How TO Trouble Affects "Manning-first" Strat

[Roo]

For those of you thinking about taking Manning first, or with an early pick (I was considering taking him 3rd), think it over again.

 

If TO's problems continues, it greatly reduces the value of both TO and McNabb. This is crucial because both McNabb and TO are potentially 2nd round picks.

 

What this means, is if you are relying on decent RB talent coming back your way in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, now you have two less non-RB players getting picked in those rounds.

 

That means the RBs will be flying off the board even faster because of the huge talent gap between Moss and the next best WR, and Pepper, and the next best QB.

 

Just some food for thought.

[Duchess Jack]

good info here

[tonyr0802]

I'm still toying with this idea in a league.

 

With 6 pt TD's, and 1 pt per reception- why shouldn't I take Manning #1, and then follow him with two top tier WR's with my 2/3 picks? The quality of RB's left at the 2/3 won't outscore a combo of 2 tier 1 WR's in this scoring system.

 

I realize my RB's suffer, but in this scoring system I feel like there's more value at the other positions- aside from the few backs that also get a good share of receptions. I think a Manning/Holt/CJ or Harrison combination would outscore a LT/Holt/CJ or Harrison combo.

 

Am I nuts?

[Los Gigantes]

I'm still toying with this idea in a league. 

 

With 6 pt TD's, and 1 pt per reception- why shouldn't I take Manning #1, and then follow him with two top tier WR's with my 2/3 picks?  The quality of RB's left at the 2/3 won't outscore a combo of 2 tier 1 WR's in this scoring system. 

 

I realize my RB's suffer, but in this scoring system I feel like there's more value at the other positions- aside from the few backs that also get a good share of receptions.  I think a Manning/Holt/CJ or Harrison combination would outscore a LT/Holt/CJ or Harrison combo.

 

Am I nuts?

 

921398[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

yes. Because filling rb spots in rounds 4 and 5, you may get guys that won't score at all, where you can get decent wrs past the tenth round.

[PaulOttCarruth]

Assuming that McNabb has a poor year because of the TO debacle, you could argue that Manning's value is even higher. It knocks McNabb out of the top tier of QBs and leaves only Manning and Culpepper. Now the scarcity of top tier QBs is even greater, making them even more valuable.

 

However, I see your point that it could take another 1 or possibly 2 RBs out of the pool before you pick again. It all depends on your comfort level of being able to find RB talent in that third and fourth tier of running backs. As for myself, I think there is a lot of quality there.

[Egret]

Also depends how far down you can get Manning. If you get him closer to the middle or end of the first round, you can still get a good RB with the swing pick.

[Brentastic]

I'm still toying with this idea in a league. 

 

With 6 pt TD's, and 1 pt per reception- why shouldn't I take Manning #1, and then follow him with two top tier WR's with my 2/3 picks?  The quality of RB's left at the 2/3 won't outscore a combo of 2 tier 1 WR's in this scoring system. 

 

I realize my RB's suffer, but in this scoring system I feel like there's more value at the other positions- aside from the few backs that also get a good share of receptions.  I think a Manning/Holt/CJ or Harrison combination would outscore a LT/Holt/CJ or Harrison combo.

 

Am I nuts?

 

921398[/snapback]

 

 

 

There are about 10 RBs who will get 40+ receptions this year. L.T. will get at least 50, probably more. If you figure a top wideout will get 100 receptions, that's a 50 point advantage for WR. However, when you figure that L.T. gets 2000 total yards and about 16+ TDs, he will still outscore the top WRs. Just layin' out some stats, not necessarily saying your idea is wrong.

 

BTW, there's no way you can get a roster containing a Manning/Holt/CJ combo or a L.T./Holt/CJ combo.

[tonyr0802]

There are about 10 RBs who will get 40+ receptions this year.  L.T. will get at least 50, probably more.  If you figure a top wideout will get 100 receptions, that's a 50 point advantage for WR.  However, when you figure that L.T. gets 2000 total yards and about 16+ TDs, he will still outscore the top WRs.  Just layin' out some stats, not necessarily saying your idea is wrong.

 

BTW, there's no way you can get a roster containing a Manning/Holt/CJ combo or a L.T./Holt/CJ combo.

 

921431[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Your comparing the wrong things though, I'm saying Manning will outscore LT in this system and therefore may deserve to be my #1 pick over LT.

 

And realistically- it wouldn't be very hard to land a combo of Holt/CJ/or Harrison with my 2nd and 3rd picks. Do some research, join a mock or two, or even review this mock: http://www.thehuddle.com/x5/pre/mock02-12perf.php

 

Pick#12: Holt, #13: CJ, #14: Harrison, #15: Walker. I think it'd be fairly easy to land the #1QB and 2 #1 WR's.

[Teacon]

With the 11th pick in a 12 team slow-snake draft (via email, 24 hrs max to make pick) I changed my strategy this year and went with the best talent instead of going rb first now matter what. I took Harrison @11 and Moss @14 who I consider 1 and 2 for wrs. My backs ended up weak, though I got Tatum Bell in the 3rd round. The rest of my rbs are Ronnie Brown, Larry Johnson, Travis Henry and Eric Shelton. I definitly have to have things fall my way to be successful this year. QBs are Palmer and Leftwich. My other Wrs are Houshmanzadeh, Colbert and Greg Lewis (picked yesterday after the TO debacle). I still have one more wr to fill.

This is one of my lesser leagues so I'm experimenting with this philosophy. I'm not real happy right now, but I don't know if that is more that I'm used to having good rbs and average wrs, or if my roster is as weak as it looks.

 

I would still go w/Manning if he fell to me following this plan and let the chips fall.

Edited August 11, 2005 by Teacon

[PatsFanCT]

With the TO situation, and Moss out of Minnesota, the difference between Manning and the next best QB leaves a huge gap and makes Manning in the first round an easy pick. I'm an RB, RB guy, but could easily see myself taking Manning anywhere after the 1.05 slot.

[Duchess Jack]

Your comparing the wrong things though, I'm saying Manning will outscore LT in this system and therefore may deserve to be my #1 pick over LT.

 

And realistically- it wouldn't be very hard to land a combo of Holt/CJ/or Harrison with my 2nd and 3rd picks.  Do some research, join a mock or two, or even review this mock: http://www.thehuddle.com/x5/pre/mock02-12perf.php

 

Pick#12: Holt, #13: CJ, #14: Harrison, #15: Walker.  I think it'd be fairly easy to land the #1QB and 2 #1 WR's.

 

921475[/snapback]

 

 

 

A mid round QB might score 70-80% the points Manning would

A mid round RB might not even see the field.

 

There in lies the problem.

[SLGRAF]

So, it seems like the T.O situation is offsetting. On one hand, it means more RBs will be drafted ahead of both T.O and McNabb than before. But, on the other hand, it widens the gap between Manning and the other QBs. I think Manning in the mid-1st round, behind LT2/Alexander/Edge/Holmes, is still about right.

[BrooklynCrew]

In a 6pt TD league Manning is a no brainer first round pick... you could even argue #1... now I couldn't follow that pick with WR/WR even in a rec per point league, cuz your situation at RB will be a MESS no matter who you get at WR. Yes Manning will be HUGE in that format, that doesn't mean you can ignore your starting RB's until the 4th round though... that's probably suicide unless you get ridiculously lucky with an old vet breaking out or a rookie no one saw exploding for you...

[Roo]

Assuming that McNabb has a poor year because of the TO debacle, you could argue that Manning's value is even higher. It knocks McNabb out of the top tier of QBs and leaves only Manning and Culpepper. Now the scarcity of top tier QBs is even greater, making them even more valuable.

 

However, I see your point that it could take another 1 or possibly 2 RBs out of the pool before you pick again. It all depends on your comfort level of being able to find RB talent in that third and fourth tier of running backs. As for myself, I think there is a lot of quality there.

 

921405[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

It's true, if you delete/demote McNabb from the tier 1 QBs, it in a sense make Manning even more unique and possibly more attractive.

 

I am just cautioning those people who have worked through mock drafts and think they can score Manning, then grab Rudi or J. Jones in the 2nd. For me, I was always factoring McNabb or Owens in to a mid-2nd round pick, which was crucial for landing a decent RB. Otherwise you start dropping down to the Cmart/S. Jackson area.

 

Now (for the time being), I feel like you'd be much safer going the standard RB first method. Here's how I mock out my own 10 man draft (the other coaches are smart/good) (I pick 3rd)

Edited August 11, 2005 by Roo

[tonyr0802]

A mid round QB might score 70-80% the points Manning would

A mid round RB might not even see the field. 

 

There in lies the problem.

 

921653[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

This may actually be the most straight forward and most sensible thing I've heard on this topic. Thanks!

[Fantasy Jesus]

This may actually be the most straight forward and most sensible thing I've heard on this topic. Thanks!

 

921709[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

I agree.

[Roo]

I agree too, well put. I think most of us understand the risk of picking Manning first - I have thought long and hard about it.

 

It's crucial to know who will be there for your 2nd and 3rd picks. And right now, it's looks real bad. Not worth it. I wouldn'd pick him before 4th in a 10 team, and 7th in a 12 team.

Edited August 11, 2005 by Roo

[Duchess Jack]

I think that picking Manning early is only a viable option in one of those dinky 10folk or smaller drafts.

[Coffeeman]

Assuming that McNabb has a poor year because of the TO debacle, you could argue that Manning's value is even higher. It knocks McNabb out of the top tier of QBs and leaves only Manning and Culpepper. Now the scarcity of top tier QBs is even greater, making them even more valuable.

 

921405[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

?? Unless I missed some big news, nothing else changed in the last 2 days for any other QBs except the drop for McNabb here. This new info only helps you (as the Manning owner) when you play vs. the guy with McNabb - not the other QBs! Unless you're changing points projections across the board, and would also make no sense here. Roos points, however, make a lot of sense to me.

 

But I could be wrong....

 

BTW, excellent thread Roo!!

[muck]

I think that picking Manning early is only a viable option in one of those dinky 10folk or smaller drafts.

 

921802[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Someone has to pick Manning ....

 

Presumably, you're talking about the only time, regardless of lineup requirements or scoring rules, that it makes sense for someone to take Manning is if the league has ten members, again, regardless of scoring rules or lineup requirements.

 

Balderdash!

 

You're smarter than that (but, not a proficient typist)...

 

What I think you meant to say:

It only makes sense to take Manning with an owners' first pick, when in that owners' opinion, Manning is the most sensical thing to do, given the size of the league (and therefore the timing of the owners next draft pick), the scoring rules the lineup requirements, and whether or not its a keeper-ish / dynasty-ish league.

[mhayhurst]

I'm in a must start 2 QB, 10man snake draft. Where do you see Manning/Pepper/Mcnabb/etc. going? I played in this league last year and was able to get Edge 1st, Pepper 2nd, but I don't know about this year.

 

My current pre rankings have both Manning and Culpepper going in the 1st round. What do you think?

[kraftykraft]

And the T.O. news gets worse. Now he is in the Bahamas and badmouthing McNabb....

 

http://www.comcast.net/news/sports/index.j.../12/199243.html

 

What a buffoon!

[Roo]

See last year I thought their relationship was funny - like they were having a good time, but pretending to be all heated.

 

Now I am thinking it's turned sour.

 

At this point, even if TO plays for the birds, his value still takes a major hit. A QB and WR can't just play "for business" - a good team has solid relationships and comrodery.

 

If TO does play for the birds, I say Lewis gets more looks, and will be open.

 

Anyhow, this really messes up my mock drafts. I see McNabb and Owens getting pushed in the third round, and maybe even later. That leaves only Moss Manning and Pepper as top 20 non-RB picks. 17 RBs in the first 20 picks is not good for those who try to pick Manning first.