Talk me off the ledge

[detlef]

They were taken late but again this is not last year. Stafford is not going round 6 this year and Eli won't be going round 8. As for Newton? Come on Man! Are you saying Newtons name as if I should draft RGIII or Luck in the last round this year and hope they do what Cam did for me last year? Predicting RB totals has been the hardest position to predict in th elast 5 years. There have been more first round bust RBs then Qbs. There was a 134 pt difference between Rodgers and Eli. That is a pretty big differencial. The three guys you mention were all taken lower then they should have been last year but all three out prefromed their ADP. Again this is why taking Rodgers is more of a sure thing. It is harder to predict a QB who is going to outpreform his ADP then it is to draft a bunch of mid rround Rbs and hit on a top 15. The only reaosn I am looking so closely at htis is I have never once in 10 years of FF taken a Qb before round 6. I just htink it is a different era in Fantasy Football and i need to open up to the idea that RB first isn't the only option.

 

You're missing my point. I'm not saying that those three, in particular, will be there late. Rather that, we could have had the same conversation we're having last year only the names would be different. You'd be saying, "There's no way Rivers lasts until the end of the 2nd and Vick will certainly be gone by the end of the 1st."

 

My point was, you're likely wrong to say that you won't be able to get a top 10 QB late. You may not be able to take the 10th QB off the board late, but as evidenced last year, 3 guys were able to get Eli, Stafford, and Newton, all QBs who finished in the top 6, without using a 1st or 2nd round pick.

 

I'm saying that something like that will likely happen again this year.

[Big Country]

It's nothing to do with picking a top ranked Qb being safer, or their being a chance to find a top 5-6 Qb in the later rounds.

 

The pure raw scores in this league make it beyong important to get a top QB. They are outscoring the other positions by almost 60%.

 

Even if you take Rodgers #1 (which I would still advocate, and the regulars can back up my claim that it is very rare for me to suggest that), I would not be waiting until the very late rounds to get a backup QB, I;d be looking to draft 1 or 2 of the higher upside guys in the 12-20 ranked range just in case Rodgers gets hurt. If you are lucky enough to hit on this years Stafford or Newton, you have great insurance in a league like this at worst, and great trade bait at best.

[Furd]

After reviewing everything again, including the posts from my esteemed colleague, I'm going to agree with Big Country.

 

Lunch at the Waffle House was good.

[Tripleshot]

Being QBs get 6 points per TD, not 4, and your league is non-PPR - you're really splitting hairs. Would I rather have Rodgers or Foster? Yes. Give me either, even picking number one, and I'll still smile all season long. I don't think anyone can really criticize taking Rodgers number one overall, they can only make arguments for their draftingstyle/preference vs yours.

[stethant]

The important thing to keep in mind, though, is that you're only looking at numbers from last year. If you look at numbers for the three years before that (2007-2009), top QBs were scoring 100 points less than last year.

 

It all comes down to your style - if you think the scoring trends this year will look most like last year then grab your man Rodgers at #1. If you think QB scoring regresses to the mean, then I'd go RB.

 

If you're really only starting 2RBs and 2WRs in this league, then I lean towards taking the QB. You have fewer positions to fill and this accentuates the outsized value of the QB, relative to other positions.

Edited August 13, 2012 by stethant

[MikesVikes]

The thing about Qbs is that your 10th best might not be the same as somebody else's. Maybe somebody takes the 10th qb but one of your top 5 or 6 Qbs is still on the board. You could get the top rb and still get your top 4th or 5th off your board because some other guy drafted QBs under your list.

[delusions of grandeur]

The important thing to keep in mind, though, is that you're only looking at numbers from last year. If you look at numbers for the three years before that (2007-2009), top QBs were scoring 100 points less than last year.

 

It all comes down to your style - if you think the scoring trends this year will look most like last year then grab your man Rodgers at #1. If you think QB scoring regresses to the mean, then I'd go RB.

 

If you're really only starting 2RBs and 2WRs in this league, then I lean towards taking the QB. You have fewer positions to fill and this accentuates the outsized value of the QB, relative to other positions.

 

Very good points and this especially...

 

I actually see a progression to a new mean from the rest that might well balance it out, with so many above-average QBs in the NFL right now, and a more pass-friendly environment.

 

I'm not sure it will be so immediate to where you won't gain a nice advantage with a top 5 QB this year, but there could be more parity than you think, when we have multiple guys flirting with long-standing records already.

 

In some scoring systems and leagues, maybe this will make all QBs even more of kings, but in ones where there's more positional balance, it might just make waiting on a QBBC of potential top 5-10 QBs even more desirable.

Edited August 14, 2012 by delusions of grandeur

[Bronco Billy]

Jump!

[MTSuper7]

Very interesting thread to me, as I also won the lottery in my main local and will be picking first. However, we do have PPR scoring, so my decision to go with a top 3 RB is easier. However, there was a comment made earlier in this thread that I agree with... Trade back in the first round to gain another pick.

 

Imagine trading back to the 6th overall pick (not sure what fair value is, but let's say you trade 1.01 and 6.12 for 1.06 and 5.06 or something like that). You are now assured either a top 3 RB or one of Rodgers, Brees or Brady, any of whom you probably feel safe with as a first round pick. But now you've done this while picking up an extra pick in the fifth round, meaning you will fill out your starting lineup of 6 players (not counting K or DEF of course) by pick 5.06. Someone is probably willing to trade up to ensure that they get their guy...

 

I'm debating this very strategy right now with the first pick, but there historically hasn't been draft slot trading in this league (no rules against it though), so we'll see if people are willing to shake things up.

 

In general, don't get fooled by the disparity between the top QB and top RB in scoring - the relative value and position scarcity are the real factors. Since you have 6 starting holes to fill, you have to be willing to accept that your RB2, WR2 or TE is going to suffer significantly for the price of taking a Rodgers instead of a Romo/Eli/Ryan type.

 

My opinion - let other people get caught up in the QB love fest. 2011 was an epic record-breaking season for passing. Statistically speaking, the numbers have nowhere to go but down. They may not fall all the way back to the mean, but I wouldn't be surprised if we had only 1 QB throw for more than 4,500 yards and maybe only one or two eclipse 40 TDs. Prior to 2011, those are the kinds of numbers we saw.

 

All it takes is 3 or 4 others willing to wait like you, and you'll get a quality guy at the 4/5 turn. If you can trade out of the 1.01 to pick up an extra 5th round pick, even better.

Edited August 14, 2012 by MTSuper7

[BS Miscreant]

In a BoTH league with some long-time huddlers and our draft just started (slow draft). We have the same scoring as you ... 4 QBs went in the first 10 picks with Stafford going tenth to a well known huddler (and we have only recorded the first ten picks). In a league with your scoring, no way Stafford makes it back to your 2nd round pick.

 

So because this happened in one league, all due respect to fellow huddlers, then it is the gospel? Seriously?

 

CG, take a step back from all this, take deep breath and...

[Avernus]

 

 

RB

Rice 320

McCoy 300

Foster 288

MOJO 279

Turner 233

Lynch 233

All Day 196

Bush 195

 

 

I was just looking at that list of RB's and realized by years end, only two of them will still be a top 10 RB as far as stats go...between Foster, Rice and McCoy....I expect two of them to finish in the top 10....and the rest?....maybe Bush? ....but I am staying away from the backs who are more physical and also may have had too many touches last year.....or a RB coming off injury....that means I am avoiding MoJo, AP, Lynch and Turner....

 

I would go RB because the dropoff at RB is more severe and you can still get a QB who can produce even if you miss out on the top 4....Rivers is a nice consideration and you could probably wait until your early 3rd round pick to get him...

[detlef]

Rivers is a nice consideration and you could probably wait until your early 3rd round pick to get him...

 

I think Rivers is going to be on more than a few Championship rosters this season. Not because he's going to put up amazing numbers, but because he seems to be getting no love despite putting up solid numbers for several years in a row and, therefor will be a nice QB that people are going to pick at a stage in the draft when they say, "Oh, Rivers is still out there?"

 

Which means they could very well be stacked at other positions.

 

3rd pick in a QB-heavy draft like this, and a fair piece later than that for more standard leagues.

[CrimsonGhost]

I have for years been arguing with league mates that we need more positional balance. Ppr or heck even a flex would allow for this. But every year tradition seems to out weigh competetive balance. No one has ever won our league taking a Qb first. I think this has to do with being spread to thin.

 

After doing countless mocks my team always look sexier taking Foster at #1. I feel taking a QB later in the first round makes more sense. Every time i start a mock with Rodgers i end up lackign depth. Furthermore I think takign a QB at pick 1.01 will make me need to get even luckier with my midround Rb and WR picks. One if not 2 WILL NEED to hit big. Fantasy Football already requires so much luck i think its in my best intrest to limit some luck by waiting on a QB in favor of drafting for depth.

[MTSuper7]

Sounds like you're coming off the ledge. I also have liked my mocks much better with Foster at 1.01. Playing catchup on RBs and WRs sucks.

[Croe]

In general I disagree with this. I have yet to participate in a draft where 10 QBs got drafted in the first four rounds, I don't think it has even been close. If that is the case in your league, then I would be happy about getting the no. 10 ranked QB later in the draft and in the meantime load up on RBs and WRs.

 

To answer your first question: I would go with Foster, Rice and McCoy before Rodgers all the time. When they are gone I would be tempted by Rodgers, but not a second before.

 

 

My draft (12 Team) went QB happy and 6 QBs were taken in the first round, 10 were gone by the 4th - I snagged Matt Ryan in 4th round (a mistake - I could have had Julio Jones instead and picked up Ryan before the 8th round when the next QB was taken) Being that as it is, I think I would have taken Foster 1st and tried for Matt Ryan or Eli Manning in the next two rounds if they are available.

 

That's just my 2 cents.

[Papajohn]

My draft (12 Team) went QB happy and 6 QBs were taken in the first round, 10 were gone by the 4th - I snagged Matt Ryan in 4th round (a mistake - I could have had Julio Jones instead and picked up Ryan before the 8th round when the next QB was taken) Being that as it is, I think I would have taken Foster 1st and tried for Matt Ryan or Eli Manning in the next two rounds if they are available.

 

That's just my 2 cents.

 

 

I don't follow. If you had a do-over then you would pick Matt Ryan even earlier?

[detlef]

I have for years been arguing with league mates that we need more positional balance. Ppr or heck even a flex would allow for this. But every year tradition seems to out weigh competetive balance. No one has ever won our league taking a Qb first. I think this has to do with being spread to thin.

 

After doing countless mocks my team always look sexier taking Foster at #1. I feel taking a QB later in the first round makes more sense. Every time i start a mock with Rodgers i end up lackign depth. Furthermore I think takign a QB at pick 1.01 will make me need to get even luckier with my midround Rb and WR picks. One if not 2 WILL NEED to hit big. Fantasy Football already requires so much luck i think its in my best intrest to limit some luck by waiting on a QB in favor of drafting for depth.

 

While I have said all along that you need to grab one of those 3 RBs if you can, it is only fair to mention that you may be doing mocks against people who are not planning on doing a QB-heavy league, so your bound to end up with a better QB in those mocks that you will in your league.

 

And that may go a long way to making the teams you end up with look good.

 

After all, would you even be asking this question if top QBs didn't put up so many pts?

 

So, while I still think going RB at 1.1 makes sense and what I would do, if you were prepared to go the other way, don't let the fact that doing mocks that are unlikely to mimic the drafting styles of your league change your mind.

[detlef]

I don't follow. If you had a do-over then you would pick Matt Ryan even earlier?

 

No, he's saying he would have waited even longer for the QB and grabbed Jones.

[Papajohn]

My draft (12 Team) went QB happy and 6 QBs were taken in the first round, 10 were gone by the 4th - I snagged Matt Ryan in 4th round (a mistake - I could have had Julio Jones instead and picked up Ryan before the 8th round when the next QB was taken) Being that as it is, I think I would have taken Foster 1st and tried for Matt Ryan or Eli Manning in the next two rounds if they are available.

 

That's just my 2 cents.

 

[Croe]

I don't follow. If you had a do-over then you would pick Matt Ryan even earlier?

 

No, he's saying he would have waited even longer for the QB and grabbed Jones.

 

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear.

 

If I was number one pick and everything else went the way my draft went, I still would go Foster first. Then instead of drafting Ryan in the 4th round, I would have taken Jones. and Tried to get ryan in the next round or two depending on what options were available.

 

In short, I would hold out on a QB for first pick - having that caliber of RB is irreplaceable.

[BA Baracus]

To the OP - You should totally take Rodgers first overall. Your scoring system and the lack of a flex position makes having the top QB a huge advantage. This is coming from a guy who ALWAYS waits on a QB. That scoring system would drive me nuts BTW.

[CrimsonGhost]

I have 6 votes right now to change the scoring to 4 pt qb TD's. 19 more days to lobby another vote or 2. The system has driven me nuts for years but I have never been able to generate enough votes. I have now created a powerpoint showing just how grossly unbalanced the current system is. The people who always are against me argue that Qb is the most important position in the nfl therefore they should score the most. 4 pt passing tds will still allow them to score the most but also let other positions catch up. I hung out with a guy who always votes no tonight and showed him that the top Rb and WR almost got doubled up by Arod,Brees, and Brady. Dude was blown away and apologized for voting no all these years. The NFL is not your father's nfl anymore. These passing numbers are not simply outliers but a reflection of the rule changes implemented over the last few years.

[Scooby's Hubby]

Good luck getting your rule changed . I am trying to do the same in my local. Just got them to add PPR two years ago. Looks like we have one more year of 6 pt passing then we will change. All rules in our league are voted in person on draft day for the next year. (We pass legislation about like our government) Hoping it passes.

[stevegrab]

Good luck getting your rule changed . I am trying to do the same in my local. Just got them to add PPR two years ago. Looks like we have one more year of 6 pt passing then we will change. All rules in our league are voted in person on draft day for the next year. (We pass legislation about like our government) Hoping it passes.

 

 

Must make your draft days very long. I hate the idea of trying to do new rules like that before the draft. If possible we have discussion during the offseason so all we're doing is taking a vote at the draft. Then this year somebody suggested "hey if we're doing that, let's change this..." We took a vote and it passed. Later the co-commish and I realized that it wasn't as clear as it should have been, both what specifically we were changing, and how it impacted things.

 

Good luck changing your scoring, we've had 6pt TDs for all positions, and don't think we'll change nor do we need it to change. We're all fine with QBs being top scorers by a wide margin.

[Scooby's Hubby]

Must make your draft days very long. I hate the idea of trying to do new rules like that before the draft. If possible we have discussion during the offseason so all we're doing is taking a vote at the draft. Then this year somebody suggested "hey if we're doing that, let's change this..." We took a vote and it passed. Later the co-commish and I realized that it wasn't as clear as it should have been, both what specifically we were changing, and how it impacted things.

 

Good luck changing your scoring, we've had 6pt TDs for all positions, and don't think we'll change nor do we need it to change. We're all fine with QBs being top scorers by a wide margin.

 

 

It is a quick vote b/c everyone is at the same place. It is not like I am giving them a lecture on point scoring, they all know the routine. 12 team league with 16 rounds, takes us about 3 hours.