that much better in terms of stats than any number of guys out there. In fact, everyone else noticed the exact same thing and didn't bother to pick him up. Then, last week, there he was, so I grabbed him, started him, and back to the scrap heap he went because there was something else out there I wanted. Now he sits, along with a bunch of other guys who are putting up identical numbers. Actually he's not putting up very good numbers at all.

 

See, your boy Edwards that you've now mentioned twice as the type of guy that's worth holding onto in case your starter goes down? He's actually ranked around 30th in pts per week in my leagues. That means in a 12 team league, where everyone carries 2 QBs just like you think they should, 5 could actually carry a 3rd before you get to him. Now, that is slightly skewed because some guys who are no longer active may be ranked ahead of him but that's only going to bump him maybe 5 or so spots. So, regardless, he is still, at best, awash in a group of guys, many of whom are the very scrubs you listed in that long post trying to explain why it's so important that you have a guy like Edwards. So, again, what's the point? Why tie up a roster spot with Edwards when he actually is, in fact, no better than probably 5 or so guys that should be available in all but the very biggest leagues? The numbers don't lie.

[Seahawks21]

As I stated, if Romo was out, I would have traded for a servicable starter. Otherwise, this week, I would probably start Thigpen out of the group you have shown as available. Maybe I would have picked up Frerotte way back when. Maybe I could start Shaun Hill. None of these options are much worse than holding onto Edwards, Garcia etc. If Torain ends up being solid, I now have a new RB toy for the playoff push. I'd much rather have the upside of Torain than the difference between Edwards and the other options at QB.

[Seahawks21]

It must be wonderful to be able to identify the stud QBs each year ... those that you can draft and won't have to worry about them getting hurt or underperforming.

it really isn't that difficult to identify Peyton Manning or Drew Brees as consistent quarterbacks that almost never get hurt, and you would never bench.

[Grits and Shins]

it really isn't that difficult to identify Peyton Manning or Drew Brees as consistent quarterbacks that almost never get hurt, and you would never bench.

 

Yeah Peyton has been money in the bank this year ... and last year was a banner year for Brees.

[detlef]

Yeah Peyton has been money in the bank this year ... and last year was a banner year for Brees.

Um, among QBs that have played more than 1 game, Manning is 9th which is QB1 status in a 12 team league. Yes, if you were the guy who knew Rodgers, Rivers, Warner (who wasn't actually the starter when many drafts were held), or Rivers would be better, then good for you. You could have grabbed them both and been in a great position. Again, my main issue is, assuming that you did draft a 2nd QB and his name was Trent Edwards or Jake Delhomme, or Jason Campbell, those guys are smack dab in the middle of a very large group of random QBs who are putting up about the exact same amount of very mediocre points each week. So, what's the point of wasting a spot on them. So maybe someone snaps up Dehlomme the minute you waive him. So? You've got Drew Brees. if dude goes down, you're stuck going after Tyler Thigpen or Shawn Hill, or Joe Flacco, or any number of guys who are.... drum roll please.... putting up the exact same numbers as Delhomme! Delhomme might make you feel warm and fuzzy but this isn't week 3. By now the numbers actually mean something and the numbers mean that Jake Delhomme is not putting up better numbers than guys who's names scare you.

 

Oh, and Brees? 4th in FF QB scoring last year. I'll live with that.

[Grits and Shins]

Um, among QBs that have played more than 1 game, Manning is 9th which is QB1 status in a 12 team league. Yes, if you were the guy who knew Rodgers, Rivers, Warner (who wasn't actually the starter when many drafts were held), or Rivers would be better, then good for you. You could have grabbed them both and been in a great position. Again, my main issue is, assuming that you did draft a 2nd QB and his name was Trent Edwards or Jake Delhomme, or Jason Campbell, those guys are smack dab in the middle of a very large group of random QBs who are putting up about the exact same amount of very mediocre points each week. So, what's the point of wasting a spot on them. So maybe someone snaps up Dehlomme the minute you waive him. So? You've got Drew Brees. if dude goes down, you're stuck going after Tyler Thigpen or Shawn Hill, or Joe Flacco, or any number of guys who are.... drum roll please.... putting up the exact same numbers as Delhomme! Delhomme might make you feel warm and fuzzy but this isn't week 3. By now the numbers actually mean something and the numbers mean that Jake Delhomme is not putting up better numbers than guys who's names scare you.

 

Oh, and Brees? 4th in FF QB scoring last year. I'll live with that.

 

So you are happy taking a QB in the 1st or 2nd round that is the 9th QB?

 

Yes ... Brees was the 4th QB in my league last year as well. However, the next two QBs were less than 10 points YTD behind him and the two after that less than 20 points YTD behind him. Fantasy wise Brees wasn't anything special last year.

[Bronco Billy]

See, your boy Edwards that you've now mentioned twice as the type of guy that's worth holding onto in case your starter goes down? He's actually ranked around 30th in pts per week in my leagues. That means in a 12 team league, where everyone carries 2 QBs just like you think they should, 5 could actually carry a 3rd before you get to him.

 

 

IF you would look at the stats instead of just jumping to conclusions, you'd see that Edwards' ranking so low is due to an injury in week 5, where he accumulated only 18 yds passing. Other than that, he has performed remarkably consistently in all other games, and excluding the game in which he was hurt, projects out to a FF ppw that ranks about 15th best among QBs.

 

Should we proceed forward with this argument, or would you like to look at his stats and educate yourself first?

[detlef]

So you are happy taking a QB in the 1st or 2nd round that is the 9th QB?

 

Yes ... Brees was the 4th QB in my league last year as well. However, the next two QBs were less than 10 points YTD behind him and the two after that less than 20 points YTD behind him. Fantasy wise Brees wasn't anything special last year.

I don't take a QB in the 1st two rounds ever. That doesn't change the fact that this is the first year ever that anyone who has Manning would ever contemplate benching him. I was going to say, unless he was injured, before I realized that he's never been injured either.

 

That Brees was barely better than the next two guys also doesn't change the fact that the 4th highest scoring QB is still an auto start

 

Think about it. When someone asks a WDIS involving a guy like Brees or Manning and a guy like, say Garrard who may be going against a crappy D. What chorus rains down from the rafters? ALWAYS START YOUR STUDS!!!!

 

So, if you have a stud and you're supposed to always start him, what's the point of carrying a middle of the pack guy? There are 32 guys each and every week who, barring injury or totally stinking up the joint, are going to take every snap from center. Understand that, assuming every team in a 12 team league carries 2 QBs, half of those teams back-up is no better than the next 6 guys, all of whom should be available.

 

Those 6 teams are wasting a spot.

 

Understand that if you are going to quote me in your reply, you owe it to me to address that point. Not whether you should draft a second QB, but simply, if it turns out that you have one of the QBs who appear to be an auto start and, more importantly, your other QB is among that middling 18-30 range where nobody is any better than the next, it simply makes no sense at all to tie up a roster spot with a QB2 until you need to.

 

Think about it this way. Would you rather have Trent Edwards on your bench or take a chance on a RB or WR that could turn out good enough to allow you to trade for a top 15 QB in the event that your QB1 goes down? By week 6, it's pretty apparent that Edwards is very expendable, so what good is he?

 

The same argument for why you shouldn't use a high pick on a QB extends to why the lower tier ones are all the same. Even the ones that are FAs.

[detlef]

 

IF you would look at the stats instead of just jumping to conclusions, you'd see that Edwards' ranking so low is due to an injury in week 5, where he accumulated only 18 yds passing. Other than that, he has performed remarkably consistently in all other games, and excluding the game in which he was hurt, projects out to a FF ppw that ranks about 15th best among QBs.

 

Should we proceed forward with this argument, or would you like to look at his stats and educate yourself first?

Do you really want to do this? Because it's not going to work out very well for your argument.

 

Trent Edwards has about 90 pts in my league scoring. When you spread that over 8 games (which includes the game you speak of, that gives him about 11.2 pts per game. If you spread it out over 7 games, as you suggest, that makes his average 12.8. Here's a list of guys who are averaging with 1.5 pts per week + or - of that...

 

14. 30. Rosenfels, Sage HOU QB 14.200

15. 31. Garrard, David JAC QB 14.030

16. 32. Frerotte, Gus MIN QB 14.020

17. 40. Pennington, Chad MIA QB 13.380

18. 44. Hill, Shaun SFO QB 12.920

19. 45. Thigpen, Tyler KCC QB 12.907

20. 47. Ryan, Matt ATL QB 12.780

21. 48. Garcia, Jeff TBB QB 12.720

22. 49. Campbell, Jason WAS QB 12.700

23. 50. O'Sullivan, J.T. SFO QB 12.590

24. 51. Delhomme, Jake CAR QB

25. 56. Frye, Charlie SEA QB

26. 57. Anderson, Derek CLE QB

27. 58. Roethlisberger, Ben PIT QB

28. 63. Flacco, Joe BAL QB

29. 64. Cassel, Matt NEP QB

30. 66. Kitna, Jon DET QB 11.730

 

Great, so scratch Kitna, Frye, and Anderson, because they're not playing any more. My point remains that, even giving Edwards a free pass on that one game (and consider that nobody else got one whether or not they deserved it), it simply doesn't make him any more valuable than any number of guys that nobody would ever consider as anyone you need to hold a roster spot for. So why him?

 

Oops, and sorry, while cleaning up the posted data, I inadvertently erased the averages of some of the guys. Go ahead and assume that they're somewhere between 12.5 and 11.7 considering that ranking was pulled straight from my league's page.

[Grits and Shins]

I don't take a QB in the 1st two rounds ever. That doesn't change the fact that this is the first year ever that anyone who has Manning would ever contemplate benching him. I was going to say, unless he was injured, before I realized that he's never been injured either.

 

That Brees was barely better than the next two guys also doesn't change the fact that the 4th highest scoring QB is still an auto start

 

Think about it. When someone asks a WDIS involving a guy like Brees or Manning and a guy like, say Garrard who may be going against a crappy D. What chorus rains down from the rafters? ALWAYS START YOUR STUDS!!!!

 

So, if you have a stud and you're supposed to always start him, what's the point of carrying a middle of the pack guy? There are 32 guys each and every week who, barring injury or totally stinking up the joint, are going to take every snap from center. Understand that, assuming every team in a 12 team league carries 2 QBs, half of those teams back-up is no better than the next 6 guys, all of whom should be available.

 

Those 6 teams are wasting a spot.

 

Understand that if you are going to quote me in your reply, you owe it to me to address that point. Not whether you should draft a second QB, but simply, if it turns out that you have one of the QBs who appear to be an auto start and, more importantly, your other QB is among that middling 18-30 range where nobody is any better than the next, it simply makes no sense at all to tie up a roster spot with a QB2 until you need to.

 

Think about it this way. Would you rather have Trent Edwards on your bench or take a chance on a RB or WR that could turn out good enough to allow you to trade for a top 15 QB in the event that your QB1 goes down? By week 6, it's pretty apparent that Edwards is very expendable, so what good is he?

 

The same argument for why you shouldn't use a high pick on a QB extends to why the lower tier ones are all the same. Even the ones that are FAs.

 

So then it is not likely you got Manning or Brees - based on my drafts and based on ADP, both were taken in the 1st two rounds of most drafts.

 

My point is ... at draft time you have no idea how the QBs are going to finish. This is why I never take a QB before the 5th round, 4th at the very very earliest. You have said you never take a QB in the 1st two rounds ... so you aren't getting Manning, Brady or Brees. Because QB performance varies from year to year and because in every league that I am all the teams carry 2 to 3 QBs through out the season and because I never know when a QB will get hurt or have a down year ... I believe it is in my best interest to draft TWO QBs. Drafting 2 QBs increases my chances of having one that is an every week starter. So in my local I drafted McNabb in the 6th round and Eli Manning in the 12th round. McNabb is my every week starter ... but should he get hurt I'd much rather have Eli than players that are currently available on my waiver wire (Wallace, Fitzpatrick, SF QBs. Collins). I'm a position now where if McNabb gets hurt or misses time I don't have to rely on Senaca Wallace and I can plug Eli Manning.

 

So ... after the draft if you discover you have that QB you can reliably start every week without worrying about his match up that will get consistently score 15+ points then I understand the concept of not carrying a back up QB. After all depth doesn't win championships. I get that. Having said that the player you replace your back up QB with is just depth at another position. Why is depth at another position better than depth at QB? I'd argue that almost ALL teams have room for a back up QB; i.e. that there are other players on that team that never see the starting line up.

 

You are claiming you'd rather have drafted a RB/WR at the 12th spot ... who likely would also be sitting on your bench.

[detlef]

So then it is not likely you got Manning or Brees - based on my drafts and based on ADP, both were taken in the 1st two rounds of most drafts.

 

My point is ... at draft time you have no idea how the QBs are going to finish. This is why I never take a QB before the 5th round, 4th at the very very earliest. You have said you never take a QB in the 1st two rounds ... so you aren't getting Manning, Brady or Brees. Because QB performance varies from year to year and because in every league that I am all the teams carry 2 to 3 QBs through out the season and because I never know when a QB will get hurt or have a down year ... I believe it is in my best interest to draft TWO QBs. Drafting 2 QBs increases my chances of having one that is an every week starter. So in my local I drafted McNabb in the 6th round and Eli Manning in the 12th round. McNabb is my every week starter ... but should he get hurt I'd much rather have Eli than players that are currently available on my waiver wire (Wallace, Fitzpatrick, SF QBs. Collins). I'm a position now where if McNabb gets hurt or misses time I don't have to rely on Senaca Wallace and I can plug Eli Manning.

 

So ... after the draft if you discover you have that QB you can reliably start every week without worrying about his match up that will get consistently score 15+ points then I understand the concept of not carrying a back up QB. After all depth doesn't win championships. I get that. Having said that the player you replace your back up QB with is just depth at another position. Why is depth at another position better than depth at QB? I'd argue that almost ALL teams have room for a back up QB; i.e. that there are other players on that team that never see the starting line up.

 

You are claiming you'd rather have drafted a RB/WR at the 12th spot ... who likely would also be sitting on your bench.

As it turns out, I have both Manning and Brees in two leagues. Brees because he fell to me and Manning because I bought low and traded a guy who also had Rivers Julius Jones for him after week 3. None the less, that isn't important. Replace the names with whomever you want, provided they have proven themselves as an auto-start at QB.

 

As it turns out, in the case of Manning, since he's not a stud QB this year, I have been carrying 2 QBs. Him, and the guy I drafted which is McNabb. I actually accepted the Jones trade because I was certain that we'd seen the best of him and I was hoping that Manning would get it back and I'd be able to trade either him of McNabb for someone down the line. Turns out, nobody bought, so I've been playing match-ups with those two. Again, this is not what the OP's situation is. Just thought I'd mention it.

 

Now, the actual issue at hand. We both agree that you should draft 2 QBs, so there's no point in going over that. Further, regardless of who my 1st QB was, had I the good fortune of tabbing Eli as my 2nd QB, I too, would hold on to him as he is a borderline starter in a 12 team league in his own right. Thus, significantly better than the crap I could dredge up on the waiver wire if I had to. My point is that, in a 12 team league, this is not going to be the case for about half the teams. Because, rather than having a guy like him as their QB2, they're going to have a guy like Delhomme, and Jake is not putting up stats any better than those shaky waiver options we're speaking of.

 

So, when a guy like Torain came up, I might think it was worth a shot. Looks like I would have been both right and wrong. Right because, when he got a shot, he looked good. Wrong because he blew out his knee. However, carrying only 1 QB to back up Brees has allowed me the flexibility to trade low for an injured Reggie Bush and waste a roster spot on him rather than a QB that would be no better than the guys I can get off the wire. Again, if my QB2 had been someone like Eli, I wouldn't go that way.

Edited November 7, 2008 by detlef